Showing posts with label Comics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comics. Show all posts

Saturday, November 17, 2018

Bill Maher and the low art of comics

Anybody who's a comic book fan has probably read what Bill Maher has had to say about Stan Lee. Apparently, Maher doesn't see what the big deal is, and he thinks that comic books can't be sophisticated because they contain pictures. I'm not going to go too into Bill Maher here. I lean pretty left, so I appreciate when he criticizes conservatives and Trump. However, he's a tremendous hypocrite for calling out the right for its climate change science denial while espousing scientific illiteracy when it comes to vaccines and GMOs. (And even though he's an atheist like myself, his movie Religulous contained a lot of really bad arguments.)

Anyway, Neil Gaiman said it best with his tweet: "More people cared about Stan Lee’s death than care about Bill Maher alive."

With that said, I wish that people would get over the whole thing with mixing words and pictures. Literature can be high art, correct? So can drawings, right? Why is it bad when you put them together, either in a comic book or a picture book? Most people can't draw much of anything, much less draw well. Artists, including comic book artists, take years and years to develop their skills. When it comes to comic book artists, they not only need to know how to draw, they need to know how to tell a story with pictures. Ever look at a comic and get confused as to what order you should look at things? While the problem might be with you, chances are also good that the artist doesn't know how to construct a page just right so your eye flows naturally from one panel to the next.

I realize that lots of people are already citing works like Maus and Watchmen as examples of the genre achieving high-art status. That's worth mentioning, but even if we didn't have these ready examples, the very notion of panning an entire art form is just ridiculous.

Think of it this way: if the problem with comic books is that they require pictures and can't just use words, then what does that say about every other form of art?

Music? No thank you. I'll just read books of poetry because I don't need somebody to sing it to me! Some of those songs don't even have words!

Those folks who see live productions of Shakespeare? What, they need a bunch of actors to perform the play for them? Why can't they just read it? It's all published in books!

Ever go to an art museum? Why? Don't you know how to read?

The irony of it all is that the basis of Maher's criticism is one that can be leveled much more effectively at the way he makes his living - television. What, that's high art all of a sudden? (I believe that it can be, but if only comics or television can be on the list of high art, I'll put comics first.)

I reckon that Maher probably hasn't looked at a comic book since he was a kid, and he figures that they're all the same as they were back then. (But I also hate the idea of disparaging entertainment made for kids. That can be just as great as anything else.)

I don't expect everybody to have the same depth of knowledge about comics history that I do, but I wonder if Maher would be surprised if he found out that his attitude is rooted in one that was spearheaded by puritanical religious zealots who sought to ban comic books in the 1950s. The medium has been getting more and more respectable over the years, attracting a more diverse audience. I've been reading them for over 30 years, and I used to hear people say stuff like what Maher did all the time. I guess it just kinda shocked me that a guy who did a cameo in Iron Man 3 would be so totally clueless. Surely he knows and interacts with some pretty intelligent comic book readers?

Lastly, he tries to draw a link between the fact that we take comic books seriously in this country and we elected Donald Trump to the presidency. I guess Maher also doesn't know how much more respected comic books are in Europe and Japan.

Whatever. The man likes to feel like he's better than all the rubes out there, but somebody needs to tell him that you need to choose between being condescending and being full of shit. You don't get to do both.













Monday, November 12, 2018

Excelsior to the Man

It's rare that I get sad or even shed a tear when it comes to a celebrity death. Today is different though because Stan Lee has passed away. It's not like this was sudden and unexpected. The man made it to 95, and his ailing health has been in the news. It still hits me hard though because I feel like it's the end of something more than just one of my favorite creators.

I don't know how old I was when I first became aware of Stan Lee. I remember that he narrated Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends, so I must have been around seven or eight. I remember that my sister had to correct me, as I thought he kept saying "This is Stanley" as opposed to "Stan Lee".

I've met him four times in my life. I remember the first time, when I was probably twelve or thirteen, I told him that I had been a fan of Spider-Man my whole life. I'm not sure what he said in reply, but it was a witty/funny/heartfelt response.

The second time, when I got him to sign the first issue of the Silver Surfer story that he did with Moebius, I told him that my mother had also read and enjoyed that particular comic. He responded with "Tell your mother I said hello."

I honestly don't remember the third time, but I have the autograph from 1991 to prove it.

The fourth time was just a few years ago when he did a signing at my local comic book shop, Flying Colors Comics. My wife wanted to be there, but she had jury duty. My son was only four years old, and wouldn't understand why we were waiting in line. I wanted them to be a part of it though, so I got Stan to hold up a picture of my wife and son for the photo I got. He seemed to get a genuine kick out of it. When I thanked him for coming out to do the signing, he replied, "Yeah, that was awfully nice of me to do that."

It's hard for me to convey just how much Stan Lee means to me. If you scroll through my blog, you'll see that I write a lot about comics. While comics would certainly exist without him, I'm not sure that I even would have gotten hooked if it had not been for him. While I read all sorts of stuff now, it was Marvel Comics that sparked my imagination initially. And while it's true that creators like Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby did not receive their fair share of credit and attention, Marvel would not be Marvel if it wasn't for Stan Lee.

When my son was really little, I read to him some of those old Lee/Ditko Spider-Man issues. While Ditko's art is something that I have grown to appreciate over time, I always enjoyed Lee's dialogue, and reading it out loud made me realize how much of the very character of Marvel Comics is due to his way with words.

Stan Lee always managed to balance fun and gravitas at the same time. The titles of the stories set the reader up for this unique mix of storytelling: "When Falls the Meteor!", "Where Flies the Beetle!", and "If This Be My Destiny!" This is some serious stuff, dammit! But you're going to enjoy every second of it, double dammit! And even if your first Marvel Comic wasn't written by him, his style continued to permeate throughout the books long after he stopped writing them on a regular basis.

I think that this is one of the reason why I love the Marvel movies so much. Is there anything more fun than watching Thor and Rocket Raccoon have a heart-to-heart talk over the fact that Thor no longer has anything left to lose in his life? But at the same time, it's all taken very seriously, and you can feel empathy for both a talking raccoon and the god of thunder. That's some Stan Lee influence right there, and I think the movie makers, from the producer to the director to the actors, would be the first ones to admit that.

Speaking of the movies, one thing that's great to know is that Stan finally got to see all of those characters finally get the respect they deserve from Hollywood. I remember when I saw him for the first time at a convention, he was talking about the inevitable release of all kinds of movies based on Marvel characters. I remember telling my uncle all about that, and he had to break it to me that Stan had been hyping all kinds of projects ever since he moved out to Hollywood, and most of these projects never saw the light of day, and those that did were major clunkers (see Dolph Lundgren in The Punisher).

I doubt that I'm going to be the only one writing a tribute to Stan who touches on the fact that his biggest talent was as a master of hype. Yeah, he could write a good story, and he changed the way superhero comics were done, but his biggest skill was getting people excited. That was right there on the page, but it also would come through in that unmistakable, charismatic voice of his. (He doesn't just get all of those cameos because of his creator credits!)

Anyway, this one is hard on me because it feels like something bigger has come to an end. Stan was around during the Golden Age of Comics. He changed the way things were done during what he (of course) dubbed The Marvel Age of Comics. While he may not have been doing regular monthly books by the time I started reading in the 1980s, his presence was always there. My son, who only takes a passing interest in superhero comics, knows who he is. My wife knows who he is. Shoot, pretty much everyone knows who he is.

I often share obituaries of important comic book creators on Facebook. I usually only get a few people who like/comment, as not many people know who they are.

Everybody knows Stan Lee though. I don't think that there's another comic book creator where I can say the same.


