Divergence and Daredevil at Primary Ignition!

Today's post is mostly a plug, as I haven't written a new post in a couple of weeks, and those of you who follow me on Twitter already know about the news I have to present here. Simply put, primaryignition.com is up and running again, with Rob Siebert at the helm once more, and I've returned with him.

Two new reviews with my name in the byline have been published, with more to come. The first such review was on Divergence #1, a Free Comic Book Day issue that DC Comics put out for the occasion, featuring new happenings with Batman, Superman, and the Justice League.

The second such review was on Marvel's Daredevil, a new Netflix original series based on the comic book property of the same name. It's pretty much what I always wanted from a live-action treatment of Batman, but just wasn't possible even in the Nolan films.

In sum, go read these reviews and get my rambling opinions on this stuff, straight from the horse's mouth. I assure you, gentle readers, new blog posts are on the way!

Also, happy Mother's Day to all of you mothers out there. Hi, mum.

Superman: Birthright and Superman for All Seasons: A Tale of Two Takes on an Icon

Author's Note: I am holding off on my long-promised post on the Air Nomads and Religious Vegetarianism, for the sake of obtaining more in-depth information about the subject. Until then, please enjoy this post about Superman.

I've written about Superman movies before, but I've never really written about Superman himself, let alone Superman comics. But over the last week or so, I've finally gotten around to reading Superman: Birthright and Superman for All Seasons, a pair of pretty notable Superman stories. The former was written by the esteemed Mark Waid, while the latter was written and illustrated by the equally esteemed team of Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale, respectively. This latter pair was also behind Batman: The Long Halloween and Batman: Dark Victory, the former being one of my favorite Batman stories. Meanwhile, Waid has written or co-written such great stories as Kingdom Come and 52, as well as acclaimed runs on The Flash, JLA, and also Daredevil over at Marvel.

Getting back to Superman, these two stories both helped to define Superman in comics in ways that were both hugely significant and hugely differing. Today, we will examine the differences between Birthright and Seasons as stories, as well as their respective takes on the world's most iconic superhero.

Right off the bat, Superman: Birthright is very different from Superman for all Seasons. Birthright was spawned in the early 2000's and ran for 12 issues. It was, at the time, meant to be the definitive superhero origin story for Superman, a concept which even then had been done literally dozens of time. Comics scholar Chris Sims notes that even before Birthright, Superman: Secret Origin, and Superman: Earth One all came about, both he and a friend agreed that the last thing they wanted to see in comics was yet another Superman origin story. Exactly why he believes this is beyond the scope of this post, but you can read all about it here. (A word of warning: I'll be citing Mr. Sims a lot in this article.)

Birthright's take on Superman's origin story seeks to capture the feel of Superman is a more "toned-down" and "realistic" way, which is generally code for our hero constantly expressing angst at his predicament. The edition I read stated that Birthright was specifically designed to mirror the approach that the odious Smallville was taking, which is never a good sign. Even the art has that weird, edgy, penciled look that was common in its day, leftover from the exaggeratedly grim and gritty feel that nearly all 90s comics had.

In the hands of a lesser talent, this might lead to what happened with Man of Steel. Not Mark Waid though, oh no. He manages to successfully present a version of Superman that is largely true to the character, yet at the same time mess it up just enough to make is significantly imperfect. Birthright's main problem in this regard is that it keeps looking for explanations and justifications for details that don't or shouldn't need to be explained or justified. The classic example, as indicated by Sims, is the rationale behind putting a giant red "S" on Superman's costume. There's a lot of ballyhoo about it being some kind of Kryptonian crest or a symbol of hope or whatever stupid crud they routinely pull out of their butts at the DC editorial offices, but Sims has a simpler explanation: He wears an "S" on his chest because "S" stands for Superman. There. Done. Mystery solved.

One thing that I actually did like that Waid elaborated on more fully was his explanation of how Superman's Clark Kent disguise manages to fool his coworkers, who are all reporters. It's brilliantly done, with Clark putting a lot of effort into it and nearly blowing it more than once. However, it leads to the one thing which I really don't like about Birthright, and it's not even in the story itself, but in the afterword: Waid goes out and states flatly that Clark Kent is the "mask" and Superman is the real man.

Bullcrap.

Aside from the obvious play for the appeal of Batman, a strategy makes minimal sense for reasons that we won't go into right now, the idea of Clark Kent being the "mask" and Superman being the "real man" is plainly flawed. It all boils down to Superman and Clark Kent being two sides of the same person who acts differently around different people, ditto for Batman and everyone else. The fact that Mark Waid of all people bought into it is beyond me.

Birthright itself is workable, enjoyable even, but still flawed. It focuses on how Superman would supposedly be found scary by the denizens of our oh-so-scared-and-paranoid post-9/11 world, and ever so trusting of a bald, corporate elitist like Luthor. I quickly debunked this idea when I asked my mom, no comic book aficionado, if she would be freaked out if Superman touched down in our backyard. The answer: Not if he looked like the Christopher Reeve version. Bingo! Guess what Birthright's Superman looks like? Sure, the folks in the military might be a bit spooked, but who's going to be scared by a guy with no mask flying around wearing a big red cape helping people?

Which brings us to Superman for All Seasons.

Seasons isn't so much an origin story as it is a summation of who Superman is and how he came to be. Everything from the narrative structure to the art is focused on producing a story which does this. The logical result of this methodology is that Seasons is nothing at all like Waid's pseudo-dour Birthright. We see Superman through the eyes of his family, friends, and that one bald guy who's his biggest enemy. Loeb and Sale specifically note that they wanted the art to be reminiscent of Norman Rockwell paintings, which gives us an incredible effect. It's homely, warm, inviting, emotional, and poignant. Heck, it's even fun!

One thing that makes Seasons such a classic is that it doesn't fall prey to the trap of obsessing over details which ultimately have little relevance to the story. Instead, its story and visuals primarily focus on developing the characters, creating memorable scenes, and communicating a rich narrative. As a result, the small details that fill up the background in these 4 issues give it a richness that Birthright could barely accomplish in 12. Every character from the Man of Steel himself to Smallville's local minister all stick in your mind and are beautifully rendered. Every panel gives us something visually worthwhile to look at. The stories this four-issue series tells us are breathtakingly engaging and a pleasure to read. There's no fretting about how Clark got his journalism degree or why he decided to be a superhero. Why he did it is decided in 2 pages -heck, I doubt it was that many- more effectively than Birthright's 2 or 3 issues devoted to the subject.

Most of all, there's a sharp contrast given between Superman and Lex Luthor. We're not given a totally solid explanation about why Superman and Luthor are at odds (we rarely are), but it's made clear that Luthor's an evil bad guy who firmly believes himself to be the good guy, and there's no tragic backstory given to justify what a jerkhole he is. He's just like that, and because of him, Metropolis is initially a fairly disagreeable place to live. That is, until Superman shows up.

To be fair to Birthright, elements of that story sort of leak into Geoff Johns' Superman: Secret Origin, which I believe is the best Superman origin story which I have yet read, though there are many out there. In truth, Secret Origin combines a lot of aspects from both Birthright and Seasons, such as Clark and Luthor knowing each other as children, or Superman's behavior as Clark Kent being at least partly natural and genuine, respectively. This results is a story which is decidedly above par, but not quite on the level of a classic like Seasons.

In the end, while Birthright does have some things going for it, I'll definitely choose Seasons any day of the week as my choice interpretation of Superman. It just has so much more life and energy that Birthright only dreams of having. They're both good, but only Superman for all Seasons is a truly great interpretation of an American icon. I'm just glad that I finally read it.

Image 1 courtesy amazon.com. Image 2 courtesy samquixote.blogspot.com

Big Hero 6: The Myth of the Corporate Supervillain

Warning: Minor spoilers for Big Hero 6 lay ahead.

I was pretty excited when Big Hero 6 won this year's Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. Not only did it totally deserve it, but it did it while marking a significant milestone in comic book movie history: It is the first adapted superhero property to win an Oscar, the second, after Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight in 2008, to win any Oscar for anything superhero-related. And it really did deserve it. It has a compelling story, a world which was interesting to watch and beautiful to look at, a charming cast of characters to relate to, and some great emotion and deep themes. It even managed to deliver a pretty unique take on several common superhero tropes. It's the last of these that I want to talk about today, specifically concerning the character of Alistair Krei, voiced by Alan Tudyk of Firefly and Serenity fame.

