Friday, May 23, 2008

Dance!

Confession time. I love the show So You Think You Can Dance, Fox's summertime replacement for American Idol. They started advertising for it about 2 months ago during Idol (yes, I still watch and you can ask me why till the cows come home and I'd still not be able to come up with a good answer). Just seeing the commercials made me excited. They used the song, "I Wanna Dance With Somebody", which can be an awful or great song depending on the artist.

Now I thought this song was pure cheese when I was younger - mainly because it was in heavy rotation as one of 5 songs on VH1 (yes! they played videos once!) and was performed by Whitney Houston, who, ironically is one of the worst dancers I've ever seen. She spends the majority of the video either watching other people dance or mildly bouncing.

*I would be able to provide video here if I were a more talented blogger, but YouTube won't let me have it. If you're that curious, go look up Whitney Houston and the song.

I saw David Byrne do a brilliant cover of this song years ago in Austin and couldn't believe the difference. Stripped of the irritating synth noises and hand claps, this was a catchy song that ACTUALLY made you want to dance.



Early season (season 2?) American Idol contestant Jennifer Fuentes also attempted "I Wanna Dance With Somebody" with hilarious results. Accompanied by only a piano (yes, at one point American Idol had a budget), the song took on a very high school talent show vibe. My favorite part is where, instead of editing the song around the spoken portion, she looks off to the side and says "Dance!". Good stuff.



But I greatly digress. I didn't start watching So You Think You Can Dance until last season and even then not until the final 20 round, so this is my first season watching the auditions. It seems as if they are showing us more talent and less of the bad auditions than Idol does, which I greatly appreciate. I danced for 10 years when I was growing up (ballet, tap, jazz, and modern), so I love that there's a show on that has a wide variety of styles of dance. The talent I saw last year was incredible (far better than what you get on Idol if you ask me) so I'm eager to see what this year has in store. The judging is also better. Instead of sound bytes (Randy), random insults (Simon, although he is usually correct), and unicorns (Paula), Nigel, Mary, and the guest judge manage to offer constructive criticism that is interesting to the viewer. If you are at all interested in dance (all one of you), I highly recommend this show for summertime entertainment.

Don't worry, folks, if you're bored - the League should be back soon, and then you can find out what Superman has been up to.





This post written by jamie while The League was out

Thursday, May 22, 2008

It's all mine: muahaha!

Hi ya'll. As you may have heard, while the League is taking some vay-cay in Costa Rica, he has left his blog in my hands. Boy is he dumb.

Yes, the League and Steanso are currently on a short flight to Houston and will then jet down to the jungles of Central America where they will rendezvous with their tour Howler monkey, Senor Screechy. They will be staying here, here, and here, so don't feel too sorry for them. Their first hotel sits at the base of a large volcano, but hopefully Screechy will steer them to safety should it decide to erupt.

My posts won't be as long as the League's - I do have company coming this weekend so I don't know how often I'll be able to blog, but I'll try. Mel and Lucy's cousin Cassidy is also staying with us, so we'll see how much sleep I'll get with a gaggle of dogs running around.



This post written by jamie while The League was out

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

The League Goes on Vacation

Hey Leaguers.

As you may recall, I am going to be heading to Costa Rica for a few days. I don't want to leave you guys in a lurch, but as I have no idea what the story is with internet connectivity and the fact that I hope I have enough going on that blogging isn't really a priority, you're on your own until I get back.

Now, I'm a bit terrified of the traveling. After all, Costa Rica could be full of dinosaurs and tse-tse flies the size of a helicopter. So hopefully I'll survive this voyage into the unknown.

Jamie claims she's going to keep the blog up to date, so I leave this place in her capable hands until I return. So ya'll keep Jamie company. Give her a shot, and hopefull she'll be able to keep you amused in my absence.

I should be back and posting by next Thursday, at the latest.

I just hope my trip to the jungle will be this exciting:

New Comic Suggestion: Guardians of the Galaxy

Hey, Leaguers!

Last week a new title debuted from Marvel, and as the series is just starting, I thought I'd suggest "Guardians of the Galaxy".

The series is about a band of space-faring adventurers who, after a series of messy cosmic cataclysms decide to actually get organized and fight THREATS IN SPACE. In the classic action tradition, it's a band of rag-tag adventurers who have little in common other than that they have a mission.



Its entirely possible that the series is a bit too wrapped up in Marvel continuity for new readers, but I think series writers Abnett and Lanning do a pretty good job of making the first issue accessible (and, yeah, I think Marvel is actually far worse about continuity being an issue to new readers these days than DC).

The team includes a lot of familiar faces from the recent annihilation series, including Drax, Gamora, and the characters from the Star Lord mini-series. And that means ROCKET RACCOON (one of my favorite Marvel characters of all time). Nova makes an appearance, but is not on the team.

Mostly, the series seems like it will be fun. And The League is always looking for FUN IN SPACE. The dialog is sharp, the art is pretty nifty, and the characters just work very well together (some of whom suggest a certain light tough to the series). And, so far, it looks like the story is pointed in an interesting direction.

Apparently there was a previous series or two called Guardians of the Galaxy, which was dreamed up by the amazing Gene Colan. But, you know, I have a hard time keeping up with every darn comic that ever saw the light of day.

Anyhow, give it a shot.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

The League Watches: Chronicles of Narnia - Prince Caspian

After the rush that was completing the 3 film cycle of "Lord of the Rings", getting through yet another adventure of Harry Potter (the boy wizard who collects doom like stamps), and wrapping up Lucas's 6 film Star Wars cycle... it didn't seem at all a bad idea that Disney produce the entire run of the well-loved CS Lewis children's novels, "The Chronicles of Narnia".

Before seeing "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", I actually bothered to read the book. In, like, an hour. It's a kids book, and its pretty short.

Also, for some reason I ate Arby's before going to the movie, and that was just a bad call. I go there, like, once a year, and I genuinely felt ill when I walked out the door.

*** SPOILERS THROUGHOUT ****

I've never read Prince Caspian, and I didn't plow through it before Jamie and I headed off for the matinee today, so I didn't have much in the way of expectations. I'd given the previous movie a solid "B". It was entertaining, the effects were convincing enough, and I thought Tilda Swinton was good. The kids were typical kiddie actors, mostly going through the motions rather than seeming to have any internal combustion going to really convince you that they were doing much but going along for the ride.

"Prince Caspian" is a very different story, and the land of Narnia has had the magic sucked right out of it by some vaguely Spanish humans, and the whole place has become a subplot for a better movie. Perhaps "The Two Towers", which it shamelessly lifts from throughout.

The kids are older, but their acting chops haven't improved much. The gentleman cast as the titular Prince Caspian is the sort of non-threatening pretty boy you expect out of a movie series this Disneyfied, without resorting to CW-style casting.

The plot basically revolves around a very-Hamletish power grab by Prince Caspian's uncle, whose name I never caught... but, man... can that guy do Evil Movie Tyrant #2 with the best of 'em. No scenery was free of teeth marks. The power grab leads to Caspian ducking out of the castle, which looks quite a bit like a LOTR castle, and running away. Which will become a theme throughout the movie. Caspian and Co. run away at every available opportunity.

For some reason, Caspian's fleeing causes the Evil Uncle to declare war on woods he should believe are almost entirely empty. I'm not really clear on the story, and mentioned to Jamie about an hour in "I have no idea what's going on". So I'd hate to make any conjecture that isn't accurate. Caspian blows the horn of Gondor, which summons the four kids from the last movie back to Middle Earth. Or Gondor. Where they team-up with Peter Dinklage (the respectable little person actor), and discover its been some time since they were last in Gondor. And now they're stuck fighting with Spanish conquistadors.

I didn't particularly care for the movie. Jamie suggested I entitle the review "Prince Cat-Stain". But, I told her, I don't work blue. She had a few other suggestions, but none of them were any more flattering than "Prince Cat-Stain". But that'll give you an idea of how it went.

I am guessing that the novel of Prince Caspian, like LOTR was to The Hobbit, much more complicated than its predecessor. Thus, its all about cramming in everyone's favorite scenes, advancing the plot whether it makes sense or not, and getting to the fight scenes, already.

In case you missed the press around the last Narnia movie, we're to understand that there's some religious allegory going on here. And, indeed, the last movie must have seemed a bit too subtle for the audience. As much as the plot seems full of inferences and non-sequitirs from a narrative standpoint, each hint about the nature of faith comes down like a bag of hammers.

The movie comes in at a glacial 2+ hours. I'm not sure, exactly, where things went off the rails here, but once your audience is aware of the situation (or as informed as the filmmakers ever make us), spending an hour watching your heroes sort things out is simply cumbersome. And dragging out poorly choreographed fight scenes isn't good for anybody.