Saturday, July 14, 2018

Read These Comics! - The Silver Surfer: Parable

If you would have asked me a week ago how many Stan Lee signatures I had in my comics collection, I would have told you three. The first time was in 1987, the second time in 1989, and the third time in 2014. Imagine my surprise when I sat down to re-read The Silver Surfer: Parable to find that he not only signed the first issue (as I remembered from '89) but the second issue in 1991. And as an added bonus, he signed the backboard and wrote "Excelsior!" Geez, how did I forget about that? I'm not even 100% sure what convention that was.

Anyway, since this series first came out in 1988, that places me at about thirteen years old when I first read it. I'm sure that I read it a few times after that, but adulthood brings fewer rereadings of comics, and it's safe to say that I haven't read these comics in over twenty years.

How does it hold up? Pretty well.

It's a solid story, and it doesn't read like what Stan did back in the 1960s. Even if you don't like the story, it's pretty clear that we have a master of the art form. He knows when to just let the pictures tell the story, and unlike some of the comics from the Silver Age, he doesn't bog it down in a lot of redundant exposition.

I should also say something about Jean "Moebius" Giraud. For those who don't know, he's a French artist, and this is one of the few American comics that he's done. I've read some of his other works, including the Western Blueberry, and some of The Incal. While I appreciated the art, I just couldn't get into them. Don't get me wrong, this is not me telling you to avoid them. By all means, check them out, because he has a lot of fans and is well-respected all over the world. The problem might be me.

My only complaint about the art is that this series wasn't printed on higher quality paper like it deserved. (There have been reprints that have rectified this.) Still, even that doesn't hurt it. While I complimented Lee on knowing when to let the pictures tell the story, he wouldn't have been able to do so if the artist didn't know how to tell a story.

Any story that features the world-devouring Galactus needs to make him look not just like a giant, but downright god-like. That's exactly what you get from this. It's especially important because in this out-of-continuity story, Galactus essentially comes down as just that - a god. Moebius really sells it, and the reader can really feel the terrifying grandeur of the character on each page.

When Galactus first arrives, he just stands there in the middle of the city. He doesn't break out his machines in order to devour the planet. He's like an old-time religious idol, and he's worshiped as one. This is exactly his plan, as he knows that the presence of a god will lead to chaos and the destruction of humanity, as nothing inspires people to kill like doing the will of a god. He doesn't even make any commandments, as he (rightfully) figures that some human will claim to speak for him soon enough. It's not until the Silver Surfer blasphemes this god that Galactus begins to move and shows what he truly is - a force of destruction. I don't want to say anything else about the story, as I hope that you're able to read it for yourself.

After reading a few interviews with Stan Lee, it's safe to say that he lies somewhere on the agnostic-atheist side of things when it comes to belief in God. But just like a lot of us nonbelievers, he's clearly interested in the subject and explores it here. As I said before, I was just a kid when I read this. It really stuck with me though, and I remember that this was an example of why I'd insist to adults that comics were not just for little kids. While I wouldn't tell you that it's like reading a book by a religious philosopher, it does throw out enough interesting ideas to get you thinking. This was certainly the case when I was 13, but even at 44 I'm finding that I can't get it off my mind.

Friday, July 13, 2018

Green Lantern Corps and the Case for Jessica Cruz

Who knows what the heck DC/Warner is up to these days when it comes to their movies. They're obviously still trying to catch up to Marvel by trying so hard not to be Marvel. Jared Leto's going to be the Joker again, right? But now Joaquin Phoenix will be The Joker in a solo Joker movie? Why is the Joker getting his own movie?

As of this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they have all of their movies be nothing but a big buildup to The Wonder Twins. (And yes, I know that Wonder Woman was fantastic. And I actually liked Justice League in spite of its obvious flaws.)

Last I heard, the plan for Green Lantern was to make a Green Lantern Corps movie. Essentially it would be a buddy space cop movie with Hal Jordan and John Stewart. This is good because since Stewart is African American, we can get a little bit more diversity in our superhero movies.

But I'm going to make some longtime fans upset and utter something potentially blasphemous.

I say ditch Hal Jordan.

That's right. Forget Hal Jordan.

He had his chance. Was it the fault of Ryan Reynolds? I don't think so. I blame a half-baked script and awful special effects. But we've seen him on the big screen before, and it didn't work.

I realize that many longtime comics fans aren't going to like this. Hal Jordan is the original (unless you count the Golden Age) Green Lantern of Space Sector 2184. He's the classic model. Sure, he's been replaced in the comics before, but it pretty much always comes back to him. Whenever DC does a big crossover event and the Justice League needs a Green Lantern, he's the one we get. He's the one that most people recognize (except for kids who grew up with John Stewart in the Justice League cartoon).

If we don't get Hal Jordan, then who do we get?

We get the one who has the potential to be the greatest Green Lantern of them all.

Jessica Cruz.

Let's get the easy reason out of the way first why it should be Jessica representing 2814. She's both female and Latina. The first one is a pretty good bonus for diversity, the second one his huge. Don't tell me that there aren't any Latina superhero fans out there. I go to comic book conventions. I know that they're there. And I'm sure that there are some little girls who would love to see somebody who looks more like them up on the big screen.

Honestly, I feel as though that reason is good enough. But for me, I have something personal to relate to when it comes to her. I'm neither female nor Latin, but Jessica deals with anxiety just like I do. To be fair, I don't deal with the absolute crippling anxiety that she does, but I deal with it enough to relate to her.

And it's her struggle with anxiety that makes her the greatest Green Lantern. (That's right! I said it!) For those of you who don't know, current continuity posits that not just anybody can wield a green lantern ring. Other heroes have tried (notably Green Arrow and Batman) and while they were able to get some results, it was absolutely agonizing for them. A Green Lantern is somebody who can overcome great fear and possesses tremendous willpower.

While Jessica's story is far more complex than this, part of her backstory is that she went camping with some friends, and all of them were killed while she managed to survive. She has post traumatic stress syndrome, and it resulted in her shutting herself indoors for three years. Being a Green Lantern has been a struggle, and she has had difficulty creating constructs with her ring.

You might be wondering then, how can a shut-in with anxiety possibly be the greatest Green Lantern when they're supposed to be able to overcome great fear?

Because for Jessica, every time she walks out of the house, she is overcoming great fear. One of my favorite issue of Green Lanterns had her struggling to build up the nerve just to go to Simon, her friend and fellow Green Lantern's, house for a dinner party. Pretty much every moment is a struggle for her.

Some supervillain comes along who wants to rule the universe? He's secondary to just walking out the front door.

There is so much potential for this character, and I really hope that they continue to do great things with her.
















Sunday, September 4, 2016

San Francisco Comic Con

Wonder Woman by Mike Mayhew
Since the departure of WonderCon to Southern California, the San Francisco Bay Area has been making several attempts to replace what was easily the biggest comic book related event of Northern California. It was looking like the Big Wow Comicfest might have taken its place, but that seems to be a thing of the past, and it's been replaced by the Silicon Valley Comic Con. I didn't attend that one, mainly because it seemed like more of a media convention and I was still hoping that Big Wow might be making a return. (I'm not including the East Bay Comic Con. I've been to the past two of them, but it's a pretty small, although worthwhile, show.)

Since that idea is apparently a bust, I went ahead and bought a ticket to the San Francisco Comic Con. The ticket price was a bit steep at $50 for a Saturday ticket, but I have been dying to go to a big show, so I ponied up. It didn't have nearly the star-power of the Silicon Valley show, and there weren't too many artists in attendance that I wanted to see, but when a buddy of mine expressed interest in going, I figured that was a good enough reason to at least check it out.

Overall, I think that it was a pretty good convention. While there weren't a lot of comics professionals there, the ones I got to see where kind of a big deal to a long-time comics fan like myself. For some reason, I've managed to go nearly 30 years of reading comics without meeting Mike Zeck, who drew one of the greatest Spider-Man stories, Kraven's Last Hunt. He's also the guy who designed Spidey's black costume.