In Big Hero 6, Krei is a businessman who runs the technology company Krei Tech. Krei first appears as an interested party who wants to buy the new robotics technology invented by Hiro Hamada, the film's protagonist. Hiro declines the offer on the advice of his brother Tadashi's mentor, Professor Callaghan, the scene setting up Krei as the film's obvious bad guy. But surprisingly, it turns out to be a red hearing which the  characters as well as the audience buy into. It's also a neat subversion of a trope which has been played out many times before: the Corrupt Corporate Executive.

The Corrupt Corporate Executive is often used in works of fiction as a stock character who is typically bald, fat, smoking a big cigar, or some combination thereof. Quite plainly enough, this character is a corporate executive who engages in villainous activities, which may or may not be related to their profession. Examples readily abound all across fiction, including Lex Luthor of DC Comics, Hiroshi Saito and Varrick from The Legend of Korra, Norman Osborn, Justin Hammer, Bolivar Trask, and whoever is running Roxxon at any given time over at Marvel, and even Jon Spiro from Eoin Colfer's Artemis Fowl.

Typically, corrupt corporate executives in fiction are greedy, obnoxious, dishonest, and evil. They will go to any lengths to make an extra buck, up to an including everything from cooking the books to mass murder. Some even commit the unpardonable sin of *gasp* making and selling weapons. Obviously, they are usually motivated by monetary gain, and they are typically psychopaths who routinely abuse their employees and customers, and use their vast financial resources to cover up their dirty deeds.

But I have a news flash for writers who like to write corporate bad guys this way: This is not what real corrupt corporate executives, I believe, are even remotely like.

My first objection is a matter of logic: How on earth would someone who does half the things that, say, Lex Luthor does have any hope of succeeding in business? Business is a very teamwork driven industry, and being greedy, obnoxious, dishonest, and evil is not a good way to get people to want to work for you, or for that matter, buy stuff from you. I mean, would you honestly want to do business with Justin Hammer or Jon Spiro, the latter of whom has blatant mob connections and the FBI and CIA breathing down his neck, but still somehow remains a successful businessman? I certainly wouldn't. The notion that people like them stay in business by spreading a bunch of money around is plainly laughable, as it could obviously cost more to bribe their way out of trouble than it would by simply playing by the rules. The International Chamber of Commerce, in a plain statement of the obvious, has said of corruption as related to public relations, "Enterprises seen to be doing business with integrity are more likely to attract and retain highly-principled and motivated employees as well as ethically-oriented investors. In contrast, companies confronted with corruption cases have faced reputational damage."

Secondly, even the corporate executives who are corrupt in the real world aren't out poisoning the reservoir, or knowingly selling dangerous products to the unwitting public, or hiring spandex-clad thugs to intimate business rivals, all of which are crappy business models. The ones that do do things like that get shut down fast or are fined into oblivion, and often for even smaller slights than that. Oddly enough, I can't remember the last time Pfizer poured cyanide into the reservoir for some reason. No, corporations that engage in illegal activity are a bit more mundane in their lawbreaking. The International Chamber of Commerce defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private financial or non-financial gain. It diverts resources from their proper use, distorts competition and creates gross inefficiencies in both the public and private sectors." It is furthered categorized as bribery, solicitation of bribery, or extortion.

What does this mean? It means that a real life corrupt CEO isn't plunking down bags of cash to hire supervillains to scare his business rival into a buy out, or being overtly hostile during a hostile takeover, or stealing an inventor's property for sinister purposes, as the heroes in Big Hero 6 suspect Krei of doing. At least, not in America. Don't ask me what it's like in China or Venezuela or Brazil, because that's a whole different pie. No, your average corrupt corporate executive is engaging in a little "creative accounting," moving the numbers around to disguise the company's profits. Maybe he's helping the mob launder money if he's a bit more adventurous. If she's a little lower in the hierarchy, it could be embezzling. Bribing a government inspector? It happens. It all boils down to the simple fact that if you're an exec, and you do something illegal, it's not probably not going to made into an movie, and you're going to be unceremoniously carted off to a minimum security prison really, really fast. Which brings us to the next hurdle of being a corrupt corporate executive: anti-corruption programs. 

Most major, profitable companies have some kind of anti-corruption program. Whether these programs are effective or not is debated, but it's a good sign that they exist at all. Even if they aren't particularly good at detecting corruption, when the company begins to go down the tubes thanks to corrupt executives, these guys are usually there to blow the whistle. In short, if anti-corruption programs don't take down a bad exec, the company will implode on its own, kind of like what happened with Enron. The point is, bad behavior among corporate big wigs usually comes back to bite the perpetrators in the end, and as a result is plainly more trouble than it's worth. 

Which brings us back to Krei.

Krei isn't given a whole lot of analysis in the film, largely existing as the aforementioned red hearing. He's affable, ambitious, mildly smug, a little feckless and implicitly intelligent. I mean, he built up his own tech company and was involved in a teleportation project with the military, so he has to be a clever guy. But he's not the film's villain. He doesn't actually do anything illegal, or even wrong. We only know what his "bad" qualities are based on what the film's real villain says about him, and this villain isn't exactly an impartial judge of character. The closest he gets to being bad is a tragic accident in which he was only vestigially responsible for, if only because the film's real villain blames him for it. The point is that he's not a corrupt corporate executive. He's not even such a bad guy! In fact, the only reason that Hiro and his friends think Krei's a bad guy at all is because Fred, their resident comic book geek, points out the villains of a lot of comic books are actually corrupt industrialists. It's a clever and funny way of subverting a by now very tired superhero cliche.

In the end, Big Hero 6 is a fine entry into the Disney animated cannon, being a fun, rollicking, emotionally deep film that sucks you in and keeps you glued to the screen the whole way through. It's beautiful to look at, engaging to watch, and provides fun for the whole family. I wholly recommend it as entertaining, innovative, and uplifting. I'd love to see where they go with a sequel.

Fun fact: This isn't the only animated Disney flick that Alan Tudyk has lent his voice to. He also voiced the slightly more villainous Duke of Weselton in Frozen. Oddly enough, he also voiced Superman in Justice League: War.

Follow Levi on Twitter at @levi_sweeney, and submit questions and post ideas with the hashtag #QLevi

Image 1 courtesy of blogs.disney.com. Image 2 courtesy of disney.co.uk.

Ms. Marvel, Vol. 1: No Normal: A Muslim Superhero, or a Superhero Who's a Muslim?

I think that it's an established fact that these days, we view diversity as a virtue. Back in the day, diversity was nice to have, but not essential, like faith, hope, and love. I learned in my Communications Studies class that diversity is good for business, as it fosters a wide variety approaches to problem solving and so forth. But today, diversity is so important to the movers and shakers of our society that if you don't have it, you must be a racist or a bigot or a sexist or a radical right-wing haters-gotta-hate type. I mean, why wouldn't you want diversity in your workplace? Don't have any people of color? Yep, definitely racist. (Incidentally, my workplace currently employs four people, one of whom is a woman and another of whom is Vietnamese.

But once again, I'm getting off track. All that said, let's talk about Ms. Marvel.

The point of my above rant was that we value diversity very highly in today's society. Some opinionated but grossly misinformed persons believe that institutionalized racism is still a problem, but really, who honestly believes that? Walk into any Wal-Mart, Starbucks, school, gym, or government building, and you'll see people of all colors, creeds, and walks of life living, working, and playing together in peace. The very existence of the comic book Ms. Marvel is yet another nail in the coffin of the theory that institutionalized racism still exists to a large degree in this nation, even if the comic book itself doesn't seem to have gotten the message.

Under the pen of G. Willow Wilson, this new incarnation of Ms. Marvel has a 16 year old girl named Kamala Khan living a normal life in Jersey City. She's a huge Avengers fan-girl who weirdly reminds me of my sister, writing fan-fiction in her spare time, chafing at her parents' authority, and dying to eat bacon. Oh, and I forgot to mention this, but she's a Muslim, ethnically Pakistani. Anyway, on her way home one night, she gets caught up in a mysterious cloud of mist, which, after a brief hallucination, gives her superpowers. Inspired by selected quotes from what I believe is the Koran, she decides to fight crime as Ms. Marvel!