Probably due to the time constraints, and therefore rushed scripting and poor editing... the movie has a few scenes which just sort of happen and make no sense. Somehow the four Brit kids know all about prince Caspian and his plight, when nothing which occurs before that scene would lead the kids to know anything about Caspian or his plans. There's another odd scene in which there's some grafitti on a cart, and the Ming-like bad-guy uses this an excuse to get his general to kill three his men... and it... makes no sense. (Plus, wow... how is that going to help morale?)

Like I said, there were large portions of the movie I simply wasn't following. There's a pretty large assumption you know the first movie very well, as well as that you're going to make assumptions about royal lineage, military maneuvering, political fact-mashing for personal gain, etc... noen of which is really outright explained. It just sort of happens.

Also, Narnia kicks ass. It's full of talking bears, minotaurs, and looks like a Dokken album cover. The kids are given royal authority over all the animals, and get to live for, like, a hundred years and wear really neat armor. So why, on earth, do they head back at the ends of these movies? That's a sucker's game.

I continue to find the mix of pagan iconography within the Narnia movie a bit baffling. It seems odd that Harry Potter and Co. take a hit in the Bible Belt, but this mish mash is okie dokey.

Perhaps somewhat more bizarre is the Aslan death clause of the movies, which depicts the teenaged heroes dispatching soldier after soldier with no qualms, all in the name of Aslan. I guess the lion is supposed to be a cuddlier version of Jesus, so we're supposed to buy into the idea that we should be stabbing people who are browner than you (yeah, I found the ethnic casting of the baddies a bit... unnecessary) for our God-allegory. Which... wow.

Further, Aslan in this film sort of talks like a huge, toothy fortune cookie. Stating things like "Things don't happen the same way twice". Which he says twice. And, apparently he never really feels like he owes his long-suffering people an explanation as to why he (God) abandoned his people to the horrible Spanish people for 1300 years, only to return when it was absolutely necessary to the plot.

Was Aslan off in Gondor on some much needed vay-cay? Appearing in a tortilla on Endor? Apparently he's a capricious allegory.

The message of "faith" in the story, at least as framed by the makers of this film, is that it doesn't do anyone but the four little white kids a lick of good. Holding out for 1300 years for a break seems like an awfully long stretch, and one couldn't really blame the Narnians for maybe thinking Aslan had turned his back on them as he reportedly left Narnia right after the heads of state, and allowed a mass extermination of the happy talking animals.

In addition, there's a bit telling the viewer that not jumping off a cliff to certain doom is demonstrating a lack of faith. Which... what? What kind of crazy religious allegory is Aslan running here? Despite their faith in lion/ Jesus, our heroes also run away at every opportunity. I don't think at any point in the action do they stand their ground. They're quite cowardly. Apparently jumping to your death is expected by Aslan, but holding your ground in battle to protect Aslan's kingdom is a bit up in the air.

He moves in mysterious ways, indeed.

From a narrative standpoint, I'm not going to write the filmmakers a blank check because they're playing the religious allegory card. Either your allegory works, or it doesn't. And I thought this movie did a pretty poor job of doing much but dispensing mixed messages and reinforcing some not terribly Christ-like ideals, like killing folks. Putting religion out there doesn't make your narrative bullet-proof, and, honestly, I would expect more out of the film-makers as per a sense of responsibility to the viewer in maintaining a clear message.

All in all, whatever worked in the first movie just falls apart in Prince Caspian. And there seemed to be some commentary of the wisdom of pre-emptive military strikes not going the way you think they will, which I wondered if I was the only one noticing that...

I did not like the constant jokes about the little people/ dwarfs being short. Including a belabored scene between a mouse and poor, poor Peter Dinklage. And teh bad guys all wore 300-inspired masks which looked like their Ming-like leader and his "look, I'm evil" Satan-inspired chin slinky.

Add in items lifted from LOTR such as set design, story elements and sequences like the Ents... and, it was kind of embarassing. And the end dragged and dragged. And was, for reasons I can't put my finger on, unintentionally hilarious.

Bleh.

I want my afternoon back.

A Century of Jimmy Stewart

May 20th marks the 100th birthday of actor Jimmy Stewart.

The League has has his list of actors about whom he is a bit fannish, and Mr. Stewart is right at the top of that list. In fact, when we were in college and took "Acting for Non-Drama Majors", we were asked to name our favorite actor, and I named Jimmy Stewart (almost everyone else named Al Pacino, which I found hilarious).

Mr. Stewart not only acted in films and television for decades, he was also a decorated soldier during World War II where he served as a pilot of B-17's and B-24's in the Army Air Corps.



I will point you to the Jimmy Stewart Museum website for a biography. And to IMDB for a synopsis of his film roles.

The truth is that I've only seen a small fraction of Mr. Stewart's work.

Made for Each Other
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Destry Rides Again
The Philadelphia Story
It's a Wonderful Life
Winchester '73
Harvey
Rear Window
The Spirit of St. Louis
Vertigo
Anatomy of a Murder
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

"Harvey" is still a favorite, and I highly recommend it. And, of course, I really dig "Vertigo". But if "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" doesn't fill you with a desire to dress in red, white and blue, you, sir, hate America. And, worse, if you don't get choked up a bit at the end of "It's a Wonderful Life" (and I don't care how many times you've seen it), your heart is made of stone.



So a special League thanks to day to Mr. Stewart.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Back from Radiohead/ Houston

Jamie and I are back from a fun-filled weekend at the folks' in beautiful Spring, Texas.

We drove in Friday afternoon with Mel in tow. Jeff and Lucy stayed here with house-mate Nicole, whom, I believe, amused the pets all weekend with puppet shows and a song and dance routine to the music of Rodgers & Hammerstein.

Saturday, Steven and Lauren joined us at stately Steans Manor for swimming, burgers and Lauren getting mauled by Mel when she got between my swimming pal and a pool toy. Sorry about that, Lauren. You'll heal eventually. But it seems like Mel had fun swimming.

Jennifer K. and Jason showed up, The Admiral threw some burgers on the grill and KareBear outdid herself in the food prep and meal-time arrangements department. Well done, parental units!

The Radiohead show itself was great. It was two solid hours of Radioheadishness. Almost nothing in the way of banter (which, believe me, I appreciate), a great stage set up and light show. And the crowd was appreciative without fawning.

I should mention that Thom Yorke is an amazing dancer.


The brightly lit hues of Radiohead's stage show

If you look at the audience, I think you can also see a lot of little blue lights in the picture. I didn't realize that recording shows on your cell phone was now considered perfectly normal. And I don't recall any statements warning us NOT to record the show. I guess either Radiohead doesn't care, or the RIAA is really giving up.

We got back to my folks' house around 12:15 or so. Lauren and Steven stayed for a while, and we all ended up staying up too late.

This morning we all got up very, very late. Then headed out for breakfast. Unfortunately, this meant our schedule was screwed up and we didn't make the planned journey down to Shannon and Josh's house in Meyerland before heading out of town.

So, Josh and Shannon, I owe you one.

Anyway, home again, home again, jiggity jog. Now I've got to plan for the week ahead and getting myself off to Costa Rica.

Hope o

Friday, May 16, 2008

A few items of no import

(a) Have you looked at CNN.com lately? They've added a feature where you can click a link and get a T-shirt printed with the headline of certain stories, complete with the CNN logo.

At what point did CNN realize that the time honored tradition of creating the bizarre (and therefore appealing) headline had crossed over to an artform of the surreal? How far is the jump from CNN.com to The Onion?

Obviously (or perhaps not so obviously) they aren't doing this with hard-hitting news, but right now the following seem to be available.

-Lawmakers say its time to tax porn
-Navy plebes scale greased obelisk
-Secret UFO files released to the public
-Legions of half-inch frogs invade town

CNN is still covering actual news on the front page, but its interesting to see them embracing the tabloid side of journalism.

(b) Here's an article that expands on some of what I was talking about in a post a few days ago. It discusses why Marvel seems to be able to have a good game when it comes to bringing movies to the screen, whereas DC Comics struggles when the connection to the studio should be a pipeline.

I don't entirely agree with the article, and I sort of roll my eyes when I see statements in print like "Marvel has always been one step ahead of DC". But I DO think its interesting how the author mentions the culture of Marvel vs. that of DC and how the differences can be reflected in how they've handled the move to major motion pictures. And I do agree with his conclusion.

(c) We're headed out for Radiohead in Houston tomorrow, leaving Lucy and Jeff in the care of erstwhile house-mate Nicole. Wish Nicole luck. Lucy is one pushy little busy-body, and Jeff is prone to strange fits of purring/ suddenly biting.

