My Favorite Things 2014: Comics

Yes, that is Moon Knight
fighting what looks like Morris Day.

Disclaimer: Yes, I left Saga off the list because I would basically just be repeating myself from last year and the year before and the numerous reviews I've done on Saga since it's inception. At this point, it should just go without saying that Saga can do no wrong in my book.

Moon Knight: This is easily one of the best upgrades I've ever read for a second/third tier Marvel character. Leave it to Warren Ellis to make a superhero like Moon Knight memorable again. The task seemed simple for Ellis and his co-conspirators, Declan Shalvey and Jordie Bellaire. Their aim was to write six standalone issues that would reintroduce the comic world to the many faces of Marc Spector. Ellis pitted "The One You See Coming" against everything from rogue cops to evil dreamscapes to punk rock ghosts. The crown jewel of this short lived run was easily Issue 6 entitled "Scarlet" where Mr. Knight infiltrates a mob safe house to rescue a kidnapped little girl. Wait...."infiltrate" isn't quite accurate. He kicks the front goddamned door in and beats the living shit out of 6 floors of bad guys a la Raid: Redemption. Since Ellis' tenure, Brian Wood has taken the wheel, expanding on the universe already established in the first issues of the relaunch. DC should take meticulous notes from this innovative master class on how to reestablish a character (I'm looking at you, Whoever's Been Writing Mr. Terrific Lately).

Starlight: (I'm not going to repeat myself on why Starlight is one of the best comics of the year, so see here)
Batman: Okay, so it feels really cheap and fanboy-ish to say that Batman is one of the best books of the year, but it's a statement that Scott Snyder has earned. Batman really IS one of the best books of the year. First of all, Zero Year wrapped up in 2014 and we were almost sad to see it go. Snyder had reinvented the origin of a 75 year old character in a way we hadn't seen before. Here, we saw a Bruce Wayne that was less a brooding man on a mission and more of risk taking loose cannon reminiscent of Daniel Craig's James Bond. He smiles once in a while, he improvises, he's unsure of himself at times, he tells bad guys they're full of shit. Batman's New 52 origin is basically the antidote to the Goddamned Batman Problem on basically every level.

Black Science: (see here on why Black Science is one of the best things to happen to comics)

Ms. Marvel: Now, this is where Marvel ran circles around DC in the way of taking risks as far as representing characters of color. G. Willow Wilson is a godsend to comics for her book that's part coming of age tale, part superhero epic. All uber fangirl, Kamala Khan, has ever wanted to be was her idol, Carol "Captain Marvel" Danvers...strong, fearless and "perfectly beautiful." Instead, she's a brown girl with a funny name and religious ways the kids at her school don't always understand. Then, she stumbles headfirst into weird shapeshifting powers that cause more problems for her personal life than she expected. "Ms. Marvel" is a courageous story that young girls of all walks of life could take something away from, a story about how the most heroic thing you can possibly be in life is yourself.

Anatomy of a Comic: So You Wanna Write A Shitty Crossover Event.... Part 2

Well, Original Sin wrapped up last week and I was sure bringing this event to a close would iron out the overt problems throughout the plot. If anything, it seemed to either a). create new problems or b). worsen the old ones. Mike Deodato is still The Thing This Book Has Going For It, but other than that, it was basically a hot mess.

He's got the last Pumpkin Spice scone! Rush him!

Once again, starting with the cover.....

I cannot stress this enough, but EVERY aspect of the cover should be indicative of what's happening in the comic especially when it's as "OhMyGodThisIsEpic" as Marvel would have you believe it is. Having said that, of the seven notable Marvel characters on this cover, only three of them are actually found in this book. No Captain Marvel, No Daredevil, No Iron Fist, No Mister Fantastic. You can't even say it's an huge exaggeration of something happening in the comic. It's just plain lying. One good example of a well done, symbolic cover (even though I got some shit from a few of you guys for using this example last time) is Identity Crisis.

Here you've got the Justice League which, at this time in the DC universe, was always characterized very much as a family. Everything about this picture conveys a very familial vibe. The broken picture is obviously representing the tragedies and breaches of trust that leave this family broken and divided.

Or if you want to make the comparison against another Marvel event, take Civil War.

Aside from the time honored trope of defeated heroes sprawled across a mount of rubble, it doesn't get much more literal than this. Captain America
and Iron Man, two generals on opposite ends of a major conflict, finally come head to head and beat the unholy hell out of one another. Simple. No hyperbole necessary.

But going back to the Original Sin cover, it says across the bottom "The Final Judgment." What the fuck does that mean? Anyone? Are the Watchers pointing down supposed to be the judges in this case? The Watchers aren't judges. They're Watchers....who just watch stuff. Their whole job description is the antithesis of judging. So, seriously....who's being judged and how? I shouldn't be asking MORE questions going into an event's finale.

And, holy shit, did this book ever leave the audience asking questions. For example....

"Take him apart. So I may drink his blood and consume his knowledge, one bite at a time."