I not only got his autograph on the first part of the aforementioned Kraven story, I had him sign the issue of Secret Wars that detailed how Spider-Man received the black costume. On top of that, I got the signatures of the inkers: Bob McLeod on Kraven's Last Hunt and John Beatty on Secret Wars. One more signature topped off the Secret Wars, and that was writer (and former editor in chief of Marvel Comics) Jim Shooter.

I also parted with some money when I bought some art prints with some classic covers that Zeck did, along with a really cool profile of The Punisher. (I had two Zeck-drawn Punisher posters hanging in my room when I was a kid.)

Writer, penciler, inker - all signed
Those guys were all some of the best in the business, but you don't find them doing much in comics lately. Zeck and Beatty informed me that they work more in licensing now rather than do the monthly comics grind. I'm assuming the same is true with Bob McLeod. (McLeod also signed the first two issues of The Amazing Spider-Man that were penciled by Todd McFarlane. In my opinion, his inks improved McFarlane's art. I told him so, but he said that McFarlane didn't think so.)

I did get to meet one artist who's currently putting out some great work, and that's Mike Mayhew. He has recently illustrated a couple of issues of Star Wars that feature the exploits of Obi Wan Kenobi and young Luke Skywalker, filling in some gaps between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope. I got him to sign those tow comics, but I was disappointed to hear that there weren't any more issues like that in the works. I also got into an interesting conversation where I got some insight into the workings of Disney and Marvel regarding keeping all of the continuity straight between the movies and comic books. Just like with Zeck, I also purchased some pretty cool art prints from him. One was with Wonder Woman, one with Batgirl, and one with Jean Grey of the X-Men.

One other thing I observed was the overall quality coming from the independent comic book publishers. Usually it's pretty easy for me to bypass what they're selling, and maybe once in a while I'll see something interesting. This time I found myself passing on a lot of stuff that looked pretty cool. (But I did pick up a couple of them - most notably from Emet Comics. Their focus is female creators and female characters, but I was drawn to the obvious quality of the artwork. I haven't read them yet, so I can't speak to the quality of the stories. One way or the other, the female angle is definitely not just a gimmick.)

As for shopping, you'd be happy if you were looking to buy some classic comics (think Golden and Silver Age) as there were a few vendors specializing in those. I didn't see as many dealers selling trade paperbacks and graphic novels as I'm used to seeing, and I didn't see a whole lot of toys or cool T-shirts either.

They apologized for looking exhausted,
but they were good sports as I geeked out.
I only checked out one panel, and that was the one with Ian McDiarmid. You probably know him better as The Emperor from the Star Wars movies. He took audience questions and shared stories from filming the movies and his stage career. Fun fact - he does an uncanny impression of George Lucas.

Of course there were also plenty of cosplayers, which is a bigger deal now than when I started
reading comics. There were the ones you'd expect like Boba Fett, Stormtroopers, Deadpool, Spider-Man, and Batman. I only caught a few surprises like a 90s era Superboy and Captain America's dancers. (I did the closest thing to a catcall in my life when I saw them on the street, pointed at them and shouted, "Awesome!" They thanked me, so I guess I can keep my Not-a-sexual-harasser card.)

I'm glad I went, but I'm also glad that I just went with a friend and fellow comic book fan. I didn't bring the wife and kid, and I'm not sure if they would have enjoyed themselves as much as they did at Big Wow. There wasn't as much kid-friendly stuff, and it was a lot more crowded. It's not that I think my wife would have hated it, but I don't know if she would have wanted to stay as long as I did. Hopefully this is just the beginning for this con, and we'll see an even more impressive guest list for next year.


Friday, August 12, 2016

Suicide Squad - movie review

For those who haven't read any of my comic book movie reviews before, I should probably start with the disclaimer that I'm almost always positive when I write about these films. In some cases, like Batman V. Superman, I could recognize the movie's shortcomings while still enjoying it. In other words, it's pretty tough to create something that I don't like so long as it's based on comic books.

With that said, I really wasn't going in to Suicide Squad with super high expectations. I've never read the comic, and the only characters that I cared about were the ones who were Batman-related. And while I realize that many people loved the trailers, I was a bit underwhelmed. That feeling only sank when the negative reviews started to pour in. I wasn't going to let that stop me from seeing the movie, but I continue to worry that Warner doesn't know how to handle its DC properties the way that Marvel Studios knows how to handle theirs.

Once again though, I'll say that while I understand the negative criticism, I still liked the movie. Much like DC's last effort, Batman V. Superman, I found this to be a pretty frustrating movie, only I have less personally invested in this particular property. I thought that the movie had a really great original style, but it seemed to be the victim of (once again) too much executive interference with the creative process. And Warner is still trying to artificially catch up to Marvel by throwing as many characters in one movie as possible. (How cool would it have been if we already knew most of these villains from various superhero movies and then have this become an anti-Avengers by having them all team up?)

One thing that I can definitely say for it is that the movie really kept up a nice, brisk pace up until the final act, which got caught up in the whole "Why are they all fighting this guy?" trap that so many of these movies do. I thought that the director, David Ayer, made good use of various classic rock songs throughout. Sometimes when people do that, it feels like they're ripping off Scorsese, but I guess it doesn't feel that way when it's done in this particular genre.

All right, here are some scattered thoughts:

Jared Leto as The Joker - I was more than willing to give Leto a chance, and I didn't really pay too much attention the fact that the guy seems to be a real creep. Obviously, Heath Ledger's performance is still fresh in a lot of people's minds, so that would be tough to top. Leto was going to have to take the character in a different direction if he was going to stand out? Did he do that? I guess, but he didn't really do anything all that interesting with the role at all. The Joker just felt like a generic bad guy.

I also think that, with the exception of the flashback scenes, the character felt pretty perfunctory in this movie. I'm not entirely sure what he added to the story other than that.

Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn - She was probably the perfect choice for this part. She's a very pretty woman, but she's also able to pull off crazy pretty well with that wide smile of hers. It was pretty clear that she looked to the character's original portrayal in Batman: The Animated Series for inspiration. (And you actually get to see her in the original outfit! And you quickly realize why they changed it.)

I think that we can blame the issues with The Joker on the fact that the movie had Harley in it, as her origin is so tied to that character. Still, Robbie's portrayal was interesting enough that I think that they could have had her merely hint at her origins.

Will Smith as Deadshot - I don't know too much about the character, but I liked Smith's portrayal. He's always pretty likable, and he was a good choice if they were going to make at least one of these villains have a bit of a heart. I'd be really happy to see more of him in other DC films.

I don't think that this is the sort of movie that will win over people who normally don't like comic book movies. It might even turn off a lot of people who like what Marvel has been putting out over the past decade. As I said, I get the negative reviews, and it's a bit of a mess toward the end. Still, there was enough for this comic book nerd to enjoy, and I hope to see it again (especially if there's a director's cut.)

Monday, June 20, 2016

Thoughts on the DC Rebirth

Honestly, if push comes to shove, I'm more of a Marvel guy than a DC guy. The first comics I ever bought were Marvel, and it took a few years for me to actually start buying some DC titles as well. (Keep in mind that I started reading regularly back in the sixth grade.) This doesn't mean that I think that Marvel is "better", it's just that I've gravitated more to the House that Stan and Jack Built more than the Distinguished Competition. With that said, it's strange that I've written more about the various developments at DC several times now while not writing too much about Marvel.

And this brings me to DC's latest initiative, which has been called Rebirth, which is kinda making me hate DC Comics. Is it because  the last major relaunch was a mere five years ago? Is it because it feels gimmicky? Is it due to the confusing continuity?