Let me tell you, I really like this book. Kamala is a likable character with a fun supporting cast. You've got her parents, her brother, her friends Bruno and Nakia, and the beginnings of her very own archvillian. The book mainly goes for the humorous side of being a superhero, such as when Kamala fails spectacularly at foiling a convenience store hold up, avoiding serious harm due to sheer luck and an incompetent robber. It's very Spider-Man-esque, sort of like Brian Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man. It also reminds me somewhat of Chuck Dixon's run on Robin when Tim Drake was in the suit back in the '90s. And considering that Tim Drake's Robin and Spider-Man are some of my favorite comic book characters of all time, that's a huge compliment coming from me. This book is more quirky than either Ultimate Spider-Man or Robin, kind of reminding me of Brian Q. Miller's Batgirl in that regard, but with a stronger emphasis on social media technology, with Kamala's unique background giving the story extra flavor.

Speaking of which, that brings us to the central point espoused in the title of this post: Is Kamala a Muslim superhero, or a superhero who's a Muslim? A similar question was addressed by Ben Stone to Paul Robinette on Law and Order. What I mean to ask is if Kamala is a superhero who is defined by her identity as a Muslim, or a superhero who just so happens to be a Muslim? Happily for the story, it so far seems to be the latter. However, it makes me wonder if the writers would be gutsy enough to address the philosophical consequences of a Muslim superhero in post-9/11 world. It would be an awfully profound story to tell if done well, but so far the closest we've seen to such questions being addressed are not-Liz-Allen's mildly offensive and ludicrously vacuous asides. And seriously, this girl, I think her name is Zoe Zimmer, is totally Liz Allen, and her boyfriend is obviously a stand-in for Flash Thompson, right down to the letterman jacket. 

It doesn't help that Kamala herself seems to buy into the presumption that a large percentage of white people are racist bigots, when this is simply not true. I mean, it's just silly to believe that in a world where people are constantly tripping over themselves to avoid being seen as racist, the currently fashionable cause of today's elite is a crusade against racism. Does racism still exist in the hearts of some people? Absolutely. I'm sure there are plenty of people, whether they're white, black, Arab, Asian, Hispanic, or polka-dot, who are racists. Is institutionalized racism a problem in this country anymore? No. You're not going to be denied entry into a hotel if you're black and the proprietor is white, nor will you be denied a BLT at Wendy's if you're Hispanic. In fact, if this did happen, you could probably sue and win.

I don't know if Kamala or her writers will come to understand this, but I do know that I will continue to follow this new Marvel comic because its a good, fun story which makes me laugh and smile. And mind you, the last Marvel comic I read was Marvel's Road to the Avengers, a terrible collection if there ever was one, which nearly drove me away from reading Marvel's stuff forever. But now, I'm willing to expand my horizons. Maybe Marvel is getting better. Maybe. I'm willing to give it chance now.

Image courtesy of goodreads.com

Review: Road to Marvel's the Avengers

Note: After a week-long vacation in an undisclosed location, I have now returned to blogging. Please return to enjoy this blog post. Also, congratulations to my grandparents, Pat and Jeanne Sweeney, on their 50th wedding anniversary! Also, congratulations to the blog for this, the 275th post!

----- 

This book is bad.

I just wanted to get that out there. Not only is it bad, it's boring, unoriginal, predictable, and stupid. To be totally accurate, it is precisely because of these latter deficiencies that it is bad. I originally put this collection on my graphic novel to-read list because I wanted to get the whole story on The Avengers. What I read only cemented my belief that everything we saw in the films leading up to that glorious cinematic spectacle was more than enough. I'm sure that whoever was writing this carp was just doing their job, but the least Marvel could do is get some actually good writers to put out actually good promotion material meant to represent and advertise their actually good movies.

Road to Marvel's the Avengers collects all of the cheap-as-Hades tie-in comic books that were put out to generate buzz for Phase 1 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe... as if they needed anymore. We're treated to a full on, word-for-word comic book rendition of Iron Man, and background and backstory on Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Dr. Abraham Erskine, and Johann Schmidt. We're also told exactly how Black Widow infiltrated Stark International in order to become Tony's new personal assistant.

If any or all of this sounds even remotely exciting and compelling, let me assure you, it's not.

The Iron Man stuff takes up roughly half of the book, and is basically a poorly rendered version of the film of the same name, plus some stuff showing Iron Man doing his thing in-between Iron Man and Iron Man 2. This latter part is particularly dull, depicting Tony fighting... people with guns in the Congo, I guess, and Tony using his Iron Man armor to impress the ladies. At the very least, it guest stars General Ross from The Incredible Hulk, and I just love that guy.

The problem with the Iron Man stuff is that it tries too hard to be the movie. The comic book rendition of the film (titled "I Am Iron Man!") is word-for-word, scene-for-scene, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was shot-for-shot too. "I Am Iron Man!" manages to capture the basic skeletal structure of the film, but has none of its substance or style. This, I think, is the problem with book-of-the-film tie-ins, or comic-book-of-the-film tie-ins, or any kind of tie-in which recycles the film for that matter: It often leaves the writer with no room for originality, essentially copying the script. As a result, this comic feels nothing like the movie, despite all of its effort to do so.

The other Iron Man stuff has a similar problem, combined with a hackneyed and stale plot. It's obviously trying to ape the pseudo-cleverness of Iron Man 2, and unlike "I Am Iron Man!", it actually succeeds in emulating the film. Considering considering that Iron Man 2 is widely considered to be the weakest film in the MCU, however, that's a patently terrible strategy, if only in hindsight. I can only imagine how fans who were gearing up for Iron Man 2 felt when they read this monstrosity. If I were in their shoes back then, however, I would have prayed to the most high God with all my heart that the movie was nothing like this comic. Paradoxically, the tone of this comic was spot on in regards to its reflection of the movie, yet somehow much, much worse. (For the record, I found Iron Man 2 to be an enjoyable flick, though admittedly not as good as its fellow MCU films. I hope to complete my Iron Man set of reviews and review it sometime.) At any rate, the only good thing about it was its exploration of the dynamic between Tony and his father, but while that was an oasis of good stuff in a wasteland of mediocrity and awfulness, it is far overshadowed by what we actually saw in the dadblamed movie.

The final bit of stuff related to Iron Man 2 promotion is a story with Black Widow. This story's tone shift early on is jarring, to say the least, going from crazy Mission Impossible/Die Hard/James Bond-esque stuff to a drama version of The Office. What I mean is, we literally see Black Widow jumping out of an exploding plane before going to apply at the Stark International corporate office. The whole time, she's using this awful, grating inner dialogue where she complains about "American inefficiency" (Clearly, the writer did not do his research when writing a defector from Soviet Russia) and the idiosyncrasies of office work. I imagine that under a different, actually competent writer, it would have been pretty darn funny to see Black Widow trying to navigate office politics without seriously injuring someone, but no, that's not what happens. What happens is a dry, humorless story which should have been very entertaining, maybe even interesting. But it is instead very boring, and only succeeds in persuading us that we really did not need to know the answer to the question it poses, that question being, "How did Black Widow infiltrate Stark International?" It's a perfect example of wasting a perfectly good plot.

As if things couldn't get any worse, we are then treated to a similar fill-in-the-blanks plot with the stuff for Captain America: The First Avenger. The story constantly shifts between a generic Cap-fighting-in-World-War-Two stuff and pre-Captain America Steve Rogers training with Bucky. Ordinarily, this would be fantastic stuff, showing Steve and Bucky growing up together. However, it's stifled by the stupid generic Cap-fighting-in-World-War-Two stuff and showing Johann Schmidt's story. (It's not that I have a problem with stuff showing Cap fighting in World War Two, but it's because it's so generic and careless in presentation that I found it to be intolerable.) The basic premise of this comic, in the same vein as televised tripe such as Smallville and perhaps even the upcoming Gotham is to show how our heroes and villains came to be the way they are. There's just one problem: Devoting a whole series, or even a miniseries, to answering that question gets really old really fast. I mean, how many times do you really want to see Steve getting pounded on in an alley before Bucky shows up to be a street fighting badbutt? (And remember, Bucky's supposed to be the sidekick.) Steve's story is basically what this series is, and while it's fairly compelling, it's not the stuff of great comics, because we already know what's going to happen. That's why we have origin stories, not origin series.

The stuff with the Red Skull and Dr. Erskine also had tons of potential, but whoever is writing this carp failed to capitalize on it. The Red Skull is shown in his days as plain old Johann Schmidt, who was apparently some random Hitler-groupie who got noticed by Heinrich Himmler and landed a position in the Waffen SS. The Red Skull's role in the plot is particularly interesting because he was so underdeveloped in the flipping movie. This comic could have been a chance to greatly redeem him as a character, delving into exactly why he wants to take over the world while parading about in an all black leather wardrobe. Unfortunately, despite one or two pretty great scenes with Johann Schmidt, we're mostly left in the dark (again) about these details. There's also a few scenes where Dr. Abraham Erskine is show trying and failing to escape to Switzerland with his family, and that really showed Dr. Erskine's selfless nature. He gets captured by Schmidt, but his manner of escape is blatantly ripped off from the Hong Kong scene in The Dark Knight of all things. And he gets put in his place in the hierarchy of morality by Peggy Carter of all people. Once again, plenty of potential, but poor execution.