Umm....what? This was the whole problem with Dr. Midas as a villain. Everything was so vague and unexplained. What occurred in this entire series that would lead him to believe that eating a corpse would make him all powerful?

Why have the Watcher's eyes suddenly turned murderous? Does this mean the Watcher's body parts can work independently of one another after he's dead? Is the Watcher a Castlevania villain? What the fucking fuck?

Now, it's a rarity that I would actively shit on the usually immaculate artwork of Mike Deodato, but he screwed the pooch a couple of times here. First of all, this is Black Panther, Dr. Strange and the rest of the heroes who teamed up (for some reason) busting in to fight...umm....someone.

Now, here's Black Panther and Dr. Strange at the end of the book in full outer space gear. Huh?

Also, if you look closely, here's Thor with his hammer firmly in hand. But wait a minute....in issue 7, Nick Fury whispered something to Thor that made him suddenly unworthy to hold the hammer. Now, he's totally holding the hammer.

And now later as the heroes are all leaving, Thor is left back where he was in the last issue trying to pick his hammer up. Shenanigans.

And when exactly did it get decided that Bucky was the new "Man on the Wall"? Did Fury choose him? When did he choose him exactly? The last thing he ever said to Bucky was "Get everyone back." You can't even dismiss that as saying it was unspoken tough guy talk and "he just knew."

Or this. So, Dr. Midas' severed hand turned the snake to gold when he bit it, but not the Exterminatrix (man, villains are really exhausting the shit out of the Big Book of Bad Guy Names) when she stole it? What?

Granted, I'm not saying there shouldn't be room to leave elements as "implied" in a story. But in an event like this where much of your story is extremely contained and doesn't need tie-ins to explain every fringe element (which is something that Marvel has been really good about in recent years)....it's okay to hold your reader's hand just a little bit. And inevitably, the fallacies here will laid at another writer's doorstep to explain how exactly Bucky became The Man on the Wall or who this new Watcher (I'm guessing that's who the glowing old man at the end is supposed to be) is. DC was really bad about this shit last year with Trinity War turning into a promo that basically forced you to buy Justice League and Forever Evil (which, to be fair, was pretty good) just to understand what happened in a 6 or 7 issue miniseries. 

Making someone interested enough in your characters to buy more comics is what a good comic should do. Insisting upon your reader buying comics to properly understand the vague collision of words and images that took place in another comic borderlines on extortion.

The Thing About Internet Spoilers

I've been meaning to talk about this for a while now, but didn't really have a good example to springboard the topic. The best example in the past few weeks I can think of is probably the "Royal Wedding" on Game of Thrones. People lost their shit about the ending and set Twitter on FIRE. It's a pretty well known fact that Twitter knows no chill even on its slow days, but this was an especially HILARIOUS night to bear witness to.

In fact, this is such a special spoiler, I'm not even going to talk about it until after the jump.

The Movie Spider Man Problem

So, after writing my review for The Amazing Spider-Man 2, I then went out in the internets to read reactions to the film and, as predicted, it proved to be as divisive (if not moreso) than Man of Steel was among nerds. They either a). walked away entertained while totally aware of the film's more glaring issues or b). eager to forget the whole thing ever happened. Both are fair reactions to have. After all, it's every bit as understandable that someone would be taken with Andrew Garfield's performance enough give the rest of the movie a pass as it is that some people won't be able to get past Dubstep Electro and Kinda Green Goblin getting maybe five minutes of fight time.

But the ending put something about the movie franchise as a whole into focus that could possibly be a bit off-putting for some old school Spider-Man loyalists on a subconscious level (I say "subconsciously" because I can't say I've actually ever heard this complaint from anyone watching the movies....just a conjecture) that makes some of the goofy moments that much more goofy. I submit that there's a good chance we might not ever see the kind of Spider-Man story the source material whores want to see.

"Well, damn, Oz! Why the hell not?" Good question. One thing that was more overt in The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 3 than any other movies is that Spidey is BELOVED in New York City. I mean, there are at least three cinematic instances I can think of where a Spider-Man fight was a public event akin to street dancers on the subway as opposed to what it would REALLY be which is people fleeing in terror, most of them not even knowing what they're running from other things exploding. The first movie showed people flinging trash at the Green Goblin, claiming the webslinger as one of their own. Spider-Man 2 featured a subway car full of people crowd surfing him with his arms like Christ. Spider-Man 3 had a parade in Peter's honor as well as a day named for him.

Anyone who keeps up with the comics could probably see how strange this is. It's pretty much standard operating procedure in the comics that Spider-Man is, at best, tolerated by the status quo. There are moments even when he's saved the day, he doesn't get it 100% right and people hate him for it. Of course, this is in keeping the overall moral of a Spider-Man comic that sometimes it sucks to do the right thing and people might hate you for doing the right thing, but do the right thing anyway because it's right and it beats being a terrible person. In fact, the only time I can remember people adoring him the way they do in the movies is during the Superior Spider-Man when Doctor Octopus Spidey was almost constantly applauded for being an Extinction Level Douchebag (which is part of why 75% of that book was a stupid idea).