At the moment, however, we are having a nice moment. Jeff is literally squished between me and Lucy on the sofa. Unfortunately, I can't take a picture because my phone is charging on the kitchen counter, and if I get up, they'll both move.

(d) the weather here the past two nights was really bad. Reports have come in that League-Pal Matt had to take his car in for extensive body work, etc... after his car was sort of demolished by "grape-fruit sized" hail.

I had wanted to clean out our garage before this point in the year, when the really scary weather can suddenly blow in, but its still full of all kinds of stuff, and I just haven't done it. I hope our cars do not get destroyed.

Texas weather can be nothing, if not exciting. Living in Arizona, I was amazed at the predictability of the weather. Whatever the weather folks said would happen usually did. You didn't feel like you actually needed to check the weather all the time. And, in fact, the weather segment on the evening news was always very, very brief. Not so much here in Texas. And, it sounds like, across a lot of the US this year.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Stray Thought of the Day: Ewoks are Evil

Hey...

In "Return of the Jedi", remember how the Ewoks had captured our band of adventurers and were taking them back to their village? If it were not for Luke's quick use of the force and C3PO's improvisation as a minor diety, weren't the Ewoks going to cook and EAT Luke, Han, Chewie and the others?

Logically, can we assume then that the Ewoks may have had some success eating previous interlopers to the forest? Such as the contract crew which would have had to come to Endor to build the shield generator? And, possibly, the Storm Troopers themselves?

One has to wonder, then, if when the Rebels and Ewoks allied in the 3rd reel if the Ewoks weren't just thinking "it sure is neat how this meal is helping us catch a whole bunch of other meals! Why, when we're done consuming the white-shelled ones, we can use their head-shells as bowls or drums!" And, also, were Han and Co. not foolish for so easily trusting the little monsters once C3PO had won their freedom? After all, they had to still look quite succulent to the beady little eyes of the Ewok village.


Chief Chirpa points to the proper location for the chips, veggie tray and Rack of Solo.

Perhaps it is only our genetic predisposition to see small, cute things with big eyes as innocent that keeps us blind to the menace beneath the leather hood (what kind of leather? Dried and tanned Storm Trooper flesh?).

Perhaps the Storm Troopers were in the right to want to kill themselves an Ewok, so as not to wind up as a main dish at some feast (surely blasting with the tunes of Meco).

You also kind of have to wonder how awful the 6 movie series would have wrapped up if Luke had met his fate as a casserole.


Wicket found most of the meal delectable, but the large, furry one was a bit chewie.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

The Unemployment Chronicles: Things I have realized from watching TV

From American Idol to the shows where people compete to become a dancer on a cruise line, it seems all of these shows have bizarre fashion and hair stylists who make-over the contestants to look like nothing resembling people on the street. And the contestants are forced, by contract, to go along with the bizarre styling choices of the show's staff. If not true, the only common denominator for people (specifically dudes) who make it on reality game shows is that they all use spackle to hold their hair-do's together and, in their regular life as the guy who re-fills the lettuce at the salad bar at Applebee's. Also, the Hollywood approved "urban" outfits that one normally only see on commercials.

All Soap Opera characters are dangerous to themselves and each other.

In the past decade, Jerry Springer has done nothing but up his game exponentially.

The Writers Guild strike has left the evening TV schedule a lonely and bleak place for the remainder of the summer.

I don't care if Astros games are occurring on the West Coast. I don't want to start watching a game at 9:15pm.

When it comes to new episodes, Mythbusters is on an erratic and unfathomable release schedule.

Not all reality shows about people chasing ghosts around in empty houses are equal.

The non-romantic pairing of Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin is the best pairing on TV comedy today. Except for maybe Tracy and Kenneth. Also on the same show. So, hey, an episode of 30 Rock is a pretty good bet for your TV dollar.

"Raiders" holds up a lot better than "Temple of Doom". There are a lot of problems with "Temple of Doom", from mild racism/ white man's burden type stuff, to the inane antics of Kate Capshaw as wacky vocalist, Willi Scott. One wonders if Spielberg weren't so enamored of Capshaw, would he have left so much of her in the final product.

The new ads they have on during day time TV shows and late, late night TV shows make me want to go to technical college and fulfill my destiny as a 20-something woman in scrubs handling charts.

American Idol is rigged. For no apparent reason. Well, not entirely rigged, and I think I know why they want to manipulate the results to an extent. And his name is Taylor Hicks.

There is an amazing amount of TV on each day wherein they discuss the ongoing lives of "entertainers" whose work I have never seen or heard.

Somebody, somewhere is excited about the "Sex in the City" movie, but we don't know who that person is. I assume its the same people who sit home with their cats pretending that the show reflects their lifestyle in some way. Who will rent the movie or buy it at Target.

The dogs don't really watch TV. Even when you explain the plot to them.

All Lifetime Network movies were filmed between 1991-1994 and star women who look sorta familiar, but you can't place.

Telenovella actors have taken vaudevillian melodrama to a whole new level that American soap actors can't even begin to match. It's almost like a life or death struggle to see who can chew the most scenery.




And, hey, feel free to add your own observations.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Wow. Just... wow.

Democrat who won't vote for Obama because he's a Muslim. Go here.

I am not in favor of any kind of written test in order to be allowed to vote. But, c'mon, America... work with me here.

Superman Red/ Superman Blue

Over the weekend, DC Comics revealed that they are planning a mini-series to be released in the weeks leading up to the very real 2008 presidential election. The series will be entitled "DCU: Decisions".

Here for a Newsarama interview with DCU Editor-in-Chief, Dan Didio.

"Decisions" is supposed to define the political leanings of various folks within the DCU. I assume we'll see some folks pop out exactly as previously defined. Green Arrow as the lefty, Green Lantern as his right-swinging pal. Hawkman coming out as a firm GOP'er. Ambush Bug as a registered Democrat.


See..!

A large part of me wonders about the wisdom of bothering to identify the political leanings of characters from whom you're trying to derive a profit. Had this been the months leading up to the highly devisive 2004 election, I would have felt Didio and Co. had lost their marbles altogether.

Politics are almost always only mentioned in some super-villainous light in super-hero comics. In 2000, Lex Luthor took the Oval Office (with Pete Ross, Superman's boyhood chum, as VP). The story seemed a bit forced, but was mostly intended to put Lex not just completely outside of Superman's grasp as a deputized officer of the law, but to give Lex the one thing he'd always wanted: the adoration of the people/ almost unlimited power.

The story didn't really bounce off of devotees of either side of the aisle too badly as Lex ran as a third party candidate, and pretty much tried to act as President as he had as CEO of LuthorCorp.

It's worth noting that real life events, such as 9-11 and the real-life US's entry into Iraq and Afghanistan, are mentioned mostly in allegory in the comics.

Anyway, Lex left office under less than ideal circumstances. Whether he achieved his goals, foreign and doemstic, seems unlikely.


Unlike Nixon, Lex knew how to leave office with a little panache

Unfortunately, I can't shake the notion that the continuity nutty and emotionally stunted fans of super-hero-dom in comics will handle the series with acomplete lack of the perspective that Didio is assuming that reasonable and mature adults are supposed to keep in mind when discussing politics. I've been on the message boards.

In short, I think that with "Decisions", DC is opening the door for a series that's just going to welcome people to abruptly turn on some of their characters when they find out that, say, Cyborg votes Libertarian. And, in the long run, that's going to cause DC some readers/ dollars.

No matter the intention of the series, people come to politics with a boatload of pre-conceived notions about "the other guys". Even today, as Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama continue the drudgery of the 2008 campaign to clinch the Democratic Nomination, the actual policy differences are fairly limited. Most of the discrepancy is in how each candidate wants to achieve the exact same goals. Yet, right now the Democratic party is suffering major upheavals as the schizm causes silly in-fighting so "our guy" can win instead of "your guy".

Apply that to a system with essentially two parties. Each has significant platform differences and where they DO agree, they might choose vastly different paths for achieving the same outcomes. No big deal, but for those of us who didn't snooze their way through 2001-2004 and how unnecessarily uncivilized it became, I'm foreseeing a lot of unhappiness with readership if these real-life political wedges are driven into their super-heroes. Isn't fighting off Despero enough? Ithat a school voucher issue?

The DC Universe is populated with characters who the reader is supposed to like. Even Ollie Queen (Green Arrow) and his nutty liberalism could be embraced by right-wingers, as Ollie can be a caricature of the beatnik with half-baked ideas. It's not too far off from how conservatives caricature liberals to begin with. Especially a limousine liberal like billionaire Ollie Queen. In the end, everyone can find something to like.

