2.5
So, I want to preface this by saying I'm not much of a comics/web comics guy. Typically it's just not my medium of choice. Also, I think McAlpin's brand of humor just isn't my style either (though I do appreciate some of his satire). So if I rate this kind of low, it my be more of a reflection of personal preference than any criticism of the quality of McAlpin's work. Other people are going to like this more than I, and that's fine.
Things that I do like though: I like the character dynamics. I think there's some real depth there. Jason, for instance, comes off initially as a grumpy movie snob at first, but as Devi notes in the the second anthology, once you get to know him, you start to see that he isn't just one-dimensional. Kurt's costumes are funny, and aren't just a gag; they show off a genuine side of Kurt, namely his love of props and movie effects.
I also like Gordon's commentary throughout the anthology. I think it adds value to the reading experience, and offers some interesting insights into the process, into McAlpin's thoughts and intentions for the strip, and into little details that I otherwise wouldn't have noticed.
And I like the art. From what I gather, it sounds like he may have received a fair bit of criticism; that the art is low quality, that he's just cutting and pasting from one panel to the next, etc.. Over the course of the anthology (and on into the second one), I think you can see his style develop and improve (which is further highlighted by his commentary). He makes a clear choice/commitment to work with this particular art style, and over time, it seemed to me like he really took ownership of the art, developed and improved in it, and decisively incorporated it into his work to achieve his goals for the strip. I admire that.
That said, I do like the satire (and for that matter, the film commentary is also interesting), but as I said before, the general style of humor isn't to my taste. I'm not a huge fan of off-color humor and innuendo; as far as humor goes, it often feels like low-hanging fruit. Cheap. Easy. Often not very funny and lacking in substance. McAlpin's comedic sensibilities are clearly much broader than that, but there's a periodic buzz of these kinds of jokes running through the series. Some people won't mind that. That doesn't really interest me though. (To be clear, this is only one facet of McAlpin's humor, and it certainly doesn't command the general comedic ethos here. As I said, I like the satire, and there's plenty of that. But this is one aspect of the humor I don't really go for. I'm a bit 'meh' on situational comedy too. There are aspects of the humor I like, and others I don't. It is what it is.)
Going beyond that though, there are times when I wonder if McAlpin's characters aren't getting railroaded. Sometimes it seems like character development takes a backseat to McAlpin pushing a joke or satirizing an idea, and suddenly the characters, well, lose their character. A much more prevalent aspect in McAlpin's humor has to do with stereotypes: some of it has to with the demographic cohort (late teens and early college agers having drama), some of it has to do with race, some of it has to do with the characters themselves--their own personalities, quirks, foibles. And again, it makes me wonder if, say, despite what Devi or some other character might say, Jason might just be a one-dimensional jerk. I'm inclined to think he's not, but when I'm halfway through vol.2 and Jason and Kurt are pulling the same stunts that they were in the beginning...I don't know. I think clearly McAlpin wants to create an interesting cast and draw them into a broader story arc. This isn't just a series of static one-off comics, trying to make a daily punchline quota. But sometimes it seems like character development may get sidelined from time to time for the sake of a particular joke or external commentary. I wonder if it might have been different if I had been reading the comics as they were being published. Perhaps this isn't as big of an issue for a strip-a-day format. And maybe this is just an aspect of Gordon's humor, and it's just a preference thing. Reading through the anthology though, alongside Gordon's commentary, makes the intention for narrative progression and character development clear. And I wonder if some of these jokes might end up working at cross-purposes this that. If Jason continues to act like a grumpy film snob, was their ever anything more to him, like Devi said, or is he just the same guy he was at the beginning? I think the answer is "yes, there is more too him," but sometimes McAlpin's humor, satire, commentary, stereotyping may be creating obstacles for character growth.
For all that though, I finished the first anthology and started reading the second. Recently, I've been much less tolerant of continuing to read things that I think are bad or aren't enjoyable. And clearly I've stuck with this one. I expect I'll finish vol.2 and will probably go on to vol.3 after that. I have some criticisms, sure. But at the same time, a thing can have value or merit, and I still might not like it. I think that's an important distinction to make, especially when expressing opinions about creative works like this. And I also think it's important to be willing to read things that you may not be particularly drawn to or agree with. I think we all need to listen more, to be open to looking at things beyond ourselves, beyond our preferences and prejudices, and try to see things from the other perspective. And then to be critical of ourselves in this process, to ask, "Do I not like this because it's actually low quality, because I disagree with it, or is this just my personal opinion/preference?"
To that end, I think this is one area where McAlpin succeeds quite well. He has a wide range of characters, who have varying preferences, values, beliefs, and McAlpin lets them express those ideas. On the topic of film alone, McAlpin's characters often disagree with each other, and they talk about it. They argue and debate. And ultimately, McAlpin allows them to have that voice, even when he himself probably doesn't always agree with them. And I think that's admirable.
So yeah, while I don't rate this very high myself, I think there are certainly things here to recommend it. This is no where near the conversation of a book like "Jaran" which I read last year; I had some serious issues with the story, would not recommend it, and have not plans to continue the series. Some people will enjoy "Multiplex" a lot (based on other ratings/reviews, quite a few people do). Some people will agree with McAlpin's ideas and choices. Some people will enjoy his art more than others. And that's fine. Is it weird to recommend a 2-star? I mean 2.5. Maybe. Whether this is for you or not though, I'll leave you to decide for yourself. I'ma go finish vol.2.