There's only two applicable reasons I could fathom for this.

1). Given the fact that Sony exclusively owns the movie rights to Spider-Man means that it exists in a different universe as the Marvel Cinematic Universe. That means he and the Avengers don't exist together. In other words, in the New York he occupies, there's no such thing as the Avengers....so he's the only superhero the people have ever seen. So, sure, it might make sense that he'd be something of a rock star.

2). (And this is really the more important thing to pay attention to.) More than ten years later, a post 9/11 Hollywood will always be hesitant...and rightfully so...to depict an apathetic, rude New York that treats its heroes as anything other than heroes. I get that this is a weird criticism, but consider Movie New York over the years.

I apologize in advance, but this is the second time in the life of this blog that I have to explain Ghostbusters II. This is the movie where an evil painting was filling the sewers with slime that made people into hateful jerks while slowly plunging New York into the eighth level of Hell (or Dallas, depending on who you ask). When the Ghostbusters came to the Mayor, making an impassioned plea to take action, this was the result.....


For me, this is pretty much the poster child for how New York was portrayed in television and cinema before some assholes threw a plane at a building and took countless lives, a day that most of us will probably not forget. This happened so close to the first Spider-Man film that they had to go back and delete the Twin Towers from the posters and certain scenes.

Odds are good we'll probably not see a movie anytime soon where a guy saves hundreds of people from a guy throwing exploding jack o' lanterns or a guy made out of sand only to have trash thrown at his head while he's being called a bum.

Because, as cynical as this generation can be, mainstream moviegoers want to see heroes win. (This is probably why Watchmen had such mixed reactions from people. It's hard to sell people a superhero movie that's primarily about failure.) They want them to be loved because, ultimately, they're blank slates for the viewer. They want to be able to paste themselves the point of superheroes is to give us some semblance of hope that doing the right thing can have a semi-happy ending.

Unless, of course, you're Batman. Because Batman doesn't give a fuck if you like him.

Textbook Apology of An Awful Person

Originally Written on My Tumblr Blog.....

I’m sorry that (recipient of horrible thing) was hurt by (horrible thing made to sound completely innocuous) but (selfish ideology that doesn’t apply to recipient) which has led me to feel that in this life (rationale as to why horrible thing has to be done). Besides, (group of people that resemble recipient) only get hurt by these kind of situations because deep down (uneducated if not biased psychological analysis). 

Maybe if they didn’t hate themselves deep down, they might not have (passionate reaction to horrible thing). My life is better because of (selfish ideology) and that’s not a crime. 


I wish more people would see that (selfish ideology) is the way to go but I realize that not everyone (backhanded callback to selfish ideology) like me, so I recognize how (recipient of horrible thing) could be hurt by (horrible thing), so I will do better in the future to not (horrible thing) in the presence of (group that resembles recipient). I ask for their (not forgiveness) and understanding in this matter. Thank you.

My Bone to Pick with Jimmy Kimmel

So, the Rob Ford "interview" happened on Jimmy Kimmel Live this week and to say it was sleaze at its finest might be a vast understatement. And I'm not just talking about "Toronto's crack mayor" (Kimmel's own words from an earlier show, by the way). Granted, it's wasn't worse than Kimmel leaning into Leno that one time, but it still was pretty cringe worthy. He brought Ford on and showed him his, more or less, worst public moments (that we've all seen on YouTube by now) of the past year and made him twist in the wind explaining them (and by "explaining them," I mean "just sweating a lot") as he and the audience laughed on. Basically, it a comedic, condescending, kinda mean spirited version of The Trial of Rob Ford.

The Toronto denizens of Twitter were, bare minimum, less than amused. And, honestly, it's hard to hold it against them. I mean, by most accounts, as far as Canadian politics go, Ford is quite possibly The Worst , so let me make this clear that I'm NOT defending Rob Ford. Having said that....

Despite several instances of previously being hilarious in my book, in this case....Jimmy Kimmel is sort of a piece of shit.

It's one thing when someone like Newt Gingrich or Bill O'Reilly comes on the Daily Show. Jon Stewart makes no attempt to hide the fact that, despite being a comedian on a comedy themed network, he's a well read guy who knows his shit and likes to challenge the "logic" (or as close to logic as Newt Gingrich ever gets) of those he disagrees with. What happened on Monday night was akin capturing a bear in the wilderness, putting a dress on it and poking in the ass with a stick to lead it around a circus tent.

It was also very clear in more than one instance throughout the interview that Kimmel had invited him on under the guise of being a pal, wanting to redeem him (the jig was up when Ford turned out to be stupid to keep up the lie that he reached out to Kimmel) in the court of public opinion even though America is not Canada.

Now, on one hand...I can see the reasoning behind someone reading this post, wondering, "Who gives a shit?" I mean, it's Rob Ford. He's an awful person who earned the comedic tar 'n feathering in the town square he's getting and will likely continue to get for the remainder of his time in the public eye, right?