Finally, there are a handful of stories focusing on people like Nick Fury and Agent Phil Coulson. These stories should have been awesome, but they failed spectacularly, thanks in part to ugly, ill-suited art, but mostly in part due to crudely put together story. None of the characters sound like their movie selves. Heck, they barely even look like their movie selves. What's particularly galling, however, is that these are the characters who, like Rhodey, Pepper, Bucky, and Dr. Erskine, would have benefited the most from tie-in comics. Instead, they all get this half-baked super-spy nonsense. A terrible shame, really.

In sum, I checked out Road to Marvel's the Avengers in an effort to enhance my appreciation of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I was disappointed by what I found, and am now reconsidering my plans to check out Fury's Big Week, another lead-up to The Avengers. What I found in this wholly ill-conceived trade paperback was bland characterizations, contorted dialogue, and a worse plot, which, combined with several details contradicted by the films, make for an altogether dull, uninspired story. Please don't add this to your personal library. It's bad enough that it made it into my local public one.

RATING: 5/10

Image courtesy of wired.com

Review: Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight

As someone with a vested interest in the plight of the mentally ill, I am routinely disgusted with the portrayal of supposedly "insane" persons in various media, most notably the Batman comics. Batman's rogues gallery, while the best in comics, is almost entirely composed of people who are routinely labeled as "insane." The problem here is that "insane" is a legal term, not a medical one. The Joker may be psychopathic, in that he has no empathy for his fellow human beings, but he is not psychotic, in that he can indeed comprehend the criminality of his actions. He therefore belongs in Blackgate Penitentiary, not Arkham Aslylum. As a side note, "asylum" is a highly dated and outmoded term which should be replaced by something else. How about "Elizabeth Arkham Memorial Psychiatric Hospital"?

But I'm getting a bit off track...

Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight by Travis Langley is a book on various issues relating to psychology in the world of Batman. It touches on both the above issue and many more, such has the Robins, Batman's father figures, the villains, the various lovely ladies in Batman's life, and what exactly makes Batman tick. It examines not only the primary comic version of Batman, but also the versions presented the various films and television shows. With a forward by Michael Uslan, the executive producer of most of the Batman films, and an introduction by acclaimed Bat-editor Denny O'Neil, this book has a lot of big names associated with it. It helps that the author is a psychology professor and a huge Batman fan. Therefore, it seems only natural that this would be a terrific book.

Happily, it is.

Batman and Psychology belongs to that class of books which examine subjects that were never designed to be studied particularly in-depth. There's the Wiley's Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture series which produced, among many others, Batman and Philosophy: The Dark Knight of the Soul, along with James Daily and Ryan Davidson's The Law of Superheroes. In this case, Batman and Psychology studies the psyche of a 75 year old comic book character. And golly, for a huge geek like me, it is a boatload of fun.

Reading about how the birth order theory might explain the varying temperaments of the Robins, or why exactly Gotham City is filled with all these weird costumed criminals is absolutely fascinating to me. Reading books like this combines my love for scholarly subjects with my love for comic books and superheroes, blending them all into a smoothie of coolness. I think it also appeals to me because the lighthearted but scholarly nature of the book grants a sort of legitimacy to comic books, a legitimacy which is not widely shared by certain others.

What makes the book really shine, aside from its great content, is the way that content is presented. Langley's writing style is very natural and relaxed, and not stiff or stuffy. This allows for the various complex ideas to be expressed clearly and understandably. It's not overly technical or involved, but expertly refined and finely expounded. This may be due to Langley's background as a professor, which would require him to be able to explain things effectively, but all I know is that he writes very well.

Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight is a must read for both Batman-fans and Batman-writers. It gave me a new perspective on Batman and a renewed understanding of the character. Incoming Bat-scribes would do well to check out this book and learn what they can from it. I am also glad that the book devoted a whole chapter to discussing Arkham Asylum and its obvious faults, as well as addressing the false premise that most if not all of Batman's villains are mentally ill. My only complaint with this book is that it did not cover the case of Jean-Paul Valley, the first Azrael, a mentally ill hero in the Bat-family. That, I believe, would have made for an interesting entry. Perhaps a later edition will include an appendix on him, and possibly one on Michael Lane, the second Azrael.

RATING: 10/10

Image courtesy of goodreads.com

Review: Booster Gold: The Tomorrow Memory

A while back, I reviewed Booster Gold: Day of Death. In hindsight, I think I gave too high a rating, as it was, in truth, pretty mediocre. Indeed, Booster Gold's eponymous series was never particularly outstanding, but it was one thing that made it stand head and shoulders above the rest: It was fun. In a world surrounded by joyless, ultra-serious grim-and-grittiness, we have a fun, irreverent, silly book which plays with the idea of time travel in a superhero shared universe. The stories in this title are sometimes a bit involved, and require the reader to have some knowledge of the fictional history of the DC Universe, but the comic usually fills the reader in so that they know enough to enjoy the story.

For instance, the primary story arc of this book, "The Tomorrow Memory", heavily involves that time when Cyborg-Superman and Mongul teamed up to destroy Coast City and turn it into a giant engine for a new War World. (Told you so.) The basic plot is that 75 or so years in the future, the government has developed crude time travel abilities and sends an agent back in time to avert the disaster. Booster Gold, being the protector of the integrity of the time stream with Rip Hunter, has to make sure that history happens as it did, including resulting in Coast City being wiped off the map. The aforementioned agent isn't too happy about this, but neither is Booster.

The other story in this book precedes "The Tomorrow Memory," and is a two-parter focusing on what Booster Gold was doing during the Blackest Night crisis crossover back in 2009. Man, has it already been five years? Anyway, this story features Booster and Blue Beetle (Jaime Reyes) being forced to fight a reanimated Blue Beetle (Ted Kord), Booster's dead best friend. It's appropriately titled "Dead Ted."

The thing about this title is that is plays with the concept of time travel without trying to sound too clever about it. There's not a whole lot of time spent discussing how exactly the mechanics of time travel work, with the main focus being on how Booster and co. deal with having to protect history- even when it means letting terrible things happen. This trade paperback also toys around with the idea that there are people outside of Booster and Rip's little group who can travel in time and want to "help" by averting big disasters. At the same time, I'm kind of disappointed that The Tomorrow Memory wasn't gutsy enough to apply the idea to real life catastrophes, like the First and Second World Wars. On the other hand, it may have been a good idea to show some respect for real life tragedies and stick to metatextual commentary on fictional events. I guess it all depends on personal preference, and I suppose it wasn't such a bad way to go.

Another particularly great thing in this book is the emotion. In "Dead Ted", Booster is forced to fight the reanimated corpse of his dead best friend, who has Ted's voice, memories, gadgets, etc. Booster's initial response to the situation is actually kind of funny, in a weird, twisted sort of way. In this story, however, Booster is seen dealing with Ted's death at Ted's funeral in the past. It's some really heart-pounding stuff, and the end of this story is pretty touching.

The best stuff, however, is in "The Tomorrow Memory" where Booster is reunited with his sister, Michelle, who got ticked off at him in the previous book and lost herself a few years in the past. There's a whole final issue devoted to Booster mending fences with Michelle over what happened during this story arc. We get to really dig into Booster's feelings about his hero career, and how much he hates his job, but goes on doing it anyway. Rip Hunter also gets some character development in a very spoileriffic way which I won't discuss here. I will say, however, that Rip is more than just Booster Gold's mentor: He's a superhero in his own right. And I've got to say, I like Rip almost as much as I like Booster. That last issue is probably my favorite in the whole series, next to the Batman-secret-keeper one.

In short, Booster Gold: The Tomorrow Memory isn't the best comic book story around, or even the best Booster Gold story, but it's still quite good. Despite my better rating of the previous trade, I actually liked this one better, and I think it is better. The only particular flaws were more annoyances than anything else. For instance, at the beginning of almost every issue, Booster takes some time to explain via inner monologue his basic origin story, which kind of got on my nerves. I understand that there's a lot of pressure on these writers to cater to new readers who are cold calling on these issues, but it does so at the expense of loyal, longtime readers and fans. I was like, "I know this already. Get on with it!" There's also the art, which looks great, but the fight scenes just look a little uncoordinated and goofy. Other than these few complaints, I recommend this books for all Booster Gold fans, and happily direct such readers to Justice League International, 52, and Justice League: Generation Lost, the last being one of my favorite comic book series.