However, most of the characters aren't so well defined, and DC has carefully side-stepped getting in too much political discussion over the years. I had assumed that this tac was taken so that anyone could just assume that the hero(es) they've chosen to follow might fall in with their own basic set of beliefs. All are do-gooders, all lend a helping hand to those who need it, just as most folks would like to believe they would. If they had heat-vision.

This isn't necessarily limited to comics. When one considers the characters on TV, how often does one think about the political affiliations of their favorite sitcom characters? The characters may occasionally express some political notions, but the characters are usually portrayed as center of the road quite intentionally, so as to keep the viewership within a large tent and ensure the show reaches all kinds of audiences.

Defining, say, Aquaman, as a member of the Democrats may surprise right-leaning readers who had otherwise not given the matter much thought (I have no idea what party Aquaman would throw in with. He'd be a nut for environmental matters, but as a monarch... well... it just seems that he wouldn't buy much into all this voting business, anyway.). Why give your audience an opportunity to suddenly question their own loyalty to a character? Especially these days, when loyalty is largely what's keeping the DCU afloat.

Further, why take the opportunity to further define and explore the characters away from writers/ editors/ etc... who will handle the character in the future? Writers are not without their own biases. If I, as a writer, believe that all GOPers think Alaska serves no purpose but as a place to drill for oil, and Red Tornado has been cast as a Republican, can I write a story about Reddy fighting off evil corporate merchants hellbent on destroying the Alaskan wilderness for fun and profit?

My hope is that the "Decisions" series will explore the heroes while keeping the discussion open ended and friendly, just as its often fascinating to learn more about your own friends of all different political stripes. Part of why I became a DC fan was that, as I became an adult and found myself in the workplace, I recognized the JLA, the JSA, and the partnership between Batman and Superman for what it was... people putting aside their differences, and even their motivations, to work toward a common cause. Where Marvel's FF had unbreakable family bonds and a cosmic accident which forged their team, the JLA had only their intentions and good-will to pull them together. Where the X-Men were a team of folks banding together to fight a common cause by accident of their birth (which I still see as a great set-up), the JSA pulled together, at least initially, as a domestic front to battle our WWII enemies. That dynamic, which reflected a friendly working relationship was easier for me to identify with than the Steans Clan being bathed in cosmic rays, and JLA became something I could relate to.

If the "Decisions" series is complex enough, if it takes the time to explore and appreciate nuance... then there's a place for this series beyond the shrill point-counterpoint of the cable news networks and their talking heads. Do I think DC can actually pull that off...?

I have my doubts. It a 4-issue series with two writers which Didio has promised have diametrically opposing viewpoints. Part of my wariness may be taste, given the two writers they've listed. Neither of whom I particularly trust.

Right now, I'm also not ready for DC's PR push on this one and the inevitable, attention getting headlines during an election year: "Wonder Woman a LaRouche Democrat?"

Yurgh.

Last year, Marvel's epic "Civil War" painted a picture of government obedience for masked vigilantes. Some have accused the DCU of following suit with a devisive topic, but I never felt that Marvel's "analogy" really worked. After all, it seems unlikely that in any universe that laws would not be passed managing crime-fighting. Or that crime-fighting without a license of some sort wouldn't be looked upon a bit suspiciously by law-enforcement and the citizenry alike. If the analogy was supposed to be about getting on-board because the government says so, they needed something a bit trickier than the story they presented. And it's possible that "Decisions" will be all too concrete and preachy.

Mostly, I worry about defining any of DC's Big 3 (Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman) in any political light. As law-eforcing (and somewhat abiding) do-gooders, one could paint the characters either way. And, in my opinion, part of the attraction of such larger-than-life figures is that all 3 characters have well-developed personalities, given the current writing, and the writers (and fans) would have an idea as to the opinions of the Trinity on any given topic. But rather than discuss those topics, the characters can express their beliefs through their actions, staying above the petty squabbling of political discourse. After all, none of the three ever stopped to ask a politicians to take on crime, social injustice, etc... They've always simply acted where others have not. That's the ideal for the costumed, crime-fighting, super-hero, anyway. Respecting the law while always being forced to live just outside of it in order to do what others cannot.

To complicate matters, many superheroes, especially Batman and Superman, were born out of the issues and circumstances of the Depression, with a huge dose of the idealism that comes with youth (Siegel and Shuster were in their mid-20's when Superman hit the stands for the first time. As were Bob Kane and Bill Finger when Batman first appeared.). Crime was rampant, families still fought poverty, and the world was in a precarious political position. However, in the post WWII years, and thanks to editorial codes, increased marketing, and various other influences, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman each changed greatly. Just as they would again and again, reflecting the time and place in which they were written.

I have my personal opinions. And occasionally you'll see them in print here at The League. I also see how certain characters are defined by their actions and how they've been written for years. And I'm comfortable with that. I also believe in followong one of the basic rules of writing a narrative: show, don't tell. "DCU Decisions" seems to be doing exactly the opposite of all that.

And, honestly, having my opinions of each character's political leanings hasn't ever taken away my enjoyment of the comics.

I personally don't talk politics here because I believe in a big tent, just like those sit-com producers. But, like the JLA, I also think most folks who come to The League can agree on end results, if not the way we get there. And when we can't agree on those end-results, on what we really, really want.... well, hopefully we can hear each other well enough to agree to disagree and move on. Nothing that can't be smoothed out on with a good sit on the back porch with a drink.

After all, just as Supermans Red and Blue learned... there are two ways to do everything, and when they work together... they end all crime, solve all social injustice, and each get a girl of their dreams.

Leaguers... behold. Two sides, working together: Superman Red/ Superman Blue



Make of that what you will.

Monday, May 12, 2008

The Understated Brilliance of Sesame Street


Denyce Graves and Elmo


Somehow the "Grover as Waiter" skits had a profound impact on me as a child, leading to some sort of pre-school existential despair as I commiserated with Grover's lot in life.


This is sort of how I understand the classics, anyway.


DeNiro and Elmo

Sunday, May 11, 2008

The League Reviews: Speed Racer - The Next Generation

I was asked by some nice folks at the same marketing company that had me review "New Frontier" if I'd review a DVD of what I think is the pilot of the new TV series "Speed Racer: The Next Generation". I haven't seen the new feature film of Speed Racer, but I thought I'd pop in this DVD and give it a whirl.

I knew it was going to be a trouble when the low-fi credits rolled and the writers were listed as "Jimmy Palmiotti and Justin Gray", the DC Comics writing team who never met a cliche they didn't like. The opening is horrible CG with a re-imagined Southern California rockin' take on the great Speed Racer theme, that literally sounds like a guy, his guitar, and Garage Band. Its... not good.

But, I confess to a warm place in my heart for DJ Keoki's inspired circa 1993 club re-mix of the Speed Racer theme.

So, after the credits? Yeah, uhm... it never really gets better.

The premise is that a young man of the name "Speed" arrives at a "racing academy" of some sort which is run by the now middle-aged and oddly grandfatherly Spritle. "Speed" gets hassled by upper-classmen who are mean, because that's what happens in these coming of age stories, in order for our hero to have an external as well as an internal struggle. There's a quest to become the best racer, and despite the fact that Speed seems like a nice guy, pretty much everybody has it in for him but his wacky roommate with a deep, deep crush on Speed Racer (who also built a robotic Chim-Chim), and some busy body girl whose significance is never really fleshed out.

And, as with the original Speed Racer, the fate of the world seems to be hanging somehow in the balance of the who is the best race car driver in the minds of all the characters.

The animation is some sort of odd mix of CG and what looks like Flash. Or something. And I'm not kidding when I say this, but the character design and animation both really, really reminded me of Planet Unicorn (ed note: I feel bad about bagging on Planet Unicorn. Its actually a lot like the educational comics I remember getting in elementary school on the dangers of THC, or the recent comic we got from the vert on flea control. As in, "well, it's recognizably a person, and my art-student kid needs the work, so we're forging ahead"). I mean, its really, insanely bad.

The vehicular animation sorta looked like someone with 3D Studio Max and some free time. Its the sort of stuff that truly does seem as if it were designed as some sort of web freebie. And, honestly, if I thought that this was the future of animation, I would despair.

There's some particularly crappy CG in a portion where the laws of time and space breakdown and Speed drives on a "virtual track". Its tough to explain, because it makes no sense and sucks, but the animation here is a weird mix of bad CG and, maybe, Q-Bert.

Also, Speed has an oddly bad haircut. I don't know how they got to actual animation with that particular hair-don't, but it looks a bit like a ladies' haircut of some sort. Like a wedge gone bad or something.