The only problem with this logic is that he's not just an awful person. He's an addict.

It's well documented that the majority of Ford's meandering through the various catacombs of his own stupidity have been fueled by, among other thing, alcohol, making it clear to most (including his own staff, several of which have resigned mumbling about how desperately he needs help) that he has serious substance abuse issues.

It's also well documented that Ford has an almost superhuman (or subhuman, depending on how you look at it) talent for slithering his way out of ever taking responsibility for anything. With that in mind, bringing him on late night talk for what amounted to Kimmel's rendition of a Daniel Tosh Web Redemption...is not any form of help, a beacon of social contempt or even a tap on the wrist. In other words, he was let off easy.

In the generation where amoral people get reality television shows and million dollar book deals for much less....it's a reward. It's a statement that says, with flashing neon lights, "As long as you're destroying yourself where we can see you and laugh, our amusement is a suitable currency with which you can barter for our silence." After all, we wouldn't want the guy to feel like maybe he should have to do something revolutionary like fix himself, right?

Society deserves better. Toronto deserves better.

Jimmy Kimmel is a piece of shit because maybe he isn't the drug dealer, but he's definitely the dickbag driving the addict to the drug deal in exchange for gas money.

In Defense of Darkman or....Superhero Movies Hollywood Could Learn Something From

With this year in superhero films wrapped up, Marvel ready to shove out their new batch and DC getting everyone's mouths watering with Arrow being a breakout success (despite mixed reviews from fanboys) their Flash television pilot, and of course the several rumors and announcements behind the casting of Man of Steel 2: The Steel Strikes Back, I thought I'd pull a few movies with cult success (despite questionable box office numbers) out of the vault and take a brief look at some of the lessons modern comic book cinema could take from them

Darkman: It sort of saddens me that we're quickly approaching (if we're not already in the midst of) a generation that will never know the glory that is Darkman. When you watch Sam Raimi's first jump into the superhero genre, it's actually a big insight into why he got tapped for the Spider-Man series in the first place. Even though, at first glance, it comes across as a teenager's ultraviolent fantasy, it's actually very indicative of what many comics were at the fringes of early comic culture: melodramatic pulp adventure. A psychotic, disfigured scientist returns from "death" to take revenge on the mobsters and crooked officials responsible? If Darkman had originated as a comic book hero, the story itself would have been more of a horror story than anything and Raimi has a far better understanding of the comic book genre than anyone gives him credit for. The movie made absolutely NO apologies for the fact that Peyton Westlake was more or less just a really demented guy who a). wanted his face back and b). wanted to kill a lot of people (basically what would happen if someone set Kanye West on fire).

Moral of the Story: The lesson that Current Hollywood can (and should but won't) take from this movie is that every superhero film doesn't have to be one of virtue because not every superhero is a virtuous one nor should they be. This is where the Punisher and Ghost Rider movies went wrong (well, they went wrong a LOT of places...Nic Cage being a notable one....but virtue was prime among their sins).


The Phantom: Now, here's a movie that holds a very special place in my heart while many others have forgotten about for understandable reasons. The 1989 Batman was something of a game changer for superhero movies. When Jack Nicholson's Joker uttered the line "Where does he get those wonderful toys?"....his reaction was one that turned out to mirror the audience's. I mean, for the time in which it was conceived, watching a hero swing onto rooftops, lob smoke bombs and evade the law in a tricked out car was pretty goddamned exciting. Then, you find yourself watching a period piece about hero you mainly only know from the comics section of your newspaper. So, needless to say, Lee Falk's jungle hero had the odds against him right out of the gate. He was an Indiana Jones-type hero at a time when moviegoers had decided they were pretty much over Indiana Jones.



Having said that, there's a lot to learn from The Phantom. First of all, there's Billy Zane's performance. With a period piece like this, it's importance not to take yourself too seriously. Zane went a different way than what would be expected from a story about a mythical hero who lives in a secret jungle surrounded by tree people who revere him as a living ghost protector. Let's face it...if you go dark and play the Phantom like a guy He dashed to and fro, punching and shooting with a wink, a smile and a "pardon me, ma'am" at every turn. We call this kind of shit "cheesy" and "hamfisted" nowadays, but it's also the sort of thing that makes us smile and induces a feeling of escape which is what we commonly go to the movies for in the first place.

One of the best "quiet as kept" scenes is when Phantom is chasing thugs who've kidnapped Kristy Swanson (By the way, Diana Palmer's awesomeness dwarfs pretty much EVERY incarnation of Lois Lane except maybe Amy Adams in Man of Steel), bumps into a woman by mistake, stops to pick up her purse like a gentleman and goes on to leap from car to car in traffic, steal a cop's horse, riding off in hot pursuit....LIKE A FUCKING BOSS.

