Showing posts with label DCU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DCU. Show all posts

Monday, December 29, 2008

I Heart Amanda Waller

Amanda Waller. Sounds like the name of someone who might have graduated with you from high school, maybe even rode your bus in middle school.

In DC Comics, the face of power is not that of a certain spit-curled Kryptonian, nor does the image of a cunning mind necessarily belong to a certain pointy-eared detective. Instead, for those of us who pay attention, we know that the toughest-minded, often most heroic person (and often the most stubbornly linear minded person) in the DCU doesn't wear tights, but skirted business suits.

I really have no idea where Amanda Waller first appeared in DC Comics (I think in Legends), but she came to prominence in the pages of Suicide Squad as the iron-willed bureaucrat who wasn't afraid to break a few eggs in order to get an omelette. Namely, she coerced villains of the DCU into doing Uncle Sam's dirty work as a black-ops super-hero team, Task Force X. Succeed in your missions, and get part of your life sentence commuted. Fail, and you'll most likely die somewhere in a foreign land with the US Government denying any knowledge of your existence.

Neither good guy nor bad guy, but always interesting.

Yeah, she's a tough cookie.


Waller has a "chat" with Bats

In addition to running Task Force X (aka: Suicide Squad), Waller pops up in other sort of sketchy Government-run superhero related programs, from UN peacekeeping force Checkmate to all-purpose "we're doing it for the good of the people, whether they like it or not" secret-ops G-Man.

Waller is an intriguing character not just because of her moral complexity, but because she seems 100% feasible. We've all known or met someone who is infinitely smarter, more determined and utterly un-selfconscious about making difficult decisions. In her own way, she's in the same league as Lex Luthor with both ther intellect, drive and concern about the balance of power regarding those caped wonders. Often, Waller plays the voice of a nervous government that would be reasonably concerned about the tight-wearing heroes zipping about the skyscrapers of the DCU. It's an odd bit of semi-realism for a world with Kings of Atlantis and men in red tights outrunning fighter jets.

To give you an idea of what one might expect of Waller, let us compare her to Marvel's Nick Fury if we want to talk G-Men.

1) Amanda Waller + paper work + budget meetings = utterly in character

2) Nick Fury + paper work + budget meetings = chomping a cigar, then complaining loudly about about how these suits don't "get it", and then maybe shooting someone just to meet the day's quota of super-spy action

Waller represents the extremely difficult situation people would find themselves in the DCU. She does not have Superman or Wonder Woman's awesome powers. She does not have Batman's lifelong martial and detective training (but probably his mind and a parallax version of his insight). She doesn't have the luxury of confining her battles to simply taking down the Joker, not when she's playing for keeps in an international arena. We now have series that look at what happens when Superman and Batman decide to play in the same area (Authority, etc...), but that's not the world of DC Comics. And whether or not I agree with Superman's moral code (I do), most others do not, will take advantage, and most people don't have Superman's luxury of bullet-proof skin and eyeballs.

And while she's often squarely in a morally gray area, smart writers like Greg Rucka have used her as an example of the arrogance of American power in international organizations when she was made, pretty clearly, a villain in the superlative Checkmate series as she attempted to maneuver Checkmate into her control/ American influence rather than as the multinational peacekeeping force it was intended to be. And she went down swinging.

But, anyway, when push comes to shove, Amanda Waller is the sort of person you want at your back in the DCU.


Waller gets animated

Waller was also featured in the JLU cartoon as head of Cadmus, a Government organization researching (and cloning) meta-humans. Her inclusion in the series was absolutely brilliant, as was her voicing by CCH Pounder. Originally positioning herself against the Justice League, they eventually teamed up to fight the unenviable foe of a merged Luthor and Brainiac.

Here's JLU plus Waller in action.


By the way, that episode just gets crazier from there...

And now Mattel has announced that they will be creating an Amanda Waller action figure to go with the line of JLU toys I sort of collect. It's a testament both to Waller's popularity and to Mattel's joy at tackling some of the DCU's less well known characters with the the still functioning and relatively inexpensive JLU line.