Behold, Speed Racer Jr. and his stupid, lumpy face

It all sort of made we wonder. The quality of the original Speed Racer cartoons was always kind of iffy in both the animation and plot departments. I was never a huge fan of the original show. As I recall, it was usually just on between other cartoons, and I always felt the show was a little light on Racer X and Chim-Chim. But the show did have a particular look, which this show did nothing to preserve, even while including stock Speed Racer art in the show in various ways.

All in all, the overall cheapness of the movie just reeks of a fairly cynical money-grab on the part of Warner Bros. Which makes sense. I sort of think that's how the whole Speed Racer enterprise has been handled since they started running those E-Surance/ Speed Racer TV spots.

The voice acting is poorly directed, and uniformly flat. The guy playing Speed sounds like he's perpetually apologizing. His roommate (Gordon? It's been twenty minutes, and already I can't remember), is shrill and irritating. But no matter the scene, all of the voice actors use exactly the same intonation. Its weird, and kind of reminiscent of when people make funny Flash movies on their own and just do the voices themselves or get a girl from their class to speak in one of the parts.

There's an odd Luke Skywalker storyline to this story, which Palmiotti and Gray go ahead and acknowledge early on in the movie. In fact, the only thing I really liked about the movie was when the characters would occasionally make comments on the action, which seemed to almost acknowledge the lack of effort on the part of all hands.

Whatever magic folks might have felt the original series contained isn't part of the equation here. Even the races feel dull and lifeless. What was considered to be life-or-death struggles in the original series is reduced to some sort of VR racing in this version, with cardboard cut out characters, 100% recycled plot elements and bland and/ or annoying protagonists. The family dynamic of the Racer clan is intentionally missing in order to give our hero a journey of discovery, and teh school yard setting takes away any weight that the international racing in the original series contained.

In many ways, this pilot reminded me of a lot of the first issues of comics from the post Spidey-boom of 2002 or so. Teenager with a mysterious gift gets hassled by his peers for simply existing, plus there's a shady adult businessman with dire plans for our hero. Unsurprising this might feel familiar, as few have ever accused Palmiotti and Gray of blowing readers' minds with original concepts.

I dunno. I've already thought too much about this, especially for something I'm highly suggesting you avoid.

I was going to do a give-away of Ol' Speed Racer here, but I like all of you too much, so I'm not going to force this DVD upon you.

There's also a trailer for an Avengers Babies movie on the DVD. Or Avengers Next. Or Something.

Happy Mother's Day!

Hey, Leaguers!  It's Mother's Day.  

This year I need to salute not just the two Mom's in my life (Hi KareBear and Judy!), but all of the Leaguers who have become Moms over the past few years.  

CB, Maxwell, Denise, Jilly, and all the Moms-To-Be.  I am sure I missed one or two of you, but, hey, I salute you, too.

Being a Mom is a tough job.  Just ask KareBear about raising her two hare-brained sons.  We didn't really do our part to ever make things easy.  And I don't think much ever passed without some snarky comment from Jason and myself.  Seriously, KareBear was well within her rights to pop us in the back of the head about five times a day.  

And...  I'm pretty sure Judy sort of experiences the same thing during our little visits.  She didn't lose a daughter, she gained a lump of a son-in-law.

Anyhoo, thanks to the Moms for all they do.  And a special salute to all you Leaguer Moms out there.  Hope your kids got you a card.


Saturday, May 10, 2008

Comet the Super (creepy) Horse and DC Comics Movies

Comet the Skeevy Superhorse

Randy suggested I blog on this topic: Cracked Online has identified the creepiest characters in comics. And, yeah, they knock it out of the park.

Of all Superman lore, Comet the Superhorse is probably the number one concept I just can't get behind. In case you don't click over, here's the rundown:
In order to make Supergirl appeal even more to the little girl audience of the 50's and 60's, they gave Supergirl a pony. Just as she had a cute little kitty with superpowers (Streaky the Supercat, who was actually hilarious on the recent Krypto cartoon), and Superman had Krypto and Beppo*, it seemed a pony was a good idea. What could go wrong?

Really, Comet is a study in "sometimes the simple ideas are the best", and you really don't need to muck about with the winning super-pet formula. But, this is comics, and in the world of comics, why have a lovely idea when you can have a really convoluted and bizarre idea?

Somewhere along the lines, Mort Weisinger fell asleep at the editorial wheel and Comet the Superhorse went from being a cute horse with powers to having a secret origin which revealed that he was once Centaur who had been transmorgified into a horse. And lusted for Supergirl. And would occasionally transform into a cowboy of some sort.

I dunno. It was the Silver Age.


No. Just... No.

I'm all into star-crossed lovers, but there's just something a bit creepy about a horse having romantic notions about a 16 year old girl. Or a 3000 year old Centaur who was lusting for Superman's young cousin. And, really, any way you slice it, I think Superman should have been going after Superhorse with a Super shotgun.

Also, they mention Terry Long, who even when I first saw him in the first Teen Titans story I ever read, I found a little skeevy, and I never understood the Donna Troy/ Terry Long romance and what the hell the editors were thinking.


*According to trusted site Wikipedia, Beppo was also a name for monstrous Nazi evil-bastard doctor guy Josef Mengele. I am... without words. Here. And here.

DC can't get a movie out, but Iron Man made $100 million its first weekend

Ah, DC Comics. It's not enough that DC Comics are the wallflower comics in the comic shops. For the past ten years, Marvel has been putting out profitable movie after profitable movie, all while Warner Bros. has been sitting on their sub-divison, DC Comics, unable to figure out how to bring anyone but Superman and Batman to the big screen.

Randy sent along this article, which takes a quick look at DC's stalled efforts while Marvel has another bonafide hit on their hands.

As a greater fan of DC Comics than Marvel Comics, it can be frustrating watching Marvel's characters make it to the big screen. After all, in theory, DC has had all the advantages for years. They're not licensing characters to get the movies made. In theory, they should be doing it in house. Marvel, meanwhile, should be struggling with bad deals.

According to the article, Marvel is simply decimating DC. And in a lot of ways, that's true. Especially if you go by volume of movies coming out.

And with Iron Man hitting theaters with a solid win, its tough to see DC having much success. That is, if you forget Dark Knight is coming out in a little while. And if you forget Marvel's recent efforts which may have made money, but also landed with a thud. FF2: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider, and even Spidey 3 didn't do much to get audiences terribly excited. X-Men 3 made more money than X-Men 1, but ask anyone which of the X-Movies is their favorite...

This isn't counting movies such as Daredevil, Elektra and the Hulk, all of which made some money, but which were mostly disliked. And a quick show of hands for anyone who is particularly jazzed by the trailers for the new Hulk movie?

So I'm not sure what to make of all of this, honestly.

DC should be out there trying to compete. But of their two feature film releases, Superman Returns received fairly decent critical reviews, but forgot it was supposed to be an action movie when it opened just a few days before the steamroller of Pirates of the Caribbean 2. Batman Begins continues to be a favorite. And the trailers for The Dark Knight look promising.

Attempts at a Justice League movie, which should incorporate Batman, Superman and 5 other super hero mainstays (Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Martian Manhunter, Aquaman and Flash) was scuttled after the writer's strike, ostensibly for cost reasons, but rumor control still leaked dissatisfaction with the script, and the cast listings for these iconic figures boiled down to a lot of talent which seemed more appropriate for a CW TV show than a superheroic epic.  This, of course, was getting negative web press from the comic dorks.  And I wouldn't be surprised if the studios didn't take notice (hey, we seem to be irritating our built in market...).

Speaking of the CW, the 7 seasons of Smallville will roll into an 8th season in the fall, as Smallville continues on as the highest rated show on the CW network. I wouldn't recommend the show at this point, but 8 seasons? That's got to say something fairly positive.

With Marvel Studios recent establishment and the success of Iron Man at the box office, the relationship DC has with Warner Bros., unfortunately, is seeming to become more of an albatross than a bonus. Rather than Marvel having the freedom to find the right package to get a movie off the ground with talent associated who they can guide in staying true to the concepts they're bringing to the big screen, DC is still fighting off directors and writers who are seemingly being gifted with superhero films with minimal input from DC.

The article states:

• Aquaman: "According to Comic Book Resources, the producers want to make a screwball comedy of it." • The Flash: Wedding Crashers' David Dobkin was signed to direct last year. • Green Lantern: Greg Berlanti (Brothers & Sisters, Eli Stone) is writing a script; Jack Black won't star—at least he promised as much back in 2006. • Justice League of America: "Tabled." • Superman: The Man of Steel: Director Bryan Singer's on board. Superman Returns star Brandon Routh's on board. Filming might begin "early next year," per Routh, who admittedly doesn't have the power to schedule such things. • Wonder Woman: "Sitting uncomfortably on the backburner."