Moral of the Story: The thing that should really translate well here for Current Hollywood is that every hero doesn't have to be edgy and dark. Granted, Ghost Rider really should be which is why that failed, but there's no reason modern day swashbucklers can't be fun.

The Rocketeer: For a movie that doesn't really get the credit it's due, maintaining a 63% rating on Rotten Tomatoes isn't exactly anything to sneeze at. Unfortunately, it suffered from the same societal epidemics as The Phantom where a). if a movie didn't open and sellout in every theater worldwide like Dark Knight or The Avengers recently, it's automatically dismissed as a failure (keep in mind that several failures have done very well in the box office in the same way as when you go home with the guy at the bar who seems to mean well only to wake up once you're sober and say "What the fuck was I thinking?"....I'm looking at you, Transformers 2 & 3) and b). was portraying a sort of bare bones "everyman" hero in the era of Batman.

In many ways, this was a movie that Hollywood, in fact, may just have learned something from for better or worse. I mean, honestly, Rocketeer was the epitome of a period-piece hero epic. A douchebag test pilot finds Howard Hughes experimental jet pack, battles "G-men", the mob, and Nazis all for the love of Jennifer Connelly's boobs? That pretty much sums up American propaganda heroes of the 1930's. For all intents and purposes, this was something of a blueprint that would later make the way for asshole superheroes like Robert Downey Jr.'s Iron Man. One of the big highlights from this movie that deserves consideration (aside from a delightfully fun Timothy Dalton villain) is the dialed back usage of special effects. Don't get me wrong; it's not like they tied Bill Campbell to a big rope the whole time and told him to holler in front of a house fan the whole time, but Peter Travers had it right when he referred to it's movie magic as "the kind that charms us, rather than bullying us, into suspending disbelief."

Moral of the Story: On one hand, when you have movies about gods with magic hammers, giant green beasts, asshole space cops with magic wishing rings and....well, Superman...it's hard for visuals NOT to be a contributing factor to their success. On the other hand, special effects don't have to subtract from the story's personality. Joss Whedon understands this pretty well. So does Rocketeer director Joe Johnston which is probably why Marvel ended up tapping him to direct Captain America, which, in addition to being a pretty damn good origin story, ended up being a terrific send up of old Republic serials.

The Art of Snapping or Maybe Cyclops WAS Right.....

I'm apologizing in advance because I have to talk about Ghostbusters II for a second. In Ghostbusters II, Bill Murray and company had to fight a demonic overlord trapped in a painting who was dumping slime into the sewers that turned all of New York into assholes who are awful to each other for no reason (though I'm still not sure how he did that from inside of a painting). Basically, he meant to take over the world by turning NYC in the center of all evil. In other words, Dallas. Watching this movie as a kid has clearly affected my state of mind now because it is my genuine belief that comment sections online are basically the focal point of all digital evil on the World Wide Web. Having said all that, sometimes, when I'm on the internet reading articles and I'm feeling very adventurous, I'll put on my hazmat suit and dive into random comment sections. Why, you ask? Because fuck it, that's why?

Anyway, one of the biggest criticisms I've read this year in comment sections and message boards is about the direction in which Marvel has taken Cyclops and it got me thinking about why. I mean, Marvel's whole thing is that their characters tend to live a little closer to the human condition of the everyman while a lot of DC characters tend to be more static archetypes. Even though Uncanny X-Men is, thus far, serving a purpose similar to Dark Avengers from a few years back during the "Dark Reign" event, Cyclops didn't " go bad" necessarily.

You're Scott Summers. You haven't looked anyone in the eye since you hit puberty. You've been raised by a kind, well-meaning man who wishes for peace between humans and mutants while training you to fight giant robot death machines since you were 15 years old. You're basically the quintessential All-American captain of the football team for mutantkind. As time goes on and you grow into an adult, people from the future you've been taught to fight for come to the present day and basically tell you that you eventually fail. You watch your wife (who is basically your high school sweetheart) silently fawn over your hairy, homicial teammate. That same wife died, came back to life as a world-swallowing space god, died and came back to life and died AGAIN. Eventually, the race of people you're sworn to protect are magically dwindled down to barely enough to reach full capacity at Chick-Fil-A. Now, you're an endangered species living an island that's pretty much a reservation. At some point, that same world swallowing space god possesses you and you convince yourself that you're righting your dead wife's wrong by healing the world. Then, it drives you power mad and you kill Charles Xavier, your only father figure, in cold blood and you're thrown in jail. Cyclops didn't "turn evil." He snapped. Plain and simple.