Finally, an action figure of a bureaucrat I respect and admire

Friday, September 05, 2008

Some Quick Stuff for Friday

A) If you don't watch Venture Bros., I can't help you.

B) DC has really been trying to figure out how to capitalize on the kid's market. It looks like they're combining the ideas of "Tiny Titans" (the comic series I recommend for, literally, everybody) and their Super Friends line of toys and comic. `

They're introducing DCU Elementary at some point soon, which will feature the mainstays of the DCU re-imagined as kids in school.


Why is Wonder WOman/ Girl just sitting there?


I can't tell you how brilliant I find this image.


The DCU Elementary clearly isn't too hip yet to that whole "integration" thing. Seriously, DC?

This is a technical thing, but DC Comics is currently in a legal dispute with the Siegel family regarding ownership of the character "Superboy", which led to the removal of the 90's-introduced Superboy from the DCU proper. I wonder what they'll call Clark?

C) Apparently a teacher is trying to get copies of DC's "Kingdom Come" for his ESL class. I don't know if kids unfamiliar with comics will get all the bits and pieces, or appreciate the statement against the excesses of 90's-era comics...

But its also a great story without all that stuff, too... Anyway, this is another comics-related chairty sort of thing, but the guy is asking for a lot less money.

Here.


D) Every once in a while I really wish I were in New York. Apparently there's going to be an original all-tap-dance opera about Superheroes coming to the Big Apple as part of a festival. Were I there, I would be all over this.

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Dodging a bullet (unless you're Ted Kord)

WHat the @#$% is wrong with Hollywood?

As you may recall me mentioning here, before the writer's strike last year Warner Bros. was working on a Justice League movie.

The plot was going to roughly follow, for reasons I cann't even begin to fathom, Rucka's "OMAC Project" mini-series, part of the Countdown to Infinite Crisis event from a few years back.

If I have to take a guess as to how this happened?

The screenwriters assigned weren't really familiar with DC Comics, but were savvy enough to know that they didn't know much about modern DC Comics. And so they poured over recent releases, finding the OMAC wing of the Infinite Crisis plotline kind of fascinating (it is), and went from there.

Who knows? Maybe it was a good script, but the best script in the hands of a director without a feel for the material is never a good thing.

I do know they were going to cast this guy (Maxwell Lord: 40ish billionaire sociopath)


With this guy (20ish Apatow nerdy utility player, Jay Baruchel):


No, seriously.

Keep in mind, director Miller's vision of the JLA was also 20ish, telegenic folk fresh from OC casting calls. My guess is he decided the ultimate foe for the JLA had to be a hacker of some stripe, and this guy looked like a hacker to Miller.

Anyway, the movie isn't anywhere close to actually being made, and is, in fact, moving the opposite direction. Which is a good thing. So very, very much of what they mentioned wanting to do sounded like the same awful JLA TV Pilot-style adaptations that turned people off from super hero movies until Spider-Man. Greater FX do not a greater movie make.

Hopefully the success of The Dark Knight is giving DC/ WB a serious rethink on how these properties can be handled.

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Animated Wonder Woman in February

hey, Leaguers!

here's a link Randy sent me for a trailer to an upcoming animated Wonder Woman movie.

Linkety Link.

I am very excited about new Wonder Woman media, and this looks like its as much fun as I'd hope an animated Wonder Woman film could be. And because longtime DCU animators and DC Comics writers are involved, it looks like they're getting the character down pretty well. At least what see looks familair to the spirit of the comics, even if I can't tell what the story is about, per se.

Also, here's the movie's official website.

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

DCU Online - Game Trailer

here's the official DCU Online trailer that will be shown at E3.



And, hey DCU online... that offer still stands. I already live in Austin, I have PM experience. Let me know what I can do for you.

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

DCU MMORPG preview!

Well, looks like I'll be needing to buy a new home PC fairly soon. The good folks at Sony Online Entertainment are getting pretty far along with their online multiplayer game set in the world of DC Comics.