-A wacky Aquaman? Any particular reason? Not enough to work with there with the Lord of the Seas, his super strength and various other powers and a largely unused environment full of all kinds of potential? I assume this is because stand up comics have been taking pokes at Aquaman for the past few years.

-A screwball comedy director for The Flash? Because that worked so well for the FF movies. I can only assume they think The Flash is a barrel of yuks, or I can't imagine what drove that decision. And while I agree that the Flash should be a huge amount of fun, letting Owen Wilson and Co. mug for the camera doesn't seem like much of a qualification. But I'd be curious to hear what the story is, first...

-Am I seeing a trend here? About four years ago it was rumored Jack Black would star in a Green Lantern movie. Once again, it seems that the now 45 year old Batman TV series seems to dictate how writers are thinking of superheroes. Its particularly disappointing when Geoff Johns is doing so much to make Green Lantern such an engaging read. And could probably hammer out an outline for a movie in about three days at this point.

-And I'm going to go out on a limb here about Whedon's Wonder Woman, but... Whedon's financial track record isn't that great. He has a small, core audience that will follow him anywhere he goes, but remember the shakiness regarding the final seasons of Buffy? The quick cancellation of Firefly? The non-existent box office for Serenity? I'm glad the man got a shot, but perhaps whatever script he handed in just wasn't looking like much to the producers but "Serenity Deux".

That said, there's a lot of room for Wonder Woman to be very, very bad. I'm not interested in seeing this movie until there's a solid script and talent behind it.

How, after 3 Spider-Man movies, Iron Man, and whatever success you want to assign to the various other Marvel movies at this point, Warner Bros. still can't help but see their potentially profitable action franchises as anything but silliness to be milked and discarded is a mystery beyond my ability to solve.

Add in what they seem interested in doing when they do get a well-written property, and you wind up with "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" (wtf?) or "V for Vendetta" (let's all be non-conformists, together!). Or the ability for things to go off the rails when the money guys get too involved (see: Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. Actually, don't.). Or they rush out a movie that's just not a good idea ("Steel". Starring Shaq. Oh, yes.).

So it doesn't do much to make me think that DC's woes as far as not meeting Marvel's output are as much of a problem as the article suggests. I would rather have fewer, better movies (and I still think Superman Returns was much better than folks gave it credit for) than a machine just dumping the DCU out onto a populace with minimal regard to quality. There's no guarantee that every Marvel flick to come will be Iron Man. There's a lot of room to go off the rails with Thor, Cap and the rest.

And if DC wants to test the waters... there's no rule that says you need to roll out the big seven. I don't think most people have a solid idea of who the heck Iron Man is/ was before the movie. So are people really going to not show up for a Blue Beetle movie if it looks fun and cool? And isn't there a great movie somewhere in there with Shazam!? Green Arrow and Black Canary? Heck, I think people would turn up for Plastic Man.

Understand, too, that WB has felt burned in the past. After the Catwoman debacle, it seems that they're aware of the potential for things to go poorly, and will do what they can to manage their properties. So while there may be a wacky Aquaman script out there, I think they're genuinely ting to do right by these characters.

Sometimes, less is more.

Now, if DC could get their comics straightened out...

Friday, May 09, 2008

Loss of Faith in Humanity/ Getting out of Town


Part of why I do not understand the world


I saw on TV the other day that Kim Kardashian, who has no skills and is famous only because of a 6th degree separation to the OJ Simpson trial (it's insanely complicated, but a quick check of Wikipedia whould clear it up) is making $25,000 a night "hosting" parties in LA.

If there were ever any time I would think God would be within his rights to smite a place from the Earth...

Gas is going to $3.60 a gallon, it costs $80,000 to get a graduate degree, the NSF is struggling for funding, schools are underfunded, and we're having food riots across the world... But somehow there's an economy in LA that says its reasonable and profitable to pay this person with a horrible "reality" show on basic cable $25K to show up and have a drink at a party. Which means, and this is the scary part, that people actually want to be at a party hosted by this person of no talent and no influence enough that the $25K will turn a profit.

The fact that the poor of LA haven't put the heads of the Kardashians and their ilk on spikes and redustributed their wealth tells me only that the American dream is mutated from work hard and it will pay off to instant wealth for becoming a personality.

Ladies and gentlemen... I ask of you... What kind of a world do we live in where Screech has to appear on Celebrity Fit Club to make ends meet and this person is making a dime?

Somebody give me my reality show, already. I'm ready to be rich. And I think America is ready to fall in love with Melbotis and his wise-cracking side-kick, Jeff the Cat.



Radiohead - Next week we're going to see Radiohead in Houston and do a bit of late Mother's Day celebrating. I'm excited.

Costa Rica - At the end of the month, The League and Jason are taking a two-man trip to lovely Costa Rica.

I'm a bit nervous. I've only ever been on one non-family oriented trip, and that was our honeymoon which was at Disneyworld. (Look, its tough coming up with stuff to do and still have access to dialysis, so shut up).

Jason and I are going to the rain forest for two days to see a large volcano and fight monkeys. The next day we're headed to the coast for a few days of drinking cheap whiskey by the shore and fighting beach monkeys.

As I mentioned, I haven't traveled much in my life and I haven't seen much of the world, so this will be very new to me. I've never even had need for a passport until this trip as I never made the college trip to Europe or went anywhere on spring break, and our "alternative lifestyle" doesn't lend itself easily to travel.

One thing that's always turned me off about vacations is that the second you mention you're even thinking of vacation, everybody comes out of the woodwork to tell you where to go, what to do, how to do it, and that no matter what you're thinking of, you're doing it wrong. And I get that. People have a good time on vacation. They want to relive their vacation by sending you on a duplicate of their vacation so they can verify that you had the same fun they had on their trip and feel that they're time away was well spent.

At least I'm now past the age where people went to Europe and came back (a) declaring how much better everything is in Europe from food to transportation to whatever, and (b) declaring how they were moving to Europe and leaving loser Americans (ie: you) behind for the greener grass of The Continent.

I confess, one of the big upsides of my trip to Disneyworld was countering this discussion with how much more ideal things are in the Magic Kingdom. The public transportation of Monorails and huge paddle boats and submarines where you can see mermaids. There's so many varieties of foods, time periods, and alternate realities. If America were more like Disneyland, things would be so much better here.

Anyway, my travel experience is extremely limited. The League has never been anywhere or done anything, and, we confess, it really gets us down sometimes, so the trip to Costa Rica is very welcome. And I am pretty sure my check from Uncle Sam intended to stimulate the American economy is going to be going to fruity, girly drinks in some cabana on a beach.

And that, Leaguers, is as close as you're going to see me sticking it to the man.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Your daily recommended allowance of awesome

Isabella Rossellini, who is certainly a DITMTLOD, has created a series of short films describing the mating rituals of various insects.

Leaguers, I link you to: Green Porno

I forewarn you, the language is a little crass, and Isabella is at the peak of her powers as she portrays each insect going about their, ahem, business. All while wearing outfits that look like they came from the drama department of a state university putting on some sort of buggy summer stock production.


Isabella wants you to "bee" yourself.

Items for Wednesday

ITEM! Randy finds a strip that is all too accurate.

ITEM! It's only taken, like, two years, but they're finally wrapping up the "Last Son" storyline in Action Comics Annual #11 coming out this week. Great googledy-moogledy. I'd heard the Kubert Brother working on this had "health" problems that kept him from working on this comic and getting it in on time. He also helps run the Joe Kubert School of Cartooning or whatever in NYC. I understand health issues can be private, so I'm not looking for an explanation. But I wish DC had hired another artist and wrapped this up a while back. Hopefully DC has their scheduling straightened out for the foreseeable future on the Superman titles.

ITEM! Hi, Denise! How are you? How are the kids?

ITEM! Entertainment Weekly has preview pages of Final Crisis #1

ITEM! Jason, Jamie, Julia... sorry about the whole Speed Racer thing last night. I had passes to a sneak peek, but I thought they were for the nearby Westgate Theater. When I grabbed them to get ready to go, I realized they were for the Gateway Theater on the other end of town. So... we didn't end up going due to the time.

ITEM! The Met has a show right now called "Superheroes: Fashion and Fantasy", featuring superhero costumes right alongside some of the more extreme fashion ideas. Especially from the 80's, I think.

Click here for The Beat's report and to see an amazing statue of DC's Trinity. They also had one of Lynda Carter's costumes. Whoo!

ITEM! I don't remember where I read it, but there's a rumor that Matthew McConaughey may have landed the role of Captain America. Which... Really? I always thought he was more of a young Michael Biehn.