It's not even a new phenomenon in Marvel. Take the Ultimate Universe, for example. Early on in Ultimate Spider-Man, Nick Fury confessed to having a file on Peter Parker because with everything that had happened to him and his family over the years (father killed in a Hulk attack, father's best friend's son becomes Venom, Uncle Ben, Norman Osborn, etc.), he was the most likely to snap and become the next big supervillain. Of course, Ultimate Peter Parker didn't snap. In fact, he went on to die in the service of not snapping and being exactly the kind of guy Uncle Ben wanted him to be (although I can't help but wonder if that's because Black Fury also said "When you turn 18, you're mine"....turns out that guy's a lying piece of shit in EVERY dimension). Meanwhile, Ultimate Reed Richards had endured equally fucked up circumstances (piece of shit father, being responsible for unintentionally wiping out another dimension, turning his best friends into a monster, his girlfriend being an indecisive ass, Doom, etc.) and, while nobody was looking, turned into the next big supervillain, almost wiping out humanity at least twice. You don't necessarily like or forgive the character for it, but you get it.

The same thing applies for others like the Norman and Harry Osborn, whose Green Goblin incarnations are completely about regular people just plain losing it in the face of bad shit happening. Brian Michael Bendis' run on Daredevil, which has turned out to be one of the most definitive eras in DD history other than Frank Miller's, is entirely the story of what happens when Matt Murdock has pretty much the worst time of his life (unable to cope with his girlfriend's death, secret identity outed to the press, Bullseye's return, declaring himself Kingpin of Hell's Kitchen, disbarred and thrown in prison, etc.) and being utterly unable to cope with the black hole his life had become.

You see it in real life all the time. Kanye West's evolution is pretty much the best real-life example I can think of when I think about what a hero-to-villain transformation looks like, but that's a whole other post.

Have you ever known someone before a relationship and seen them AFTER a breakup? After the death of a loved one? Post-traumatic stress is more present in America than its probably ever been. Often times, soldiers come home from war changed by their experiences and understandably so. Their job is literally to get shot at so you don't have to. Now, compare that to "superheroism." People who get shot at and attacked by all kinds of unthinkable supervillain shit every single day are bound to be deeply affected and changed in the wake of what they've seen.

No, seriously....WHY hasn't Marvel made
these shirts? You're leaving money on the
table, Marvel.

Having a major character go through a major change like that isn't necessarily always a perversion of who he or she was meant to be. Sometimes, it's the next logical step. It's evolution. Sometimes, people just snap. Comic book characters shouldn't have to be immune.

Why Superior Spider-Man Doesn't Work.....

For you to understand my take on Superior Spider Man, I have explain a thing or two about Breaking Bad and Batman.

Recently, Damon Lindelof wrote an essay for Vulture (that, due to spoilers, I couldn't read all of) in which he compared the transformation of Walter White's Heisenberg to Bruce Wayne's becoming Batman. He points out that while Walt's circumstances were certainly a factor in his evolution to a meth peddling mastermind, it wasn't really the cause. He was ALWAYS Heisenberg. Yeah, some guy in an alley orphaned Bruce Wayne and essentially robbed of his innocence at eight years old, but there are a LOT of people who lose their parents to gun violence. There are also a lot of people who contract cancer and can't pay for treatments. They don't dress like bats or resort to cooking illegal substances in an RV. Lindelof submits that these characters are special because their circumstances awaken something that's already inside of them, that their environment isn't the cause. It's the catalyst. The argument could be made that this is what we love about them. Regular shit that happens to plenty of people happened to them and they do something about it that everyday people simply don't have the balls to do.

After showing the essay to a friend of mine who is a Batman fan, she pointed out, "Yeah, but couldn't you say that about all heroes?" You could say that about most heroes, but not necessarily Peter Parker. Circumstances played a bigger part than people realize. His true transformation was more earned in a way. He had to learn how not to be a dick by being sort of a dick. He started out a mostly decent guy who people sort of marginalized and shitted on in high school. He got bitten by a radioactive spider and was improved physically.

Spider Man went on to take up a career as a television star to make money and then came the moment when he let a crook get away because...."Fuck him. Not my problem." This is kind of a dick move by any standards, really. Then, it turns out that same guy shot and killed his uncle. Granted, I'm sure more than a few kids screw up and inadvertently get someone they love hurt, but none of them had superpowers when they did it. Essentially, Peter was a good kid, got superpowers, was seduced by personal gain, failed and THEN became Spider Man. Now, this isn't necessarily a trope that has never been explored before, but it is the crux of why Spider Man works so well. He is the result of above average virtue through "everyman failure." Incidently, this is a big part of why Otto Octavius' "Superior" Spider-Man is so divisive among fans (myself included).

I should say, before going any further, that this is probably one of the most ambitious and gutsy moves Marvel has made in years. I mean....they killed Peter Parker. They didn't zap him back in time. They didn't send him off to the edge of the universe trapped inside a giant space bullet. They didn't ambiguously kill him using a crazy mutant's chaos magic so that he may or may not have really died. They killed him. It was one of the few moments in recent times I can remember a comic depicting a top tier hero's death rattle. And then, when the brain waves/ghostof/whatever came back to haunt Otto in an attempt to get his body back, they killed him indefinitely....again.