I believe I am EXACTLY the target market for this game. I read piles of DC Comics, and I'm not averse to games, but I spend my time and money on comics rather than on, say, World of Warcraft. So, I think they can consider this one copy and a membership sold.

They're actually working on this game in Austin, which is sort of mind blowing. I've applied there once or twice, but Im not really sure how to shine the Bat Signal on me and say "seriously, I'll work like a maniac on this one."

Thursday, July 03, 2008

Apple goes Super Awesome



iTunes has partnered with Waner Bros./ DC Comics to put a whole mess of cartoons, live-action, etc... online. If you don't already have all of these great shows in another format (say, DVD), then this is a great opportunity.

I'm especially excited to see they've made "The Adventures of Superman" available, starring George Reeves and Phyllis Coates (Noel Neill would join the cast in Season 2, reprising the role she played with Kirk Alyn in the movie serials).

Also, look for:

Batman: The Animated Series
Superman: The Animated Series
Batman Beyond
Aquaman
Super Friends
and the original Fleischer Studios Superman cartoons

Episodes are priced at a very reasonable $1.99, or about $1 less than a comic book.

Go to iTunes and look for DC Classic Animation.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Krypto




Superman's canine companion, Krypto, graces the September cover of Superman (issue #680).

For full September solicitations, go here.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

The League gets linked

Well, I'll be...

Apparently interweb support for Final Crisis must be pretty slim, as somehow The League has been cited as voice of support for the mini-series at Newsarama.

Go here.

They took a pretty nice chunk for their article, too.

Always nice to get a nod, even if it usually means almost zero click-throughs.

But even if they come for the click-throughs, will they stay for the anecdotes and pictures of dogs?

Monday, June 09, 2008

Final Crisis - Morrison speaks

In a Newsarama interview posted on Monday, Grant Morrison informs readers, basically, that they were better off ignoring "Countdown" and "Death of the New Gods".

For those of you keeping score, the conclusion of "Death of the New Gods" and "Countdown" not jiving with each other at all should have given you a serious moment of pause. Throw into the mix the beginning of "Final Crisis", and you have a potentially cataclysmic problem at DC Editorial.

It should come as no small surprise that Didio's pet writing team on Countdown fell down on the job. The insult, then, being the 52 issues of a series some of us picked up, and which wound up as a colossal disappointment. This is to say nothing of the embarassing outing that was "Death of the New Gods" (in which Jim Starlin proved that he had almost no ability to channel Kirby's vision for the New Gods, and/ or was just cashing a check). And, it should be mentioned, Salvation Run will now also be largely pointless and forgotten.

The long and the short of it seems to read something like this:

Unless a DC book is written by Morrison, Johns, Rucka and possibly Gail Simone, its best to just consider it ancillary and out of continuity. And that, Leaguers, is kind of messed up. Even if its sort of the sneaking suspicion DC fans should have come to by the end of 52 and the OYL year-long implosion.

In general, I think I give DC a lot of leeway. Some of that is in reaction to the Marvel Fan game of trying to blow every minor mistake DC makes into some sort of catastrophe and point to conflated issues as evidence that DC is a fraud. Much of the time, those mistakes are either inconsequential or, occasionally, not a mistake at all.

But how DC can push a series like Final Crisis, with all the hype and supporting series attached by big name writers and make the error of not including someone like Morrison in the planning process for the "countdown" to his story is, frankly, unforgiveable from an editorial standpoint.

Its sad that DC saw the fervor caused by the discrepancies between "Final Crisis", "Countdown" and "Death of the New Gods" and had to ask Morrison to answer for DC's editorial incompetence in order to try to find a way to salvage "Final Crisis" before the fire got much bigger.

I believe in continuity, but there's a lot of work that has to go into making these events work. And something as big as "the final battle between Dakseid and Orion" seems big enough (in the DCU, anyway), that it seems imperative that a company wide decree on how this was going to work should have been issued. Let alone, asking Morrison what events were going to work or NOT work with Final Crisis, if Final Crisis was intended to be the last word in big event comics from DC for a while.