RATING: 7.5/10

Image courtesy of collectededition.blogspot.com

Review: JLA Deluxe Edition: Volume 1

Attention readers: I will be out of town this week and unable to post anything. On the other hand, I will now be posting on Saturdays as well. Thank you for understanding.

The nineties were a weird and frightening time for comics. Known as the Dark Age of Comics, this era in comic book history actually began in the late eighties following the successes of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns and Alan Moore's Watchmen. The next thirty years or so of comics were spent trying to emulate those two series. Both Marvel and DC did everything in their power to make their comics "darker" and "grittier," in order to show that their stories were more "mature" and "serious." To them, and, sadly, to a lot of fans, that meant outrageous displays of profanity, sex, and gory, bloody violence. Every hero under the sun suffered at the hands of creators who wanted to make their heroes more dark, more brooding, more, you know, realistic. The art was affected too. Characters were drawn to be more exaggeratedly muscular, more ripped and mean looking. Superman got a mullet for a while, for Pete's sake.

Then you throw Grant Morrison into the mix.

I've never been a big fan of Grant Morrison's work. It's generally super trippy, super complicated, and super hit-or-miss. I haven't read much of his stuff, but I have read enough to know what his style is like. He tends to rely on plot twists, Chekhov's Guns, and lots and lots of nightmare fuel, depending on what he's writing. I've got to give him credit, however, for being really, really into all manner of comics. I mean, this guy digs up stuff from the Silver Age and recycles it for use in the Modern Age. He just loves comic books. Plus, he actually writes some pretty good stuff. It's not always to my personal preference, but it's usually aesthetically good, and I can always find something to like about that.

What I'm saying here is that Grant Morrison in the nineties makes for a bizarre combination. We've got goofy, over-the-top art combined with trippy, devil's-in-the-details writing, which all combine to make one of the most peculiar trade paperbacks I've ever had to review. For the uninitiated, JLA stands for "Justice League of America," and features the adventures of DC's "big seven": Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, the Flash, Aquaman, and Martian Manhunter... plus all their friends who pop in every now and again. JLA Deluxe Edition: Volume 1 collects the issues originally collected in New World Order and American Dreams, plus some random Secret Files issue. We've got an alien invasion story, a mole inside the JLA story, a story about a fight between a rogue angel and the Legions of Hell that spills over into the corporeal world, and a traditional Morrison mind-bender story involving a supervillain called the Key and medically induced comas.

I'll be honest: I'm not a huge fan of alien invasion stories. For one thing, it's been done to death, and for another, I have yet to meet a comic book story full of large groups of people blasting each other with energy or hitting each other that did it in an interesting way. I have faith in comic books as a genre, but I just haven't seen anything of that nature which I find entertaining to date, except maybe, just maybe, Blackest Night. Thankfully enough, Morrison manages to subvert the usual pitfalls of an alien invasions story by injecting his own unique spin on it. With the first story, the one with the "Hyperclan," I think Morrison was actually trying to make fun of the exaggerated, toyetic era of the nineties. The Hyperclan, led by "Protex," show up on Earth apparently wanting to use their powers to better the world. But they actually have a secret agenda. Next, a JLA recruiting drive brings in "Tomorrow Woman," secretly a mole cooked up by T.O. Morrow and Professor Ivo to bring down the Justice League. Following that, there's the story where Zauriel the angel literally falls out of the sky, shortly before all heaven breaks loose, so to speak. Finally, we get a two-parter where Green Arrow is forced to go it alone on the Justice League satellite against the Key, who has trapped the rest of the Justice League.

Like I said, Morrison has his flaws, but his unique style manages to bring out his stories so as to elevate them above the rest. Considering that this thing was written in the nineties, that's saying something. My favorite story of the four listed was undoubtedly the two-parter at the end. For one thing, we've got the novice Connor Hawke, then the only Green Arrow, being a badbutt, while at the same time we're treated to some cool-looking alternate realities. The Key is an awesome villain, a truly magnificent bad guy. The thing about this story, though, is that it was set up in the Zauriel one. Morrison tends to do that. Just pay extra close attention to the hospital scenes and you'll see what I mean. Speaking of Zauriel, that story was probably my least favorite. The long and short of it is that I don't appreciate Morrison's grasp on theology (it's almost as bad as what David Hine and his ilk were doing over in Azrael a few years ago), and the story wasn't particularly groundbreaking. I guess I just don't think much of Morrison's huge, epic stories, and it's the smaller scale, more personal stories like the two-parter that I really like. It doesn't help that the evil invasion plot is so... generic.

Morrison also has trouble with stilted dialogue, but it's not usually particularly egregious. The art is typical nineties fare, with Batman's look being particularly ridicule-worthy. My only other objections are motivated by personal preference. I don't generally like epic science fiction adventure epics like this story, but I'm willing to proceed given that I've heard so many good things about Morrison's run on this book. It's just that he did the invasion/war story twice in the span of seven issues. Granted, he resolved and executed them in cool and unique ways, but I just don't particularly care for that sort of story. Otherwise, his characterization of the JLA members is spot on, particularly with Batman. I've always liked Morrison's take on Batman, mainly because Morrison knows how to make Batman look really, really cool, and I'll thank him also for only minimally touching on the souped-up Superman (see Dork Age). The dynamics we're given here are sure to be deepened later, as they are prone to do in long runs. In short, while not perfect, Morrison does deliver a satisfactory start to the JLA series.

RATING: 7.5/10

Image courtesy of unitedmonkee.com

Review: Mr. Holland's Opus

If there's one movie genre that I'm an absolute sucker for, it's late twentieth century period dramas. Second Hand Lions. Forrest Gump. The Help. October Sky. Apollo 13. I think it's because they all take a interesting concept and put it in a visually engaging historical setting. The point is, I love all of these films, and now I've added another one to the list: Mr. Holland's Opus. It stars Academy Award winner Richard Dreyfuss in the title role.

Glenn Holland is a struggling composer and musician who desperately wants to compose full time. He and his wife, Iris (Glenne Headly) find themselves living in an Oregon town where Holland gets a job as a High School music teacher. At first, Holland views the position as a short term gig, a mere stepping stone on his way to becoming a famous composer. But things happen, as they always do, and he stays on. The years go by, and Holland makes lifelong friendships, touches and influences the lives of many of his young students, and welcomes a son into his family, all the while going through the trials and tribulations that inevitably accompany life. At the same time, we get to see the major events of the 60s, 70s, and 80s through his eyes.

Mr. Holland's Opus is one of those movies that is very effective at what it tries to communicate. In this case, it succeeds in communicating raw, unadulterated emotion. It's not schmaltzy or sappy, and it's by no means a feel-good movie, but it totally sells the feeling and mood its going for. From the opening to the conclusion, and everywhere in between, this movie will put a smile on your face, and it will make your eyes water when it wants to. It all hinges on the characters, really. We see Holland's trials, we see his friendships develop, we see his mundane exploits. These range from the hilarious to the sad to the heartwarming. Mr. Holland's Opus manages to be all of these things simultaneously while not feeling like a tonal train wreck, just like all great dramas.

It helps that Richard Dreyfuss totally sells it as Glenn Holland. And really, he overshadows all of the other actors in this picture. First of all, we're given a rich, complex character like Holland. He starts out as a slightly jerkish person, but evolves and matures into a caring, almost fatherly figure to his students, and eventually to his biological son, Cole, with whom he initially has a strained relationship due to a very important reason. Then we get an A-list character actor like Dreyfuss, who proceeds to act the heck out of the role, to the point where he gets nominated for yet another Academy Award. I'm telling you, the sheer subtlety, the sheer talent, the sheer emotion he puts into it far outshines any and all of the other undoubtedly talented actors in this film.