When his turn at being the web-slinger starts, Doctor Octopus has the best of intentions in carrying on Spider-Man's legacy, protecting his loved ones and a better hero than Peter was. This didn't last very long at all. First, to plant the initial seeds for his narcissism, he refurbishes his trademark "Octobots" into "Spiderbots" that survey the city for danger and alert Otto immediately via phone app. As cool (and sensible) as that is in theory, this is also sort of a dick move in a symbolic kind of way. Most apps, by nature, are tools designed for convenience, mainly making urgency an option for phone/tablet users. For example, there is a setting for the news app on my phone that alerts me to breaking stories as they occur. If there's a shooting in Bummerville, Middle America somewhere, I have the option of picking up my phone to know about it or putting it down and saying "It can wait." It's okay for ME to have that option because it's not my responsibility to go to Bummerville and stop the shooting. Spider Man shouldn't have the option of not going to fix shit. The whole point of a superhero is that urgency shouldn't ever be optional.

Nope. He went on to toss an old man (okay, yeah, it was the Vulture, but still) into a floodlight, shoot a defeated criminal in cold blood and beat up parkour thieves on YouTube. You would think he would pay some sort of price for this (someone important dying on his watch, losing his job, etc.) in keeping with the theme of power and responsibility. Nope. In fact, aside from a light tap on the wrist from the Avengers, Doctor Spiderpus faces little or no consequences for any of the douchebag things he does. He's rewarded with a grateful New York City (something Peter rarely had on his best day), a new girlfriend, a hollowed out prison as his public base of operations, his own private army and a giant spider mecha. I'm not kidding about that last part either. He has a giant robot. It could be argued that Otto is less on a crusade for justice and more looking to redeem his failed life through the same acts of arrogance and vanity that cloaked him in failure to begin with which isn't exactly the most heroic, altruistic or even likable of goals.

Batman has undergone some odd changes over the years, but a Batman fan opens up a Batman book and pretty much knows what their getting: a traumatized, paranoid obsessive zillionaire puts the fear of God into bad guys and plays the resident "Stop being a pussy" guy in the Justice League occasionally. People who read a Superman book know they're probably going to either get a superpowered slugfest or Superman talking suicide jumpers down off of ledges with hope and change. The theme of Spider-Man has gone from "with great power comes great responsibility" to "being a douchebag works." That works for Iron Man or the Punisher, but a change like that in a character like this is tantamount to Kanye West going from songs about working at the Gap to albums mainly about popping ecstasy pills and casual sex. Is that what Spidey readers of any age sign up for?

One of those parkour thieves he beat half
to death is a woman, by the way.
Real American Hero.

One can't help but feel this is indicative of Marvel giving into what Craig Lindsey referred to in another rogerebert.com essay as "jerk culture." This usually entails a book or movie entirely about intensely unlikable people you would probably not hold the elevator for in real life like the entire cast of The Hangover. And this is, more or less, why Spider-Man has fallen from grace for many readers. It's not that it's impossible to create good stories centered around repugnant assholes. Breaking Bad, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia and Seinfeld show that to be untrue. And I'm certain there are those who will use the argument that comics are an escape fantasy, so it's okay to live vicariously through heroes even when they're jerks, but to quote Lindsey, "We can be a crass, selfish, inhuman society sometimes." Maybe...just maybe...we could stand an escape from that, too.

Women and Comics According to Middle Aged White Men.....

The Television Critic's Association press tour wrapped with a panel discussion featuring Todd McFarlane, Gerry Conway, Len Wein and Michael Kantor, who directed the upcoming documentary, Superheroes: The Never Ending Battle. Eventually, the roundtable turned into a criticism among the creators as to why mainstream superheroes are (and continue to be), on a majority, white men. Alyssa Rosenberg wrote an excellent, more detailed report for ThinkProgress on the points made by the panel, but NPR's Linda Holmes summarized them best via Twitter.

1). "Hey, nobody is in your way saying you can't."

-Here, we have a double edged sword. On one side, yes, the burden of leading the charge for progress IS on the undervalued demographic. After all, a lot of history's great achievements are the result of mainstream doors being shut in the faces of ambitious upstarts. Independent comics as well as web comics are feasible avenues that make user created material more feasible all the time. "Be the change you want to see in the world" and all that.

However, on the other hand, this is ultimately a lazy school of thought on the panel's part and a dismissive way of presenting it to consumers of a medium that, having it's own growing film/television genre to think about, should be a little more concerned about opening its doors to potential readers. That should really sound more like "Nobody is saying you can't. In fact, you should. I'd love to see that shit." This really came across of the comic industry's equivalent of  "Send us your demo tape, kid. I'm sure my agent will get to it or something."


2). "You can't because it would be like a medieval comic about female knights."

-Oh, please. First of all, I'm pretty sure Paul Cornell's Demon Knights series featured a transgender incarnation of Shining Knight.

Second, I'm pretty sure this is a female knight handing a male knight his ass on one of the most popular shows on television. Still an implausible sell?


Third, it's FICTION. That's the entire point of fiction. You can make the world whatever you want it to be. There is a comic book about a second civil war turning New York City into a nigh-uninhabitable No Man's Land and the thought of a female knight (aside from Joan of Arc) in medieval times in unfeasible to you? Again, I say: Oh, please.