No, it's because I pretty much want to read everything that they're publishing. While I'm certain this problem will not be able to sustain itself for a long period of time, I'm finding myself intrigued by everything I've read so far, and I'm still looking forward to some titles. Oh, and did I mention that most of them come out twice a week? There's still plenty of stuff from Image, Boom, and IDW that I want to buy, not to mention the offerings from some random company owned by Disney. (And I should mention that company is still turning out great Star Wars comics.)

For those who aren't currently reading comics, or haven't been following the news of the relaunch, here's the brief synopsis of what's going on:

Less than five years ago, DC canceled its entire line and relaunched absolutely every title along with a bunch of new titles. There were 52 total, hence the name The New 52. It was a controversial move, and while there were definitely a lot of great comics to come out in that period (particularly Batman by Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo) overall a lot of fans, like myself, started to lose interest. While it might have helped to bring in a lot of new readers, I think that it might be safe to say that a lot of us felt like this new continuity was missing what we loved about DC Comics (even though we might not have realized that this is what we loved) and that's a sense of history. Or better put, the legacy of many classic characters had pretty much gone up in a puff of smoke. (The Flash is probably the one character who suffered the most from this.)

Rebirth isn't completely rebooting continuity so much as bringing back what was lost with the previous relaunch. It all started with a one-shot titled simply Rebirth, and I think that Mavel's Tom Breevort said it best: "I thought it was -- and I mean this in a good way -- the most 'DC' comic that I'd read in a long while." From there, a bunch of new Rebirth special issues and new #1's hit the stands, and I've read pretty much all of them. I picked up the usual suspects with the Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman titles, but I also revisited Green Lanterns and gave Aquaman, Green Arrow, and Titans a shot.

And I can tell you, there isn't a weak link in the bunch. I'm obviously going to have to stop dropping titles simply because I won't be able to afford everything, but I think that it's just going to come down to sticking with my favorite characters.

Anyway, here are some highlights:

Batman #1 - I don't think that I've read anything by Tom King before, but holy crap that's the way that you start a first issue. I don't want to give away too much, but it's really one long and well-constructed action sequence. However, there's a real emotional heft to it, and the last page has me dying to find out what happens next.

Green Arrow - I don't know if I'm going to be able to stick with this one, but I like the interaction between him and Black Canary. One of my oldest comics is a Green Lantern/Green Arrow reprint, so I always associate her with Ollie. I haven't been following either one of them in the New 52, so I didn't even realize that their history had been taken away. I imagine that longtime fans will be really happy with this.

Mick Gray, inker on Superman to the left, me babbling on at the right.
Courtesy of Flying Colors Comics.
Superman - Geez, but I can't think of a time when I've been this excited to pick up every Superman related title. Maybe it was back when Kurt Busiek was on Superman and Geoff Johns was on Action Comics? Anyway, I'm not sure how much this one will appeal to people who are totally new to comics, but I can't be the only veteran fan who's intrigued about what's happening here. In a nutshell, Superman is dead. But Superman, from the pre-New 52 continuity is very much alive, and he's ready to be the Man of Steel for the universe he now inhabits. He has some problems though as Lex Luthor had ideas about doing the same thing. Oh, and this Superman is married. And he's got a kid who doesn't know his own strength.

And Gene Yang has a book with a Chinese Superman? I'm down for that one as well.

The Flash - I'm doubly excited about this one since Joshua Williamson is writing it. He's currently writing two of my favorite Image books, Birthright and Nailbiter. Hopefully he'll be given the freedom to really bring his best to the Scarlet Speedster, as he's great at writing about personal relationships.

Wonder Woman - I lost interest in her adventures shortly after the conclusion of Brian Azarello's run, but this one has me back on board. This one really exemplifies what Rebirth is all about, as her origin underwent a heavy revision in the New 52. The Rebirth one-shot didn't do much other than set up a story to come, but it looks like the theme is "Who is Wonder Woman?" which has a lot of potential considering the heavy symbolism that is inherent with the character.

Green Lantern - I am a huge fan of what Geoff Johns did with Hal Jordan and the Green Lantern mythology. I kinda lost interest in the title when there was that whole New Gods business, and I really just didn't think that Billy Tan was a good fit for the title. I like the setup for the new Green Lanterns series, as it focuses on the two newest recruits for Sector 2814: Simon Baz and Jessica Cruz. The setup is a pretty good one, as the two of them have to share a lantern battery, and the Justice League will have to do their training since the Green Lantern Corps is missing in action. I don't know what they have in store for Hal Jordan in his book, but I'll at least check it out.

The Green Lantern concept already had a rich history and mythology to it, and that only became even more true under Geoff Johns. Hopefully this will continue the tradition.

No doubt I will have more to say as this reboot plays itself out. In the meantime, I'm excited and a bit daunted as to how much good stuff there is to read.

Sunday, May 29, 2016

X-Men: Apocalypse - movie review

There was a lot that I liked about the recent installment of the X-Men franchise, but it was also missing something important that would have let it rise above just being average. It's certainly not the downturn that the third movie was (although I don't think it was as horrible as everybody says it was - the first Wolverine movie was far, far worse). However, it also is a bit of a letdown after the stellar Days of Future Past.

The major problem is that there simply wasn't anything interesting about the villain, Apocalypse. I could get over the fact that he looked kinda lame, but other than that there just wasn't anything very compelling about him. One thing that has always been good about these films is that there were always conflicts between the good guys and bad guys where things went beyond just the physical and were downright personal. With Apocalypse, he basically just has a god complex, but his ill-defined powers pretty much justify them.

That said, all of the good guys were interesting, and it was cool to see the character arcs for Mystique and Magneto get carried through into this chapter. Sure, it's not doing exactly what the comic books did, but by this point they need to do things that make sense in context of the previous films and not force the characters into predetermined roles.

Speaking of making sense though, I probably should point out that by this point, the continuity of these films make absolutely no sense at all. There are things that happen in this film that flat-out contradict what happened in the previous films. I'm pretty sure that they don't even really care, and they figure that maybe the time travel hijinks of the last film can miraculously explain it all away. Whatever, that's not very important to me, but I know that it will bug some people.

Anyway, there were a lot of great moments and highlights of this film, but I don't want to give away too much. I'll just say what I knew going in but yet still managed to thoroughly enjoy. For one, Quicksilver comes back, and they do a super-speed scene that might very well rival the one from the last film. Wolverine gets a brief scene that essentially undoes the damage from his lousy origin film, and it's a good one. However, I have to wonder if everything leading up to that scene detracted from the main plot, and we could have given Apocalypse more motivation. We also get to see a bit of Phoenix, and that's always cool.

One thing that I also liked was how Alexandra Shipp was a big step up from Halle Berry as Storm. Berry is a fine actress, but I never really felt like she did very much for that part. Shipp managed to hold an accent, and I was slightly surprised to see that the actress is from Phoenix, Arizona. (I figured that they might have gotten an actual African to play her.)

Speaking of Storm, it should also be noted that the ladies definitely get a lot to do in this story. They get some of the biggest moments and they're some of the most powerful players. While I think that The Avengers franchise is better overall, Marvel Studios could take some notes from what's going on with the X-Men movies.

If you've generally enjoyed most of the X-Men movies so far, you're probably going to like this one just fine while not being blown away. If they've never done anything for you, or you've been overall pretty ambivalent about them, this one won't change your mind. Brian Singer has done a fine job with this franchise, but I'm personally pretty eager to see some new blood show us what they can do.

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Calm down about Hydra Cap

I don't think that anybody would argue the notion that I love comic books. I've been reading them regularly for nearly 30 years now, and I've never gone more than a month without a trip to the comic book store during that time. It's a basic part of my life, and to quit reading them to me would be as strange as it would be for some people to quit watching TV or attending sporting events. I'm always excited to talk about them when I get the chance, to the point where I do a whole lesson on comics and superheroes with both my freshmen and senior English classes. (And from the comments I get at the end of the year, that's easily my most popular lesson.)