In a movie about music throughout the late twentieth century, there is, of course, good music. We've got stuff from John Lennon, Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder, Beethoven, and many others. Additionally, it is marked by other virtues, such as being pretty darn funny, and while it does focus primarily on Holland, all of the other characters have a clear-cut motivation. Principal Helen Jacobs (Olympia Dukakis) wants to give her students a good education, while later Principal Gene Wolters (William H. Macy) wants to run an efficient school. Hard to blame him for coming off as a bad guy, in view of how messed up schools are these days, but even then he's played well enough that we can sympathize with him, thought not as much as we can sympathize with Holland. Iris wants to help her husband and raise a family, and Bill Meister (Jay Thomas) the gym teacher (and later, Holland's best friend) wants to do for the jocks what Holland is doing for the music students. Even Cole (played by various actors, including Joseph Anderson and Anthony Natale) wants to be understood and accepted by his father, a good motivation as any.

Mr. Holland's Opus deserved an Oscar, pure and simple. I guess it was enough that it was nominated for one, but still, it totally deserved it. Dreyfuss lost out to flipping Nicolas Cage, for goodness sake. But nevertheless, I am glad to have watched this film, and I happily grant it the highest esteem I can afford to it. The only reservations I have are with a smattering of bad language, so parents, please be discerning. In the meantime, we have a wonderful, moving film with great acting and awesome emotion, and a beautiful, rhythmic premise. I think Mr. Holland would appreciate that.

RATING: 10/10

Fun fact: Terrence Howard, who would later play Rhodey in Iron Man, played a student of Holland's named Louis Russ! Man, he looked young. I wonder what Don Cheadle was doing in 1995...

Image courtesy of wikipedia.org

Spider-Man: The Greatest Superhero in Comics

Web-slinger. Spidey. Web-head. "Masked menace." Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

We all know the story. Or at least, we all should know. It was plastered on the big screen on no less than two occasions, plus all the comics and TV shows. Peter Parker was an Ordinary High School Student. But when he went to that science lab and got bitten by a radioactive spider, he gained the proportionate strength, speed, and agility of a spider, plus a sort of sixth-sense that allows him to detect danger (dubbed "spider sense"). At first, he did what any real teenager would do: He used his powers to make money. But when his Uncle Ben was murdered by some random jerkhole whom Peter could have stopped earlier, Peter decided to take his Uncle Ben's admonition that "With great power there must also come great responsibility," and use his powers to help people. Thus, Spider-Man was born!

My bold declaration in the title of this post may have many of you wondering. Surely the lowly Spider-Man is not the world's greatest superhero? Does not that title belong to Superman? What about Captain America, or even Batman? Let me assure you that I stand firm in my conviction. Superman may be the world's most well known ("iconic") superhero, and Batman and his associates may be my personal favorites, but Spider-Man is still the best. Why? If you want a really good reason, go to Comics Alliance and find Chris Sims' article on the subject. My take, however, is a bit different. The thing about Spider-Man, about Peter Parker, is the whole "With great power comes great responsibility" thing. It may sound clichéd, but it is in fact pretty original. Spider-Man was the first real superhero that Stan Lee and co. actually wrote. The Fantastic Four were more like a team of adventurers, and the Hulk was just a rampaging monster, but Spider-Man was genuine superhero, when the superhero comic was still relatively young. I could go on about how this reflected Marvel and DC's differing modus operandi, but I'll leave that to Mr. Sims. The point here is that Spider-Man was specifically setting out to help people. Not to ruthlessly target crime like Batman, or to routinely save the world and circumvent disaster like Superman, though he has done that. He doesn't even do it to fight supervillains, though he does that a lot. Spider-Man's core purpose is to use his powers responsibly, and to him, that means helping people and doing the right thing, no matter what.

Of course, this trait alone is not enough to make Spider-Man the greatest superhero in comics. At least, not without elaboration. When Spider-Man was created, he was, as mentioned, an ordinary high school student. A teenager. Back in the day (that is, 1962), it was a pretty novel idea to have a teenage superhero headlining his own book. Before that, teenagers and other younger characters were seen as only worthy of being sidekicks. (Stan Lee, for the record, hated sidekicks.) When Spider-Man became unexpectedly and outrageously popular after first appearing in Amazing Fantasy #15, pop culture became awash in teenaged heroes, so much so that the character has become even more clichéd than "With great power comes great responsibility." (On a side note, it was also a pretty novel idea to have the story being set specifically in New York City, as opposed to some generic, made up metropolitan area.) The point is that Spider-Man does what he does, the right thing, no matter what, in the context of having to deal with all the normal problems that teenagers have. And by normal problems, I mean the feeling that everyone reading this got as a teen that the world's out to get them. The genius here, however, is that for Peter Parker, he has actual life-threatening situations to counterbalance perceived life-threatening situations. He's got midterms, girl trouble, an ailing aunt, adults who hate him for some reason, money problems, the whole nine yards, plus criminals, killers, supervillains who have a personal fixation on killing him, the media, and the general public, who all hate him.

The thing is, though, the things going on in his personal life are generally a lot more stressful and angst inducing for Peter than Kraven the Hunter trying to drive a spear through his torso. Just like a real teenager would. A real teenager, if granted the power of Spider-Man, would get cocky and have fun, like Spider-Man does. Chris Sims notes that Peter Parker's activities as Spider-Man is a way for him to "cut loose" and relax. That's why he cracks jokes, makes fun of his enemies, and relishes in hand-to-hand combat with unabashed glee. This is made abundantly clear in Ultimate Spider-Man when Peter decides to quit being Peter Parker, having come to the conclusion that everything's fine when he's Spider-Man, and that it's his personal life that's giving him all the trouble. Of course, this leads to an imbalance in his life as Spider-Man, nearly leading to disastrous consequences from neglecting his personal life. All of this makes it even more important to remember that whenever Spider-Man is despairing over a battle with his villains, stuff just got real. Because normally, an episode of Spider-Man's crime fighting adventures is another exciting interlude in the personal drama of Peter Parker's hapless mundane life. He doesn't have Batman or Iron Man's lax, luxurious secret identity, or the sheer, raw power and charisma of Superman. Peter doesn't even have a team of super-powered buddies to help him out every now and then (except when he does, such as when he's serving with the Avengers). And yet... he does the right thing. Because of all of this, Spider-Man is the first superhero to ever achieve something that all previous superheroes had not: He was able to make the reader relate to him.

Most importantly of all, however, is that Peter Parker does not stay an angsty teenager. He grows up. He matures. He lives life. He falls in love. He gets married. (See One More Day) He doesn't grow older than, say, 30, this being comic books, but he does go from boy to man. Peter Parker goes from insecure, petulant child to noble, strong, heroic young man. And he is a man, because, say it with me, "With great power, there must also come great responsibility." Similarly, Winston Churchill said, "A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality." In light of this, if there ever was a man, it is Spider-Man.

Spider-Man's greatness is also helped by the fact that he has, as Mr. Sims has observed, the best supporting cast in comics. Aunt May, Mary Jane Watson, J. Jonah Jameson, Harry Osborn, Gwen Stacy, Captain George Stacy, Flash Thompson, Robbie Robertson, and all the rest of them. And while not having the best rogues gallery around (that honor goes to Batman), he does have a quite memorable set of villains, including the Green Goblin, Doctor Octupus, Venom, Sandman, and the Vulture. I'd go on, but it's a bit beyond the scope of this post.

As hard to believe as it may seem, I've actually been into Spider-Man a lot longer than I've been into Batman. I remember borrowing the 2002 Sam Raimi Spider-Man movie from my Aunt when I was a kid, though my parents wouldn't let me watch it until a couple of years later. I still have fond memories of that movie, the original Raimi film holding a special place in my heart, kind of like Jean-Paul Valley. I remember pouring over Spider-Man: The Ultimate Guide, which, I'm sad to say, is the only exposure to the original comics that I've really had. (The originals are on my list, don't worry!) This in turn led me to read Ultimate Spider-Man, which I read faithfully until Prelude to Death of Spider-Man. I intend to return to it later, but I was thrown for a loop by certain plotting decisions that the esteemed Brian Michael Bendis made. On the other hand, it's worth noting that TVTropes refers to Ultimate Spider-Man #1 as the beginning of the Modern Age of Comics. I just find it difficult to believe that 10+ years worth of comics happened in a little over 1 year. They didn't even show the seasons changing! But I'm getting off track...

I've only read a little bit of the main continuity Spider-Man (such as the woefully messy Spider-Island crossover.), and I don't think much of the new stuff. I've been wanting to check out Scarlet Spider and the original stories, plus The Superior Spider-Man, which I heard was good, but I haven't had much interest in reading post-One More Day stuff. Then again, Chris Sims has gone on record saying that Brand New Day initiated a long overdue shake up in Spider-Man's status quo, but we'll get back to that later.