Of all superheroes, Cap is really the American Superhero ideal. He's the barrel-chested, baritone voiced, two-fisted slugger fighting against fascism. Is that McConaughey? I've never seen his more action oriented flicks. And I don't want a Vin Diesel or some pro-wrestler putting on the feather-headed cowl, so...

And I don't know how many of you have seen the circa 1980 Cap movies made for TV, or the 1990 movie which never made it to theaters (starring no less than the son of JD Salinger), but the costume sorta doesn't work in real life. But I think if they took a look at Hitch's designs for Cap in The Ultimates, then, maybe it won't make him look like a member of the cast of a Superbowl Halftime Show.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

TTSNB: Balrog Wall Mount

Hey, Jamie. You know how we've been trying to figure out what to do with that one wall in the bedroom...? Well, have I got something for YOU.

Fresh from the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy, it's The Balrog Wallmount.

That's right, a "to scale" Balrog head. You, too, can enjoy the basilisk stare of the hellish beast from the time-before-time cast upon you while you're putting on your socks, folding laundry, and saying your vespers.


You can sleep tight knowing the unfathomable face of rage and destruction is gazing upon you

It's 48" long, 40" high, and 26" deep. And only $1800 before S&H. And it features the to-scale likeness of the only movie monster since I saw John Carpenter's The Thing in college to genuinely give me the heebie-jeebies. So why WOULDN'T I want this in my house?

I make fun, but if I owned a club, this would totally hang right over the bar. Also, it would give me an opportunity to shout "You shall not pass!" whenever I felt like it.

Monday, May 05, 2008

Movies for Boys of Summer?

Occasional Superheroine had an article up today about the lack of movies which come out in the summer which are "geared towards women". I found Valerie's questions legitimate, to an extent. But I think it oversimplifies the business of the Blockbuster movie and how and why it is made.

Valerie's post actually was spawned by an article in The Times entitled "Come Summer, Is There a Real Woman in the Multiplex?", which reminded me entirely too much of the sort of stuff you would read in RTF's Narrative Strategies class.

What becomes clear after a quick read of the article isn't that there's a lack of movies with a female audience in mind (and I would argue, the huge blockbusters try to be a big tent and include women as well). Rather, it seems that author Manohla Dargis basically doesn't care for the mainstream faire that comes out in the summertime. And has blacked out many movies and arguments which she might find inconvenient to her thesis.

Because the article reminds me so of RTF course quibbling, it relies on the same mish-mash of Gender Studies 101 to condemn the Apatow movies for showing non-He-Men, who discuss their emotions and should therefore be identified as women. An odd condemnation when she's simultaneously condemning summer movies for their machismo. What perfect balance of yin and yang Dargis is seeking in her male stars is as elusive as what she seeks in her female stars and stories.

With the other hand, Dargis complains that the women of "Sex in the City" are also not "real" women. Especially interesting as the debut of "Sex in the City" on HBO was, according to critics and fans alike, heralding a realistic depiction of the urban sophisticate. She has no praise for the Travelling Pants, Momma Mia!, or any other movie she has yet to see, and damnation for those she has seen.

So what, exactly, is Dargis looking for? It's easy to roll your eyes at movie's coming out, and its okay to criticize if you have a point. But her premise of "not enough movies for REAL women" seems a bit... well, if I was a lady, I'd be a bit offended. What movie is Dargis prescribing? If you enjoy the adventures of Indiana Jones, are you a traitor to your sex? What is this perfect movie of complicated female characters that would make he same $200 million opening weekend as Iron Man? Because it seems Dargis is completely dismissive of action movies in general, so I wouldn't bring up the recent spate of B-movies featuring tough-guy ladies fighting zombies, werewolves, vampires... what have you.

Val asks some questions.

1. Has Hollywood decided that women are not a viable audience?
No. But female-centric movies don't open to $200 million. Just as male-centric movies featuring martial arts, etc... don't open at $200 million.

There's a difference between there being no movies for women and the marketing push the Tentpole pictures receive. The sheer number of ads for Speed Racer and Iron man may give a feeling of some disproportionate balance, which may or may not actually exist. But the actual movie is not the point of a big summer pre-packaged blockbuster. "Sex in the City" won't sell millions in action figures at Target. Nor will "Made of Honor". You won't see Patrick Dempsey's face on a Coke cup at Burger King. Or Sarah Jessica Parker dolls in the BK Kids' Club meal. If "Made of Honor" loses money, the machine of the Hollywood Blockbuster won't make sure everyone gets paid. Whether Iron Man makes or loses money at the box office, the license rights alone may make up the deficit.

2. What movies DO women watch? In what format? Theater, DVD, what?
You know, back when I asked What Do Women Want in Superhero Comics, I got slammed pretty hard for asking what women want, as if I was asking a herd of people who all behaved alike. I think the question shouldn't be "women". It should be: how do mothers of 5-10 years olds enjoy entertainment? Do they take their children to see Iron Man? Do they make time for themselves to see movies of their choice? What about bad mothers who don't know they shouldn't take their kid to see "Saw"? What about Grandmothers? And professionals? Are they watching Lost on DVD instead of going to movies? Do they have time to go to the theater? Are they more aware of who the stars are than what movies they're actually in?

But, mostly, its a goofy question. What do guys watch? They don't all watch the same things. Now, comic book nerdy guys... we kind of do all watch the same things. We just enjoy them to varying degrees.

3. Does Hollywood assume that women either do not watch movies in theaters or will go to wherever their significant others will take them to see or that they are so busy mopping floors that they haven't even given the topic much thought?

Well, that's a loaded question. And I won't speak for Hollywood. Or women. But with movies costing $200 million dollars, I'm pretty sure the studios do some research to figure out what is going to be profitable.

But if the last five movies "for women" came out and all made between 50-75 million, how much are you going to spend on the next one you make to ensure a profit? Probably less than $50 million, I'd assume. From that point, I assume people who know more about marketing a movie than I would know how to narrowcast advertising to the presumd audience.

Anecdotally, I do believe women are more likely to see a movie of their partner's choosing than their male partner will really, really want to see "27 Dresses". Other than that, I refuse to comment on this, because it seems like talking about this would lead me into trouble with Jamie. Who went with Jason and me to see "Doomsday", even though we all agreed she would not like it.

4. Is a movie like "Indiana Jones," as mentioned in the article, not a movie of female interest because Indy and his sidekick themselves are not females? Or is this sort of reductionist?

I think its kind of reductionist.

As I mentioned, some movies are just going to overwhelm those niche categories. As an example: Titanic didn't make a billion dollars because of squeeing 13 year old girls who found Leo non-threatening. A lot of people saw that movie. It seems that a franchise like Indiana Jones can also have that cross-over appeal, once its ingrained in popular culture.

5. According to the article, the amount of female movie directors is something like 6%. Is this the movie studios fault for not hiring these women? Are these women not applying for the director track? Are they not applying to the director track because they are not interested, or because they are discouraged from doing so in school?

Uh... the Director track? In school? I went to film school, so I think I have a little bit of experience with this one (and there was no "director's track" at UT RTF. You're all doing everything from camera to feeding your actors). Honestly, my years in film school were sort of the opposite of discouraging women. They seemed a lot more focused on the opposite ideal, to look at narratives from non-traditional points of view and encourage everyone who wanted to participate.

And the hard numbers: our production track was about 40% women, 60% guys. But I would also question whether that has a direct effect on the number of directors as much as I would ask (1) if that figure 6% is accurate, (2) how many women went out to try to get features made, (3) are you counting television, documentary and directors of non-main-stream films, and (4) perhaps a bit of a rough point, but as in any industry... Life often complicates things. There are female CEO's and some female directors, producers and studio execs. But how many women decide to have a family and are unable to keep up the break-neck pace of working in the film industry to get to a point where they are given the opportunity to direct? Let alone decide to pursue something else requiring less time once the kids need parenting?

Looking for some sort of male-dominated conspiracy from film school to the directors chair is giving Hollywood entirely too much credit. There's a lot of money at play here, and decisions are made about how to be profitable. Its not a conspiracy as much as too much caution about unknown commodities.

My point being, in order to try to make a good investment, Hollywood mostly goes with what it knows. If "March of the Penguins" makes money, we get two animated penguin movies and a Bob Saget Penguin spoof within a year or so. If Iron Man made $200 million in an opening weekend, you make Iron Man 2. If Catwoman and Elektra failed to make any money (and, in fact, lost money) you put the brakes on hoping sexiness in a costume is enough to drag folks in. Then you take a long, hard look at your script for Wonder Woman and don't assume its going to rush into theaters because of T&A and a magic lasso. And if you think they're taking too long between pictures... How long between Superman IV and Superman Returns?