With that said, I really can't stand comics fandom sometimes. I've already written about this once, but the recent brouhaha over Captain America has prompted me to return to my blog and give my two cents. For those who don't know, the controversy is over a recent revelation in the new Steve Rogers: Captain America series. It turns out that Cap is a member of the evil Hydra organization, and this has been true ever since he was a child. (Flashbacks show his mother being recruited by a Hydra agent.) The reveal came at the end of the issue, and we don't know much else.

And fans are freaking out. Many of them are saying that this completely destroys the character. Some of them are saying that it's a slap in the face to his Jewish American creators, Joe Simon and Jack Kirby, since Hydra had ties to the Nazis. (In the sense that any fictional organization can have ties to a real organization.) Even those who aren't letting it upset them are dismissing it all as a cheap gimmick - merely a stunt to bring in new readers.

Here's my response:

ONLY THE FIRST CHAPTER HAS COME OUT.

Is it possible that this story will be a slap in the face to the character? (Funny how fans don't seem to lob this comment at Frank Miller, who craps all over Superman's legacy in his various Batman stories.) Sure, it very well could be. But as of right now, all we know is that he's been a member of Hydra all along. At least, it seems like that's what it is. We do not know the circumstances. Maybe he's trying to destroy it from within and has some kind of master plan? Maybe they're mind-controlling him? Maybe he thinks that by being part of the organization, he can somehow contain it? The point is, we don't know. The explanation may turn out to be really horrible, and later those fans will feel justified. However, there's also the possibility that there's a really good story behind this that will make Cap stand out as an even greater hero than ever before?

What about the charges of this just being a gimmick? I don't see why that's necessarily a problem. It certainly is a gimmick, but so what? It's bad if it's a gimmick and a poor story, but being a gimmick doesn't necessarily take away any artistic merit from a work. A lot of superhero comics are based on gimmicks in the first place because the publishers were trying to sell stories. What do you think inspired team books like Justice League of America and The Avengers in the first place? How is that NOT a gimmick? I even think that Paul McCartney would be the first to admit that Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band was a gimmick, but that's one of the greatest rock albums of all time. Shakespeare wrote about what people wanted to see and no doubt employed what then would have been seen as a gimmick in his time. (He did make a living off of his art, ya know. I doubt he would have done that if he ignored what the masses wanted to see.)

Lastly, can we give the writer, Nick Spencer, a little bit of credit here? The man has shown that he understands Captain America's value as a symbol with the Sam Wilson: Captain America comic. I had said that I wouldn't be too interested in that series if they made Sam (The Falcon) the new Captain America and made it so all of America was fine with the idea of there being a black Captain America. Spencer went with that idea, with a whole lot of parallels to the national freak-out that happened when Obama became the Commander in Chief. He even managed to get the Fox News talking heads all discombobulated. In other words, he has earned the benefit of the doubt.

As for me, I dug the first issue, as there was a lot more going on than the "gotcha!" ending. And it should be noted that the art by Jesus Saiz is awesome. I'm looking forward to how this all plays out. If you are a comics reader and don't find it interesting, then that's fine. However, stop making sweeping judgments based solely on the first chapter of what will no doubt prove to be a lengthy saga. When it's all said and done, then let's evaluate it as to whether it's a highlight or a low point for the character. And even if it is a low point, the character will survive. If he could survive the cancellation of his series at the end of World War II, he'll get through this.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Captain America: Civil War - movie review

The most significant thing for me about seeing this latest Marvel Studios film is that it's the first one that my wife and I brought my son to see in the theater. He's five, and he's seen pretty much all of them on video. When he sat through Captain America: Winter Soldier, and was absolutely fascinated with the brainwashed Bucky Barnes, I figured that he'd be fine to see the next installment in the theater.

How did he do? He got a bit fidgety during the long bouts of dialogue, but he was pretty riveted whenever somebody was in costume, and he was definitely enthralled every time there was a battle - especially if it involved The Winter Soldier. (Not sure why that character fascinates him so much.)

Here's my son's short review: "It was great and a lot of things happened."

As for my thoughts, anybody who reads my reviews knows that I'm going to find something to like in pretty much every comic book movie, especially the ones coming from Marvel Studios. Sometimes I add special caveats. With this one, let's just say that if you've enjoyed most of them, then you will probably like this one as well and might even include it in your top three. (Which is where I put it. Is it as great as the first Avengers film? Not sure if I'm willing to go there just yet. I'm not even sure if it's better than The Winter Soldier. But I have an easier time saying it's better than pretty much every other one.)

For those who don't know, this film borrows a story right out of the comics, while shifting around some details in order to make it fit a new storytelling format. The basic concept is that the governments of the world want to crack down on superheroes and basically make them accountable to the United Nations. Captain America, burned by his experiences with SHIELD, isn't willing to do that. His good friend Iron Man is, and the two wind up fighting with each one recruiting their own mini-army of like-minded heroes.

This movie does a nice job of picking up threads from both the previous Cap movie and Age of Ultron. Not only that, but there's a real arc with Captain America, who has gone from being a loyal boyscout in the first film to downright cynical of authority. Iron Man has made almost the reverse trajectory, as he's grown such a conscience that he's more than eager to have himself restrained. One could easily see each one of them fighting on the opposite side of this issue in each of their first films. (Think of the scene in Iron Man II where Tony Stark speaks before Congress.)

Another thing that was handled well was all of those characters. Did it make the movie a bit longer than it should have been? Perhaps. But I also enjoyed the big superhero fight where you got to see Ant-Man, Hawkeye, Spider-Man, The Black Panther, etc. all go at it. Did all of this make it feel more like an Avengers movie than a Captain America movie? Maybe. But the focus always came back on Cap, with Iron Man taking a close second.

Anyway, here are some random thoughts:

Spider-Man - Tom Holland is getting a lot of praise in his turn as the webslinger, and it's well-earned. While I wouldn't go so far as to say his appearance in this makes it the "best Spider-Man film" (that still goes to Spider-Man 2) I will say that the upcoming Spider-Man: Homecoming has the potential to be the best Spider-Man film. It was great to see him as a kid, and even better, a guy who talks way too much while fighting. (And just like in the comics, the other characters are keen to point out that he needs to shut up.) Was his role totally necessary in this film? Maybe not. But just like you could cut out the bit in Hamlet where the Danish Prince interacts with a gravedigger and not have it affect the plot, I can't imagine this film without it.

The Black Panther - King T'Challa was a welcome addition to the story as well, and unlike Spider-Man, his role was far more necessary to the story. He functioned as somebody who was looking at everything from an outsider's perspective, which by this point the audience isn't going to be at. I don't want to say much more in fear of spoiling the plot, so I'll conclude this bit by saying that the action scenes were top-notch. He definitely has a style all his own. Also, he had a character arc that didn't feel forced despite his limited screen time.

Zemo - As an old fan of The Thunderbolts, I'm particularly fond of Baron Zemo as a villain, and I don't feel like this character was close enough to his comic book counterpart to even justify having the same name. Was this guy a decent villain? I suppose, and he certainly could have had more to do. I'm just hoping that maybe he can evolve into something closer to his comic book counterpart.

Ant-Man - Upon repeated viewings of his solo film, the character has grown on me. He was a welcome addition to this one as well. Even though his role was a small one, he nearly upstaged Spider-Man, which isn't an easy feat.