I was concerned that Morrison's comments would somehow distort my vigorous defense of Final Crisis #1from last week, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I'm not so sure I can be as kind to my "accessibility and comics" rant.

Incongruent continuity, flatly, makes comics hard to follow. It makes the stories around them tough to read, and conflicting portrayals of events are a show stopper for both long-time fans and, especially, for those new to the concepts. When you've seen the same character die 3 times in three weeks in three different ways, it leads to some serious cognitive dissonance that is going to pull you out of the story.

DC, get your mess together.

Didio not only owes his customers an apology, he owes us a solemn promise that he has seen his editorial goof for the colossal mistake that it was and that such a mistake will NOT happen again lest he will fall on his own sword. Not ask Grant Morrison to go smooth things over for him.

But, honestly, if I were Levitz, I'd be calling him on the carpet.

For the first time in a long time, I feel screwed by DC as a reader. This wasn't a case of me disagreeing with the direction of a comic. This was about a serious mistake in editorial. A clerical error that should have been spotted. And mostly it looks like Didio and whomever is closest to him is whispering to him their ideas for how they can ride on Morrison's coattails and make everyone a WINNAH!. But, by not working with the goose, their trampling all over the golden eggs on the way to the market.

For all of that, they asked readers to pu their faith in a comic that was going to supposedly effect the entire DCU (it didn't), and lead into a highly anticipated event (it didn't).

So what was "Countdown"? A cynical cash grab? A failed follow up to "52" once the success of the series became obvious? An honest attempt to build a "spine" to the DCU? An experiment that went up like the Hindenburg?

What were all those awful Countdown spin-offs?
The promise of storylines that never really happened (Why did Jimmy Olsen have to die again? And what did that have to do with the Joker?)
Countdown Arena?
the go-nowhere plot with the Monarch?
Was that really the plan with Ray Palmer from the beginning?
What was the point of Salvation Run?
Likewise, Death of the New Gods?

So, so many questions...


I'm tired of being an apologist for Didio and his cadre of incompetent creative teams. There's too much else going on at DC that works.

Batman
Detective
Robin is even okay with Dixon back
Superman
Action
All Star Superman
Green Lantern
GL Corps
Legion (now that Shooter's taken over. Go figure.)
Checkmate
Blue Beetle
Justice Society America is rock solid
Justice League America is okay when they aren't desperately tying into events
Booster Gold

All really good, solid titles. Even Simone's Wonder Woman is showing promise. Heck, even Supergirl has been on a major upswing.

I'm still highly recommending Final Crisis. I don't think its that complicated (and if you have a question, feel free to ask, and maybe I can help). But I am seriously questioning how many more DC titles I would add in the future as Morrison, Johns, Rucka, etc... leave. My days of giving titles the benefit of the doubt is coming to an end. Especially for books not written and drawn by teams I already trust.

Saturday, June 07, 2008

JLA Movie question

Yurgh. I'm looking over my last few posts, and if the tone is any indication, The League needs a jobby job. How seriously am I really supposed to ask you Leaguers to take this business? And yet I ramble on for 10,000 words.

That's a sure way to keep a readership. Sweet Christmas.

Anyhow, I asked for some blog topics the other day, and a few folks stepped up. Steanso sent me some ideas that, if put into place, would end in an arrest. My favorite, though, was taking Lucy to various places and see where she could get in. I would have started, of course, with the State Capitol.

Simon asked how I felt about the now-shelved George Miller directed Justice League movie. Well, Simon, I'll tell you...

That movie was going to be all kinds of terrible. And the universe can do without a terrible JLA movie. I'm not sure what sort of alternate universe much of Hollywood works in, because it just doesn't seem like it should be too hard to "get" the JLA, but everything I'd read leading up to the cancellation notice was the same sort of cockamamie nonsense I'd read regarding Superman revivals before Singer got ahold of the property (ex: Ashton Kutcher as a Superman who has a destiny to fulfill on the planet Krypton. Which, btw, has NOT exploded.).