And, by the way, a woman is directing the next Punisher movie. So it seems Marvel doesn't believe women are off-limits when it comes to their movies.

One of the greater challenges for comic-to-movie adaptations has to be that most of the time-tested characters and ideas came from a time and place where diversity wasn't as valued as it is today, and where women held a different place in society. Keep in mind, Action Comics #1 premiered about 19 years after the 19th amendment passed. Finding female characters who starred in their own titles in a genre that typically featured male heroic archetypes for decades is going to be a bit slimmer pickings. And with the failure of two high profile characters like Elektra and Catwoman on the big screen (with terrible scripts to blame, really. Yes, I've watched most of Catwoman), its difficult to pick out who could be the female Iron Man.

Not that I think that's what Dargis is looking for. Really, I think what she'd like is to see the Oscar-season movies open in the summer and do 200 million in their first weekend. That's my guess, anyway. I'm not sure which "real" women she wants at the cinema. Are there not silly, ridiculous women in real life? Or are those silly women who will appear in comedies this summer, or the women of Sex in the City just not her cup of tea, in movies about topics which she holds in contempt, or are they just not the kind of person she personally likes to pal around with? "Real" women.

All this said, at last check, I'm not a lady. But I do know a few. And they like all kinds of movies, just how guys like all kinds of movies. CB likes Scorcese, horror, John Waters, and all kinds of stuff. Jamie likes fantasy movies and smart comedies. Nicole watches stuff that's a bit more art-house, and she likes Ocean's 11.

So if you want to know what I think at least Jamie's thinking this summer? I think she'd echo Marion Ravenhood from the first reel of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Indiana Jones. Always knew someday you'd come walking back through my door.

But, again, I'm not going to speak for her.

Sunday, May 04, 2008

Toys That Should Not Be: Rocket Fishing Rod

I'm mostly linking to this toy because the ad which plays when you click over (and it starts without a warning, so be prepared if you click on the link to get some loud audio) reminds me of an SNL ad for a horrible kids' toy. The commercial just never makes that sharp left turn to show you any particular ways in which you can injure yourself or others with the Rocket Fishing Rod, but I can think of about three.

You know what I like about fishing? Sure, the time with family on a boat without much but to worry about but how much sunblock you're wearing is great. But its also quiet, peaceful and relaxing to just sort of sit there casting and reeling in.

It seems like today's kids, fed on a steady diet of hyper-active animation and video games that allow them to do everything from blow up 40' aliens to cruise for hookers may not feel (how do I say it?) fulfilled by dropping a lure and hook in the water and hoping something will eventually catch on the line. No matter how snazzy the rod.

Well, the makers of the Rocket Fishing Rod, apparently, believed that fishing should be more X-TREME. Now, don't get me wrong, I find the Rocket Fishing Rod a great idea. Pull a trigger, and... POW! You're fishing, suckah!

And, really, that's what they're selling. A fish gun. Alas, fishing is not a sport of instant gratification.

Really, if you're trying to teach Junior and Sally that fishing is Daddy's quiet beer-drinking time, this toy seems like the one to kill any interest they might ever have in again tagging along on another fishing expedition.

Now, I'm not really sure what the shooting device (if it works) means as per teaching a kid how to actually cast, and I don't know how loud this thing is as it launches the bait through the air. My suspicion is that even if its not loud enough to scare the fish, the repeated launch sequence of the thing would be enough to make you want to chuck little Sally or Junior from the boat. Or, heck, just push them into the drink from the end of the dock.

I suspect the dirty little secret of the Rocket Fishing Rod is that its more actual work than a regular old Zebco. After all, it seems like you have to reset this thing every time you reel it in, and if the line gets tangled... hoo-boy.

As I mentioned above, fishing is about patience. Guns and whatnot are sort of the opposite of patience. So while the Rocket Fishing Rod might hurl that bobber out there... Junior, you have a wait on your hands. I don't care what sort of futuristic weaponry your little toy fishing rod looks like in your mind's eye. The fish will come when the fish darned well feel like it.

But, hey, again... I may not want to pay $40 plus S&H to find out if this thing is fun, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want to monkey around with this doo-hickey before Jamie's dad tossed me off the side of the boat.

FCBD and DC Universe #0

This is the first year that I think I did not insist on dragging Jamie and/ or Jason along with me to check out Free Comic Book Day (if you didn't go today, you sort of missed it. But you might be able to get free comics over the next week or so as the shops clear out their stock of free comics. There's an economics lesson in there about keeping inventory that, by definition, cannot draw any profit.).

This year I hit two of Austin's remaining comic shops. At this point, I'm not sure how many are left in town. Three of the four shops that were owned by the same person have shut down since I arrived, and the remaining one (Funny Papers) has recently been sold to some enterprising youths. I did visit Funny Papers to check out their sale items and pick up my weekly comics. And I visited Austin Books to check out their back issue offerings, see what was going on in-store, and pick up the second Kirby retrospective released in the past two months.

I am actually taking a bold step. I've decided that I'm going to start ordering all of my comics online. Its cheaper, and saves me the hassle of trying to park at my current comic shop, which is located in a great place for pedestrian student traffic to access from campus, but its a mess trying to get there just for comics (andone else remember the parking at Dobie Mall?). I'm not moving my pull list to Austin Books because I'm afraid of what I'd start spending if I had to go there every week.

The idea is to save money. And it will make the trips to the comic shop, when I do go, a bit more fun. Hitting the shop every week shouldn't be a chore, and I think a monthly or bi-monthly trip to Austin Books should keep it fun.

The offerings this year seemed, how do I put this...? A bit more sensible. Austin Books had a wide variety of selections, even as late in the day as I arrived. They had courteous staff on hand helping families that had come in. But, unlike past years, I didn't just grab whatever was free. I mostly took copies of stuff I was genuinely curious about and left the kiddy faire for the actual children who were running around.

It seems like FCBD is having some positive effects, or I don't think the industry would continue to support the initiative. Smaller publishers are still going to face trouble reaching those new readers if the shops order the FCBD offering but don't offer any issues on the shelf. New readers shouldn't have to guess at the byzantine ordering practices of comic shops (and it is unnecessarily complicated, i assure you), so I often wonder what step 2 is after giving them the first one for free.

Fortunately, visitors reaching Austin Books will probably be able to get exactly what they need, but at many other shops I've been to... I f I could make a suggestion to Austin Books (aside from suggesting they make all Superman's Pal: Jimmy Olsen back-issues 75% off on FCBD, or just for me), it would be to see what theyc an do to get a signing arranged. Atomic Comics, a place I frequented in Phoenix, landed the entire starting line-up for Image. Jim Lee, all those guys. In one room.

And this isn't to bag on Atomic Comics, because they were the best game in town, by far, in the Valley of the Sun, but Austin Books is just a better experience on a day-to-day basis. Perhaps the thinking is: FCBD is for new readers. We don't need to gum it up with a line of nerds waiting for Ed McGuinness to sign Superman back-issues. But they also had a guy in a Spidey suit at Atomic Comics. And I know there's a dude in Austin with a GREAT Spider-Man suit. Where was he?

I dunno. It was fun, don't get me wrong. But... it was also the first time in a while I've wished I could be in frikkin' Mesa, Arizona (and, Leaguers, that thought does not often cross my mind).

DC released DC Universe 0, which was billed as an "entryway into the DC Universe". And it was not. Fortunately, the comic was $0.50, and actually intended to get folks to see what's going on in some of DC's mainline books, such as Wonder Woman and Green Lantern. And reminded this reader that, right now, Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison are keeping DC alive and somewhat healthy, almost on their own (although Gail's Wonder Woman is refreshing, Rogers' Blue Beetle is a book i would recommend to anyone and everyone, and Rucka/ Trautmann's Checkmate is the most under-appreciated comic coming from DC).

There was a huge amount of sniping on the internet about the content of DC Universe #0, and some of that might have been residual negative energy from the epic screw-up of Countdown. Honestly, I didn't really see what had gotten so many folks' dander up. I thought it was a nice sampling of what was going on in the DCU. Badly marketed by Didio himself? Possibly. But for fifty cents? jeez. I can't tell you how many full-price comics I've closed and went through a beat of buyer's remorse. At least this had me jazzed for all of the stuff they showed coming up.

Were I a savvy shopkeep, I would have taken the gamble that DCU #0 was going to get folks interested in DC Comics on FCBD, and would have made it half-price or free, hoping that the upfront cost to myself would pay dividends later.

Also, yeah... looks like the news is out on a certain super-hero of the Silver-Age coming back. But I certainly didn't think it was so awkward and painful as the interwebs had led me to believe.

Ah, well.

I'm going to bed.