Spider-Man has appeared in many other media besides the many comic book series, with two movie series, multiple animated series (one of which I wrote a review on in the early history of this blog, The Spectacular Spider-Man), a short-lived live action television series, and even a Broadway musical! For the record, Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man was decidedly underwhelming, and I haven't heard good things about its sequel, leaving me hesitant to embrace it.

A final question must be addressed concerning the topic of Spider-Man: If Spider-Man is, in fact, the greatest superhero in comics, then why do I prefer Batman and associates? I guess it's because the Batman mythos harbors another character similar to yet very different from Spider-Man: Tim Drake. I'm primarily a DC man, and I'll always cast my sword with Batman and his associates in that regard. I like Batman, Tim Drake's Robin, and Jean-Paul Valley's Azrael because they've got this edge to them, this "cool" factor. Spider-Man may be more fun, but Batman is more cool. Nevertheless, I'd like to make clear that Spider-Man is really the only Marvel hero that I've ever particularly liked. I intend to get into Thor later, and maybe Captain America, but for now, Spider-Man is my only hero at Marvel. But perhaps that will change someday. In the meantime, Thwip!

Image courtesy of designyoutrust.com

Batman's Villains: The Greatest Rogues Gallery in Comics

Superman is the most iconic superhero, and Spider-Man has the best supporting cast, but Batman has the best villains. And believe me, I'm not just playing favorites. The Joker, Two-Face, the Riddler, the Scarecrow, Catwoman, Mr. Freeze, Ra's al Ghul, Bane, and the Penguin are all awesome villains who have battled the Dark Knight for decades and will continue to do so, even while those upstart new villains like the Court of Owls and the Black Glove and Professor Pyg try to make a name for themselves. These classic villains are all well known for their flamboyant appearances, unique methodologies, and compelling back stories. But none of these things tells us why they are the best at being bad. Indeed, there is one singular reason that Batman's villains, the best ones anyway, all share which makes them the greatest rogues gallery in comics.

First, to understand Batman's villains, we have to understand Batman. Indeed, we could easily turn that phrase around and say that to understand Batman, you have to understand his villains, but we'll get to that later. Right now, the key to understanding Batman is that he's a, to quote the Joker from The Dark Knight, "an unstoppable force." He's got the body, the brain, and the bucks to be the Batman, and he does exactly that: Be the Batman. He's the World's Greatest Detective. He's the Caped Crusader. He's the Dark Knight. He is Batman. He sees a problem, comes up with multiple plans to solve it, and then tackles it with gusto, always succeeding. He doesn't just see problems. A lot of times, he foresees problems, and takes appropriate preventative measures, such as always carrying a Kryptonite ring in case Superman goes rogue, or instilling a "back up personality" in his mind to take over in the event of... something happening, I don't know. Just got read Batman R.I.P. or look up the Batman of Zur-En-Arrh. I didn't. Anyway, the idea here is that Batman is ready, willing, and able to accomplish his goals, such goals including protecting the innocent, fighting against crime and corruption, and beating up evil clowns.

What does all of this have to do with why Batman's villains are the best rogues gallery in comics? The long and short of it is that Batman's best villains are the best around because they are all, to some extent or another, a reflection of some aspect of Batman himself. The Joker, for instance, is the "immovable object" to counter Batman's "unstoppable force"; that is, both are stubborn in their goals, which are polar opposites. The Joker is an unstoppable force for chaos while Batman is an unstoppable force for order. Two-Face is a bit more obvious, reflecting the dual nature of Batman and Bruce Wayne, though that's a bit of an oversimplification of what Chris Sims called "the most overrated truism in comics." The other ones are all a bit easier to identify. Riddler is really smart and does whatever he can to prove it; Batman is super smart and doesn't feel the need to prove anything. The Scarecrow uses fear as a weapon for evil; Batman uses fear as a weapon for good. Ra's al Ghul wants to make the world a better place by destroying it; Batman wants to make the world a better place by fixing it.

Catwoman is a bit more difficult to categorize (no pun intended), mainly because she's not really a villain anymore, and more of an anti-heroine. She does, however, reflect Batman in that she targets the criminal element for theft, and the criminal element only. Batman may make plans to deal with fellow superheroes, but only if they become part of the criminal element. In addition, both generally show restraint in pressing situations, not to mention having above average athletic and strategic capability, and both are willing to go to extremes to accomplish their goals. The most notable commonality, is simply that they are both the best at what they do. Even the Penguin, while an admittedly lesser villain in the Batman rogues gallery, reflects Batman in that he is a rich heir who turned to crime while Batman was a rich heir who decided to fight crime.

Batman's rogues gallery retains the honor of being the best in comics for one simple reason: They all, to one extent or another, reflect him or a faucet of him. All of the best villains, from the ones as old as the Joker to newer villains like Bane, are great villains because they have varying commonalities with a great hero, while at the same time being perfect foils to him. As the villain in Unbreakable said, "In the comic you know how you can tell who the arch villain is going to be? He's the exact opposite of the hero!" In a similar vein, the best villains, not just the best Batman villains, but the best villains everywhere, have to be the total opposite of the hero, but still have something in common in him in order to be able to have any sort of dynamic with them. Whether the link is in motivation, back story, or methodology, where you have this principal, you generally have a great villain. And having a great villain is the key to having a great story.

Image courtesy of free-wallpapersblog.blogspot.com

Review: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Steve Rogers is doing okay.

After being frozen in ice for 70-plus years and surviving an alien invasion in New York during the events of The Avengers, Steve Rogers, a.k.a. Captain America, is doing alright for himself. He's working as a professional good guy at S.H.I.E.L.D. with his Avengers gal pal Black Widow, living in Washington, D.C. where he runs 13 miles daily, and he's made at least one new friend, a VA worker named Sam Wilson. He's integrating into the modern world fairly well, and has even reestablished contact with his now elderly former lady-love, Peggy Carter. Life is... not bad. At least he doesn't have post-traumatic stress disorder like fellow Avengers alumni Tony Stark.

But then stuff hits the fan, and stuff gets real.

It all starts when Steve's boss, Colonel Nick Fury, Director of S.H.I.E.L.D., is locked out of important, top secret files. Troubled and suspicious, Fury seeks out Alexander Pierce, a senior S.H.E.L.D. leader, to delay the upcoming Project Insight. This project, theoretically, would use three new helicarriers to target criminals and terrorists before they have a chance to strike, which Captain America isn't too happy about. "This isn't freedom," Steve says to Fury. "This is fear." Fury is then critically wounded by a team of assailants led by the mysterious assassin known as the Winter Soldier. Just before the wounded Fury gives Steve a thumbdrive containing the aforementioned top secret files, he whispers to him, "Don't trust anyone." Steve must work with Black Widow, a.k.a. Natasha Romanoff, Sam, and Maria Hill to stop the Winter Soldier's deadly mission, figure just what the heck is going on with Project Insight, and foil the real villain's dastardly plans.

Okay, I just want to be clear, and I'm not gonna lie: This movie is awesome. Resoundingly so. I'd even say that it's resounding in its awesomeness. But empty praise tells little. What makes this movie so great? Without a doubt, I'd say that it's the best installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, up there with Iron Man and The Avengers. My personal favorite remains Thor, but Captain America: The Winter Soldier is undoubtedly the best.

But again, why? Firstly, this movie is constituted of some incredible acting talent. Everybody from Chris Evans as Captain America to Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce to Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury to Emily VanCamp as Agent 13 gives it their all in this picture. It's on the level of the The Dark Knight Saga in terms of sheer star power. It's just as much Fury and Black Widow's movie as it is Cap's. Even the guy who plays the Winter Soldier (I won't tell you who it is because, you know, spoilers. Also, don't Google "Winter soldier". You'll get immediate spoilers.), despite not actually being the main villain, totally kills it. It all adds up to the believable performances coalescing together with the remarkable onscreen chemistry to produce nothing short of brilliance.

Speaking of killing, we've got a lot of cool, killer action sequences which keep you on the edge of your seat. Beginning with the boat skirmish at the beginning between Cap, Black Widow, and the S.H.I.E.L.D./S.T.R.I.K.E. agents and Batroc (Georges St-Pierre, whom we previously saw in Sherlock Holmes, which starred Robert Downey, Jr.), and ending with the climactic battle between Captain America and the Winter Soldier aboard one of the helicarriers, these are some really cool action scenes. But the real thrills from this movie don't come from the fights and explosions; they come from the suspense.