Batman v. Superman - Is it fair to even compare this film with that one? I think so. It's a superhero film. It's part of a bigger franchise. It features a lot of characters and hints at an even larger universe. But here's the deal - even though I gave a fairly decent review to BvS, the more I think about that one, the more I think about its flaws. I still insist that it had a lot of good stuff going for it. (And I'm excited that Ben Affleck is moving forward with his solo Batman film that he will direct.) However, it was a mess. Basically DC/Warner is trying to do what Marvel is doing, only they're not willing to do the legwork that's involved with this kind of universe building. Imagine if Civil War was the film that came out right after the first Iron Man. It's hard to have a lot at stake with Batman fighting Superman when it's their first film. However, it was heartbreaking to see Captain America and Iron Man pound away at each other because we've seen a friendship grow, develop, and evolve before it all went south.



Saturday, March 26, 2016

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Movie Review

I was going to wait a few more days to see Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice but I found myself getting involved in too many online discussions about it that I was getting bombarded with spoilers. So, I seized the opportunity to see it this afternoon and just got back home about an hour ago.

I wasn't in too much of a rush to see this one, honestly. I was disappointed with Man of Steel and this looked to be more of the same from director Zack Snyder. I didn't think that I would hate it, just that it wouldn't live up to its potential. When I started to see the reviews pour in, I really started to fear the worst (actually, that started with a few somewhat lame looking previews).

Basically, I'm disappointed in the direction that DC/Warner is taking with their shared cinematic universe. They're trying to catch up with Marvel Studios, but they're not necessarily learning the right lessons. They see that it's cool to have a bunch of superheroes in one movie, but they don't want to take the time to build up those characters in their own movies first before rushing to the Avengers goal post. Plus, they got off to a rocky start with the aforementioned Man of Steel and the trainwreck that was Green Lantern. (Which I'm pretty sure is considered apocrypha by now.)

So, what did I think now that I finally saw it? I actually really liked it a lot, and I'm looking forward to seeing it again. This isn't to say that it doesn't have problems - because it definitely does. It also doesn't mean that I'm going to echo the cries of "the critics don't know what they're talking about!" Most of the criticism that I read was pretty fair, and while the negative points don't bother me as much as they did some people, I can see how they might detract from somebody's enjoyment of this film.

Here's what I thought about various aspects of the movie, in no particular order. Oh, and SPOILERS.

Batfleck - Unlike a lot of fans, I did not bemoan the casting of Ben Affleck as Batman. I thought it was an interesting choice. This doesn't mean that I thought it was a good idea, but I have been surprised by so many unconventional choices (Heath Ledger as the Joker anybody?) that I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Now it sounds like a lot of people are praising him for his performance. So, what's my verdict? I definitely lean more toward the praise than the lamentation. I don't know if this is the "best" Batman, but I can't say that it's worse than either Christian Bale or Michael Keaton. He certainly looks the part more than Keaton, and his Batman voice is less over the top than Bale's. Overall, good job, Ben. If I ever see you while crashing the movie set to Good Will Hunting 2: Hunting Season, I shall shout: "Affleck, you were the bomb in Batman v Superman, yo!"

Gal Gadot - I had a good feeling about this casting choice, and those feelings were justified. While I might have preferred a bit more of a muscular Wonder Woman, I can overlook that. (If I can overlook Michael Keaton as Batman, I can get over a more slender Amazon Princess.) Aside from that, she's exactly what I wanted in a Wonder Woman - beautiful and yet totally convincing that she could kick your ass. I also got a bit more than I hoped for, as she has an accent (the character isn't American, after all) and she actually looks Mediterranean. Props to Linda Carter, but we don't need another Wonder Woman who looks like she's of Northern European stock. (Personally, she's one character where I wouldn't mind if they cast a woman of any ethnicity.) Oh, and the best part of her performance was how she clearly relished being in combat. Now THAT'S Wonder Woman.

Luthor - I actually think that this was one of the weak spots of the movie. I was actually pretty excited that an unlikely choice like Jesse Eisenberg got to play the part, but I feel like he's just doing "Generic Super Villain" with this role. I was kind of hoping that he'd basically do what he did in The Social Network only more menacing.

The Story - There's a lot that works. For one, Batman is given a really good motivation for wanting to take down Superman. I'm not sure if his sudden change of heart was all that believable though unless one takes in the entire Batman mythology as a whole. Aside from that, this movie did suffer from trying to cram too much into one movie. The fight with Doomsday would have felt totally anticlimactic if it weren't for the chance to see Wonder Woman kicking some serious butt. I'm sure that with subsequent viewings, I'll notice more plot holes and inconsistencies, as that sort of thing happens when you try and put too much into one movie.

And yes, much of this was a setup for the future Justice League movie. Do those parts work? Yeah, sure. Could the movie have done without them? Yeah. All they needed to do was make a brief mention of the fact that other metahumans exist. We didn't need a whole scene that served as a preview of franchises to come.

I guess I felt the same as I did with Man of Steel. There were parts where I felt emotionally invested, and then there were parts where it just felt like it was dragging on.

Final note - I don't think that it's possible to give an "objective" movie review, as the nature of the beast is subjective. However, when reading my reviews of superhero movies, one should always keep in mind that I'm always going to be partial to them and find something good to say for the sheer fact that they put superheroes up on the screen. Perhaps a good gauge is for me to put it on my list where I rank the comic book adaptations. It would definitely be in the top half - but perhaps not too much higher than that. Time will tell if it rises or drops.

But I will say this - it currently ranks below Affleck's rendition of Daredevil on Rotten Tomatoes. That's crazy. Maybe it's just because the bar has gotten really high since then with the various Marvel studio movies and Christopher Nolan Batman films. But there is not a moment in this movie that's worse than Affleck and his wife fighting on a swingset.

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Deadpool - Review

Before I get started, I should point out that even though I'm a big fan of comic books, superheroes, and superhero movies, I'm not a huge fan of Deadpool. I don't think that I have any Deadpool comics, and I think that the only ones that I have with him are ones where he's making a guest appearance. It's not that I actively dislike the character, it's just that I never found him appealing enough to follow his book. After 30 years of reading comics, that's true of a lot of major characters though.

As a result, I might have actually skipped this one if it hadn't been for all of the good reviews. After all, I'm a fan of the Fantastic Four, but I didn't bother with the last movie since the reviews were so bad. With so many good comic book movies, why waste your time with what looks like a real stinker?

That certainly didn't seem to be the case with Wade Wilson's feature film, and the people who seemed to like it the most were the comic book fans. Also, it seemed like it was a project that the creative team really believed in and really wanted to get right. So, even as a passive fan of the character, I had to check this one out.

Overall, I really liked it, and it lived up to the hype. It was crude, violent, and hilarious, but they did a good job of creating a character that I could care about, and the love story was better than a lot of movies that are marketed as love stories. Here are my thoughts, in no particular order:

Ryan Reynolds - After the disappointment that was Green Lantern, I honestly wondered if the guy had what it took to carry a feature film. I think that this was the movie that proved that he can. I actually have a lot of respect for the guy, as I know that he's one of the main reasons why they got this right. He obviously respects the character and the fans, and he wanted to not just make a good movie but to make one that was true to the spirit of the comic book. (Even though I don't own any, I have read a few, so I can say that it succeeded on that level.)

The story structure - I can't think of another superhero film that does a similar thing, but this one began in median res. For those of you not well-versed in Greek epic story structure, that means that it starts in the middle of things. It doesn't waste any time showing Deadpool in his full costume right from the first scene. It then flashes back, catches up to where it started, and then it continues the narrative. I thought that was pretty smart, as most of Deadpool's appeal is in his fighting style, which includes a whole lot of talking too damn much.

The costume - I don't want to hear any more crap about how superhero costumes don't necessarily translate to the screen. If Deadpool doesn't look like he just jumped right off the page, then I don't know what's what. If they can do that, then we can see Wolverine in something a bit closer to the comics.