3). "Readers wouldn't read it so don't blame creators."

-Despite what people may think of them now, these are artists. Furthermore, they are, almost by definition, nerds. Ideally, one of the great ideas about nerd culture is the thought of fellow nerds making good. Someone else who loves this comics as much as you do is out there living the dream. I've always assumed this is a big part of what people like about Kevin Smith. Now, imagine a nerd, someone you perceive to be like you in a fashion, making good and then telling you that the medium you love isn't representing you in its art because people don't give a shit about you or telling your story. We expect that from "suits"....not creators.

4). "You can't make the point of a superhero some kind of political message."

-I repeat: Oh, please.

Finally, to top off the tomfuckery, the panel went on to make a point of emphasizing that comics don't lead in society, that they follow and reflect it. Rosenberg flatly stated "That seems like an unambitious position," and ended it there which, by the way, is probably (ironically) the most heroic thing that happened here in this room of superhero creators. This is probably the most indefensible, disappointing thing to happen all year in comics thus far and that's saying a lot considering 2013 has given us Justice League of America, Age of Ultron and The Following. The middle aged white men on this panel would have you believe that comics have evolved to cater to an older, more testorerone filled audience because they're consumers, first and foremost and it's true that a lot of them have. From this rather outdated notion of what comics "have to be" comes the idea that women in comics are just some kind of novelty to serve as pleasing the old male eye. Even if the market for comics were populated solely by old men sitting at home, still clamoring for cartoon boobs like they were when they were twelve years old (which it isn't...not exclusively, anyway), that doesn't mean this is the only way it has to be. And it shouldn't be the writer/artist/creator's primary goal to enforce that. The marketing execs determine that which, in turn, trickles down to the editor-in-chief and then, eventually, to the talent. The job of artists in any art form is to say something and even with capitalism's tyrannical head looming over mainstream media, respect and admiration will come to any artist who even tries to represent the people, man or woman, who are willing to listen.

Why People Should Suck It Up and Get Over the Iron Man 3 Thing (SPOILERS AHEAD).....

Seriously, there are SPOILERS in here. Last chance.

Well, Iron Man 3 has finally come and, as I predicted within 15 seconds of seeing the big Mandarin reveal, the entire internet fell on the floor kicking and screaming like children (Bell Biv Devoe calls that "the crybaby"). For those of you that don't care about seeing this movie, but want to know what I'm talking about, here's the breakdown.

The movie version of the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is the (white) supposed head of a terrorist organization known as the Ten Rings, the same group that held Tony Stark captive in the first movie. Stark infiltrates the Mandarin's home only to discover that he is actually a drunken, drug addicted British actor named Trevor Slattery, who is just a front for Aldridge Killian (Guy Pearce) and A.I.M.'s war profiteering scam. At some point throughout Killian's final battle with Iron Man, he screams "I am the Mandarin!!!" Denzel Washington Training Day style.

As a result of this twist in the narrative, as I said before, the internet lost its collective mind because they didn't get a RDJ/Ben Kingsley superpowered slugfest even though the slugfest they got instead was FUCKING AWESOME. The thing about comic nerds is that they're very random about how and when they decide a movie's handling of the source material is careless. X-Men First Class was taken seriously, the Scarecrow got beaten up by Katie Holmes, Dr. Doom was basically portrayed as Donald Trump with superpowers and Ghost Rider got two movies. But somehow, THIS is just too much to handle. To understand why this is a silly grievance, you have to understand who the Mandarin is in the comics.

Depending on the writer, the details have changed slightly over the years, but basically the Mandarin was a Chinese man, oppressed by Chairman Mao, who stumbled upon alien technology in the form of ten powerful rings and used them to become an evil would-be conqueror. An evil Chinese would-be conqueror who looks, dresses and talks like a villain from a Shaw Brothers kung fu movie.

In other words....this guy.

Over the years, they've changed his clothes and motives for hating Iron Man, but as far as his goals and ideologies, long story short....this could be considered pretty fucking racist. In 2013, with the borderline xenophobic political climate, there is just no way in Hell you can market this to a worldwide audience with children in good conscience. None. Granted, I'm not saying that you HAVE to characterize the Mandarin this way to do it justice, but it IS racially problematic for Marvel and, ultimately, Disney. If they cast a Chinese guy, the Asian community would quite possibly maul the studio and rightfully so. If Ben Kingsley's version (dressed the way he was) had been a superpowered badass, the movie would have been accused of "whitewashing" a Chinese character and we saw how that worked out for M. Night Shaymalamadingdong with The Last Airbender. Or you can write the Mandarin out altogether, but then you have C-List Iron Man baddies like the Living Laser. Sorry, but outside of comic book, no studio exec in the universe thinks Living Laser is a good name for a movie villain.

My point here is that Shane Black handled the "Mandarin" issue in the most realistically feasible way possible. So suck it up.