To understand this faucet of the film, we must first understand that Captain America: The Winter Soldier is just as much political thriller as it is superhero action-adventure flick. More accurately, I believe that the writers said that it was a political thriller disguised as a superhero action-adventure flick, just as Captain America: The First Avenger was a throwback to pulpy World War 2 adventure movies disguised as a superhero movie. There's a lot of stuff in this movie that will make you go, "Whoa, I did not see that coming." It's intelligent and relevant in its sociopolitical commentary, asking hard-hitting questions about freedom, security, patriotism, heroism, trust, and friendship. One particularly heart-pounding scene features Steve and Natasha unearthing a devastating revelation about S.H.I.E.L.D. that rocks them to the core. The only explosions that took place in it were after everything else had happened... not that I don't like stuff blowing up, it's just that there's been a lot of it in superhero movies lately.

But while this film is indeed thrilling and exciting, it also has the capacity for some quiet, tender, humanizing moments. For instance, the first half or so of the first act is filled with Steve just going around doing things. He meets Sam while outrunning him multiple times while running... during the same run. He goes incognito to the Smithsonian exhibit dedicated to him and his World War Two buddies. He visits a now very elderly Peggy Carter, who encourages him when he says he isn't sure what the right thing to do is anymore. There's also the many great scenes between Steve and Natasha, Steve and Sam, Steve and Fury, Steve and Agent 13, and even Steve and Alexander Pierce which serve to illustrate the finely crafted characters that Marvel has managed to produce.

Miscellaneous things I liked about this movie include its various continuity nods, such as references to previous MCU films and set ups for future MCU films. For instance, we've got Brock Rumlow (Frank Grillo), known in the comics as the mercenary called Crossbones, the aforementioned Batroc, based off of Batroc the Leaper, as well as namedropping a certain neurosurgeon. I also liked the film's sense of humor, which, while by no means in the same shape of humor found in the Iron Man and Thor films, was, indeed, funny. Miscellaneous things I did not like include what they did with Jasper Sitwell (Maximiliano Hernandez). I don't know if it was an Life Model Decoy, or brainwashing, but he deserved better than that. Maybe he'll come up later in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., I don't know, but I just hope that he's not out completely.

All in all though, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, is a solid film. Sam Wilson/Falcon, the Winter Soldier, and Agent 13 were all a bit underused (Batroc is gets one action sequence), despite being heavily promoted, but I can deal with that because when they were used, they were used very well. The acting was top-notch, the script, cinematography and music were all great, and it really pulled of the political thriller thing. It's a great film, and I liked just about everything about it, minus the smattering of bad language. What's more, it made me want to check out the comics run by Ed Brubaker (co-author of Gotham Central), whose storyline introducing the Winter Soldier in the comics was used as an inspiration for this film. Incidentally, this film was also the perfect Geek Pride Day/Memorial Day weekend movie!

RATING: 8.5/10

Image courtesy of comingsoon.net

Phoenix Jones

Superman. Batman. Spider-Man. Robin. Batgirl. The Avengers. The Justice League.

And now, Phoenix Jones.

Phoenix Jones is an indelibly controversial figure in Seattle culture. He is equally controversial in the real-life superhero (RLSH) subculture. He is easily the most famous "superhero" of Seattle's superhero team, the Rain City Superhero Movement (RCSM), of which he is the founder and leader. He is also without a doubt the most famous real-life superhero in the United States, or at least the one with the most media coverage. What makes him controversial is not his propensity for self promotion via the apparently equally bemused and amused mainstream media, though that is worthy of concern, but his decidedly direct and not mainstream crime fighting methods. In any case, Phoenix Jones has more than his fair share of both fans and detractors, to the point where he is the only superhero I've ever heard of to have an actual, dedicated "supervillain" to oppose him.

The man who later adopted the alias of Phoenix Jones, MMA fighter Ben Fodor, has, like all superheroes, a not-so-secret origin story. Fodor has detailed in multiple interviews how his young son was injured by the broken glass of a car window, and how he asked a bystander for help. To Fodor's astonishment, the bystander declined on the basis that it would ruin his YouTube video. Fodor, a lifelong comic book reader, was thus inspired to patrol the streets of Seattle, namely bars, and do things such as break up fights. However, he soon realized that his activities were drawing undue attention, which led him to don a (admittedly silly looking) costume, and take on the moniker of Phoenix Jones. The ski-mask he originally wore with his costume was, according to Fodor, the same one filled with rocks which broke the glass car window which injured his son.

After a series of misadventures, Phoenix Jones formed his own superhero group, the Rain City Superhero Movement, which includes his wife, Purple Reign (now separated); ex-con Midnight Jack; El Caballero; Evocatus; Pitch Black; Ghost, and a host of others who have come and gone over the years. Such aforementioned misadventures include an occasion where Jones/Fodor was arrested after attempting to break up a brawl, though the charges were dropped. He has been covered extensively by the media, usually portrayed in a positive light. However, he is not universally loved, as a large number of fellow RLSH and crimefighters can attest (there is a difference). The New York Initiative, for example, has taken a dim view of him for what they see as reckless tactics and seeming glory hound nature.

Jones has been criticized for his publicity-friendly approach and his direct, hands-on crimefighting methods. He is different from RLSH in that he doesn't just do homeless outreach and what not. No, this man and the RCSM actively patrol bad neighborhoods such as Belltown and Pioneer Square, looking to stop crime. This mostly amounts to getting medical attention to people who have overdosed on drugs, breaking up fights, or stopping other petty crime, but they have had their share of big cases. They once stopped apprehended a stabber, and later helped to quell acts of vandalism by members of the Anarchist Black bloc on May Day 2012. These are commendable acts which deserve recognition.

It doesn't stop there, however. A "supervillain" named Rex Velvet has taken to the internet with a website and as series of videos with remarkably high production values which criticize Jones in a sinisterly exaggerated manner. As Jeremy Jahns has noted, most "real-life supervillains" are little more than "internet trolls with cameras and makeup." This guy, however, put some real effort into his videos, and is actually kind of funny. What's even funnier though, is that he calls himself a supervillain, but at the same time believes that he's advocating for law and order. I wonder if that makes him Lawful Evil or Chaotic Good?

Now, there are a lot of things about Phoenix Jones that get people edgy, but the most flagrant misnomer about him is that he's a "vigilante." Vigilantism is defined by the Legal Dictionary as "Taking the law into one's own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one's own understanding of right and wrong... [...]." At first blush, that seems to describe Jones perfectly. However, nothing could be further than the truth. Jones and his compatriots have clearly demonstrated that they don't routinely break the law in their activities, as some fictional superheroes have been known to do. Rather, they set out to patrol the streets, deter crime, and when they are forced to confront lawbreakers, they always call the police first and act as good witnesses. Jones and his crew have repeatedly attested to this fact, saying that they aren't out to violate anyone's "civil rights." In sum, Phoenix Jones and the RCSM are little more than a glorified neighborhood watch group, a concept which I discussed in an Op-Ed that I submitted to the Seattle Times some time ago (it never got picked up, but can be found in the Notes section of my Facebook page).

Many people may wonder exactly what Jones hopes to accomplish in his activities. Even with all of his allies in play, and his efforts at branching off into a world-spanning movement called "the Jones Army," Phoenix Jones doesn't hope to end all crime all by himself. Thankfully, his stated goals aren't quite than ambitious, but he does have high ideals. His stated mission is to combat "apathy." To paraphrase the man himself, he has said that, "If everyone reported crime, there would be no crime." He and his sidekicks hope to inspire people to stand up to the violence and crime in their communities, to actually call the police, report crime, be good, cooperative witnesses, help people in need, and to generally be good citizens. That's what Phoenix Jones is all about, and that's something that I find quite appealing, even admirable.

In the end, Phoenix Jones may be a little reckless when it comes to the publicity, and his rocky relationship with the Seattle Police Department may be the end of him, but he has a good heart. He is determined to do what he can to keep the city safe, and he will endure mockery, danger, and outright threats against his life in his mission. This is not to say that he's infallible, for no man is but Christ. It may be one day that he will suffer some disgrace. But if the selfless actions of him and his crew on May Day 2012 are anything to go by, and indeed, they were selfless (what kind of glory hound disguises his identity?), I reckon that we've got ourselves a new hero. The social media saturation may be a bit much, but that's his way of doing things. Here's hoping that he doesn't go and get himself killed in really dumb way.

Image courtesy gq.com

Want to read more about Real Life Superheroes? Check out my review of the documentary Superheroes. You also might want to take a look at Heroes in the Night, the blog of journalist and author Tea Krulos.