The wisecracks - The movie proved that you can have flippant remarks while fighting without taking away from the dramatic weight of the situation. While the two recent Spider-Man movies started heading in that direction, now there's really NO reason to not have Spidey be his smartass self in his next feature film.

The R rating - I'm totally fine with an R rated superhero film. There are a lot of adult fans out there. But like some others have commented, I'm worried that Hollywood will learn the wrong lesson and go that route with too many of them. As a father who likes to watch these films with his son (not this particular one just yet - my son's only five) I'm not too happy at the prospect of even more of these being out of his age range. Because believe me, he knows who Deadpool is, and he wants to see the movie. I'm not sure if I like the idea that the next Wolverine will be rated R (especially considering my son is named for him) and the fact that there will be an R rated version of Batman V. Superman on home video has me a bit nervous. (Superman should be accessible to little kids. I'm sorry, but any other way of looking at that is just wrong.)

Colossus - Even though it wasn't horrible what they did with him in the X-Men movies, it was nice to see a Colossus who was recognizable from the comics. I was a bit worried that he was going to be all grim and gritty as well, but he made for a nice foil for Deadpool with his earnest and heroic attitude.

The love story/ending - SPOILER ALERT - I really liked the relationship in this film, but I think that they should have taken more of a chance with the ending. I can believe that Vanessa would want him back, but they should have saved that for the next film. She was obviously hurt with him disappearing on her like that, and believing that he was dead took a toll on her. I would have found it perfectly believable if she would have told him that she loved him despite his deformity but could no longer be with him because of how hurt she was. The movie took so many chances in so many other ways that it would have been nice to see it do something a little more unconventional with the love story. That's a minor complaint, mind you.

The tone - This is probably the most incredible part of the movie. It's hard to pull off a movie that switches from comedy to drama as much as this one did, but it really pulled it off. Somehow I completely accepted the absurdity of some of the situations, but when everything took a dramatic turn, I was still invested in the characters.

I guess the only real shame is that even though this is a Marvel property, it's not part of Marvel's movie studio. It would be cool to see him interact with The Avengers, but I guess that's just not to be.

Sunday, October 25, 2015

Captain America versus Fox News

I'm a bit late to the party here, as I picked up the latest issue of Sam Wilson: Captain America a week late, and I didn't get a chance to write about this until today. For those of you even slower on the draw than me, the latest adventure of Captain America seems to have some Fox News heads in a tizzy. Here's the video, in case you hate yourself enough to watch it:



They already start to lose me when their "expert" claims that comics are "struggling" lately. From my understanding, sales are pretty solid. Just like a lot of businesses, they have seen their highs and lows over the decades, and I know that they were predicting the end of them back in the 1990s. I certainly wouldn't think of the present as being one of the "low"periods. I also seem to recall reading that while most print publications are losing ground to electronic media, comics are one of the few that are actually up. So, yeah, that's Fox for you.

In the issue, Cap goes up against the Sons of the Serpent, a white supremacist group with ties to some classic Captain America villains with a similar agenda. The Sons are attacking people who cross the U.S. border with Mexico, and they speak in a lot of right-wing cliches:
"Also, you know how you make me press a one for English at the beginning of every call to my satellite provider? That is something I cannot abide!" 
"Look who it is, y'all! Captain Socialism is here to save the day!" 
"Are you really so far ahead on appeasing terrorists and apologizing for our country's greatness that you have the time to come down here and flout still more of our laws?"
Tucker Carlson describes the villain as being simply a concerned citizen who's worried about unchecked illegal immigration. Umm...no. He's a guy who attacks vulnerable people. What Carlson doesn't understand is that you can be a person who's concerned with illegal immigration and STILL view the Sons of the Serpent as being bad guys. The best villains usually speak a bit of truth. After all, isn't Poison Ivy, a Batman villain, just somebody who's concerned about the environment? Same with another Batman villain, Ra's al Ghul. He's concerned with the damage that humanity is causing.

But do you ever hear liberals coming forward and complaining that Batman is attacking liberals? Not from what I understand. That's probably because most people (including a lot of conservatives, I reckon, as these doofuses probably aren't the best representation of them) understand that it's not necessarily the motivation that makes a villain but the method. If Tucker Carlson sees a similarity between himself and the Sons of the Serpent, then that says more about him than it does the comic book.

The talking heads then go on to create a strawman, insisting that the message of the comic is that everyone in "the middle of America" is some kind of a small-minded bigot. That's hardly what's going on. Plus, they point out how the Sons cite the "crime and disease" of illegal immigrants as something that's actually a legitimate problem. Well, those are only concerns about illegals if you don't have your facts, as they are less likely to commit crimes. And call me crazy, but I'm more worried about diseases from anti-vaccination cranks who tend to be upper middle class white people.

Then you get a suggestion about how they should do a comic book on people guarding the border, supposedly keeping us safe. Do these people not realize that under a capitalistic society, such a comic book WOULD exist if anybody thought it would sell? Why should Marvel publish that? Since when is a business obligated to "tell both sides"? I realize that Fox likes to pretend that's what they do, but nobody's making them give equal time to the opposite of what they do, which would be giving actual facts.

It all gets wrapped up with the absurd notion that Captain America comics used to be free from politics, citing the front cover of the first issue where he punched out Hitler. Yeah, no politics there. I think that Trevor Noah has already covered this:


Then it ends with the completely daft "Keep politics out of comic books; that's what I say." What kind of crap is THAT? Do you read comic books, lady who is not Gretchen Carlson? Why don't you let the people who read them decide what goes in them and what doesn't? And they can decide with their wallets.

With all this said, as a fan of the comics, the first issue of this new series was a great read. I have had my misgivings about replacing Steve Rogers with Sam Wilson as the title character, but I've changed my mind. I said that I would change my mind if Marvel had the guts to make the story mirror the sort of freak-out that happened when Obama became President, and it turns out that's exactly what they did. And sure enough, I've changed my mind. Personally, I love the fact that they're pulling no punches when it comes to addressing politics and current events.

I also didn't make the connection when this series was first solicited that it was written by Nick Spencer, who's been doing some great work lately in general. His Superior Foes of Spider-Man was a hoot and a half, and he's actually made me care enough about Ant-Man to follow the new series. They definitely picked the right guy for the book, and while I liked Rick Remender's run well enough to read it all the way through, I haven't felt this excited about Captain America since Ed Brubaker was writing the series.

It also helps that artist Daniel Acuña is doing some great work on the title. I've always enjoyed his work, but this is probably the best I've seen from him. The one thing I loved about the last run with Remender was the top-quality art from Stuart Immonen (who's now rocking it on Star Wars).

While it still feels too recent since the last time Captain America was replaced, I'm on board for this particular direction. Even though we're not living in the 1940s, it seems to me that if you're going to switch Steve Rogers with somebody else, then that person has to be different. And while I still like Sam Wilson better as The Falcon, they're doing a good job of showing how things would be different with him carrying the shield.

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Read These Comics! - The Don Rosa Library

In my very first installment of "Read These Comics!" I recommended the Carl Barks Library of Donald Duck and Uncle Scrooge collections by Fantagraphics. In short, Carl Barks was known to fans of Disney Duck comics from the late 1940s to the early 1960s as "The Good Duck Artist". He created many memorable characters, most notably Scrooge McDuck.

There is one other "good duck artist" who stands out though, and that's Don Rosa, who did his work from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. Thankfully, for fans like me who are a little late to the party, Fantagraphics is reprinting all of his Disney work as well. The third volume is the most recent release, and even though I'm barely halfway through it, I'm thinking that it's the best of the bunch so far. (I've been reading it out loud with my son, who wants to read nothing but Duck stories before bed lately.)

My introduction to Rosa's works came with a reprint of The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck (which I believe will be included in the next Fantagraphics volume). I had fond memories of the character both from some comics I had as a kid and from the old Ducktales cartoon. It was the recommended book of the week at my local comic book store, so I figured I'd give it a try. I wound up being pretty impressed with what a detailed and, ironically enough, human story it turned out to be. So, when I heard about these new collections, I knew that I'd be on board.

For those of you with fond memories of Uncle Scrooge from Ducktales, don't get into this expecting the same thing. In fact, Rosa has a sign that he puts up at conventions and other signings letting people know that it's NOT Ducktales that he's doing. (For instance, don't expect to see Launchpad McQuack.) His work is based on the Barks stories, even having created some sequels to some of them. (Although it should be noted that volume 2 does have the one Ducktales short story that Rosa did, so it's not 100% true to say it's not what he's doing.) However, I'd go so far as to reckon that if you like one, you might like the other. (Rosa himself has said that he liked the cartoon.) They're not the same, but they share a common ancestor. If Ducktales is a bobcat, Rosa's work is a jaguar.

If you've been picking up the various Carl Barks reprints (And why wouldn't you? Pretty sure I recommended it!) then you'll be pleasantly surprised to see that Rosa wasn't merely re-hashing the Barks stuff. While it certainly owes a debt to those comics, he successfully ventures off into new and exciting territory. For one, his stories get really deep into history, and the historical events outside of Duckburg overlap with real-world history, so you wind up learning a little something when Scrooge goes looking for a particular historical artifact. There are also some science lessons that are sprinkled throughout the adventures as well. Barks had his share of real-world lessons, but not nearly to the extent that Rosa takes things.

Rosa's artwork also is different from that of Barks, and the more you read, the more you notice it. Barks was an animator, and that comes through in his drawings, as one panel flows into the next, and you can almost feel the motion between them. Rosa has an engineering background, and that comes through in the amount of detail that he adds in every panel from the elaborate buildings to subtle gags going on in the background. People often write about that aspect of his work, but I've also noticed that there's a real cinematic quality to his work as well, as he'll use large panels to convey scenes of wonder, excitement, and even danger. (A particular shot of the ducks hanging from a cliff in the second volume especially stands out in my mind.)

Rosa is officially retired from doing comic books, and he has cited that one of the reasons why is how Disney treats its artists. In a nutshell, Disney doesn't publish its own comics, and various publishers pay the artists for the work that they do. However, it all winds up belonging to Disney, so it can be reprinted by other publishers without any royalties being paid to the artists - even when the artist's name is being used to promote the reprints! (As has happened to Rosa.) I think that it's safe to say that Rosa is making a bit of money off of these volumes though, as he's providing a lot of original text pieces for each one, including an introduction, detailed story notes, and a "Life and Times of Don Rosa" biography that continues from volume to volume. In those text pieces, you'll find the man to be one of the most self-deprecating artists out there, and if that was all you read, you'd think that the art would consist of a bunch of scribbles and stick figures. Maybe he's seeing something that I'm not, but I'm glad to be missing it, as I think that he's not only producing some exciting stories but some really great drawings as well. This is an example of the medium at its finest, and Rosa will take his place among the greats.

I have a feeling that I'm not the only long-time comic book reader who missed Rosa's work the first time around. While I never looked down upon any particular genre of comic books, I was primarily interested in superhero comics while he was doing his thing. (That's probably still true.) I suppose that as an American I have more of an excuse, as the man was more appreciated in Europe. (I hear he's treated like a rock star in Finland, believe it or not.) However, maybe it's not so bad of a thing, as Rosa has also explained in the text pieces that Fantagraphics is printing many of these stories as they should have been printed in the first place, the originals being plagued with bad coloring and other issues from publishers that didn't really understand comics. Also, these volumes are printed in a larger format than your standard comic, which helps with artwork that's as detailed as Rosa's. Perhaps it was worth the wait, and for me, it's even more fun to experience these stories with my son.

You can read about the time I met Rosa at the Big Wow Comicfest in San Jose here.

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Where are the female superheroes?

While it remains to be seen whether my son will inherit my love for superhero comics, like most little boys, he has a lot of superhero stuff, including toys, a bedspread, and a couple of backpacks. That's pretty cool, but there's one thing that I can't help but notice.

On his Avengers bed spread, which features the team from the movie, Black Widow is nowhere to be seen.

On his Justice League backpack, you won't find Wonder Woman anywhere. There also isn't a pair devoted to her with his set of Justice League underwear. Sure, he has Aquaman underwear, but no Wonder Woman underwear. And no, I'm not expecting them to throw a pair of girl's underwear in there. You can have boy's underwear with a female character on it, can't you?

I find this troubling as both a father and as a fan of superheroes. I'll be the first to acknowledge that when it comes to representing women, comics haven't always done a great job. (Although I'd argue that things have been improving quite a bit lately with the current Black Widow, Batgirl, Starfire, Captain Marvel, etc. comics out there nowadays.) Female superheroes have always been outnumbered by their male counterparts, and this is always clear when it comes to superhero teams. Things were really bad back in the 1950s when it was Wonder Woman's job to act as secretary for the Justice League, and although that sort of a thing fell by the wayside, there were also bad periods, especially in the 90s, where the female heroes were there more to pose like porn stars than serve the story.

Like everything, there are exceptions, and it seemed like for a while there that things were starting to go in the right direction. The Justice League cartoon of the early 2000s at least featured two female heroes (with Hawkgirl joining) and then Justice League unlimited allowed for more of them to get the spotlight, like Black Canary, Supergirl, The Huntress, etc. I know that Teen Titans Go! had some popularity as well, with 2/5 of the team being female.

I should also point out that the X-Men comics have long been a good exception when it comes to representing female heroes. The above image is from issue #218 of The Uncanny X-Men, which featured a story with a small team of X-Men going up against one of their most dangerous foes, the unstoppable Juggernaut. The team consisted of three women and only one man. I was only in seventh grade back then, but I remember loving that story. I was big on the X-Men in general, and the team frequently featured more than its fair share of heroic women. I never associated it to be a girl's comic as a result - nor did I think that of its offshoot Excalibur, which had a female to male ratio of three to two. (Unless you count Kitty Pryde's pet dragon, I guess.)

One thing that I've been realizing lately as comics and superheroes have gone more mainstream is that there isn't anything inherently "for boys" about them. Traditionally they've been geared toward boys, but you see a lot more girls getting into them, and I've found myself talking comics with my female students as much as my male students lately.

This is why it's so troubling that these superhero products seem to leave out the women entirely. They've already gotten short shrift (with a few exceptions) and now they're being ignored all together?

I wonder where the problem really is. Is it that the people behind the decisions feel that boys won't want the backpacks/underwear/blankets if there's even one woman on them? Are they just out of touch? More likely, I'm afraid, is that they have good reason to think that sales will fall if the women are included. And if that's the case, the problem is much worse than I imagine.

I'm not sure how my son would react if Wonder Woman was included on his backpack. There have been times when both my wife and I have had to correct him when he said things about what "girls" supposedly can't do. He obviously doesn't hear that from us, but the message of female limitation definitely gets through to him, so we have to work at damage control. I pointed out to him the issue of Wonder Woman, and he didn't seem too concerned about it, but he also didn't act like it would be a problem if the Amazonian Princess was there next to Batman, Superman, The Flash, and Green Lantern.

I know that there's a lot of talk about feminism nowadays, and a lot of people like to attach meanings to it that don't really jive with my understanding of it. To me, it's all about treating people equally, but we use the term "feminist" to acknowledge that generally speaking it's women who aren't being regarded as full equals. While a superhero backpack might not be the most important fight along these lines, it's certainly a symptom of a problem.