The idea of the Miller movie was, I believe, to drop the viewer in on the JLA after the JLA was already formed, thereby consciously avoiding what could be a fascinating origin story, wrought with drama and what-have-you. Instead, we'd see an internal split within the JLA. A team which we just met... so why we were supposed to care that they were having issues, I do not know.

This inter-office politicking would, no doubt, have led to "the unnecessary super-hero fight". The super-hero fight is the fight people always THINK they want to see between superheroes, but, really, you're usually so painfully aware of the fact that its a perfunctory fight before the heroes come to terms and go after the actual threat that the whole thing always feels like a waste of pages in comics.


The Original Seven of the JLA

It should be noted that WB was not planning to use the pre-cast Bale and Routh in their respective roles as Batman and Superman for the JLA flick. Which seems it would, at best, dilute the brand WB should be promoting for their own product. And, essentially, tell the audience "we don't take any of this seriously enough to bother to cast the same actors, so don't you worry too much about it, either."

And, of course, one of my chief complaints was that it seemed a CW or reality-show casting producer had gotten ahold of the movie and was going for the Tiger Beat sort of actors. Pouty-faced young Hollywood, intended to draw in the girls, 10-17, I guess.

If Iron Man and Batman have taught us anything, its that one not only doesn't need to cast young CW network-types, but that fans react much better to adults in these roles (depending on the role. We can go young on, say... Wally West.). A little age can lend superheroes a bit of gravitas that, a show like Smallville has never been able to muster.

I don't have a particular JLA origin story in mind I want to see, but I DO KNOW that for WB to launch a franchise, they need to give the audience a starting point from which to work. And that means an origin story. Not a JLA dysfunctional-family story.

Spoilers

By the way, the rumor (and evidence from the stinger at the end of Iron Man bears this out) is that Marvel is putting out an Avengers movie in a few years. After they've established several characters in their own feature films, starting with Iron Man and continuing on with a Cap movie, etc.... The common thread seems to be Nick Fury meeting with the characters in each of these movies as they're rolled out.

I can't tell you how smart this seems. WB's plan was to put out a JLA movie, and then do spin-off's of various characters. But... if the JLA movie wasn't any good (and it didn't look like it would be) wouldn't that manage to hurt seven potential properties?

Not only does Marvel's formula give each property a chance to get in their unique origin story and set up the characters, the audience will have a built-in affinity for the characters which will make the Avengers movie a near guaranteed financial success. Narratively, the movie also won't have to waste the time necessary to introduce characters, give them some special plotline, etc...

END SPOILERS

Just think of those Rock and Roll Hall of Fame jam sessions where you see all those guys rocking out, and even some of them you don't know... and even if they're playing some song you don't like all that much, its still cool to see Elvis Costello, Sting, Tom Petty, Bruce Springsteen and all sorts of other folks all sharing a stage. You know each of them individually pretty well, and even if you don't love, say, Tom Petty... you can maybe respect him a bit more just because he's sharing the stage with these other guys you DO like.

And, man, I think Marvel knows how to do this pretty well from their comics, so the chances of a decent movie are already pretty darn good, if they produce through the newly established Marvel Studios.

Really, what CAN'T Warner Bros. and DC learn from this?


Each of these guys could probably carry two or three movies on their own

DC would do well to begin introducing the Original 7, or at least several of the Original 7 in their own movies FIRST. They don't necessarily need a through-line like Nick Fury to pull them together. But why water down the concepts by forcing them into a JLA movie for their first appearance, and muck up what could be a pretty good feature film for that property before its ever seen the light of day?

There's a rumored Green Lantern movie in the works. Its only at the script stage, but its got pretty decent writing talent attached with Marc Guggenheim (who does movies, TV and comics). Its supposed to be a Hal Jordan origin story, which is a good sign. Supposedly they're also talking about a Green Arrow movie, but that's rumored to be based on the formerly abortive script called "SuperMax" which was about a super-villain prison. And didn't touch on GA's origin at all.

And... there have been rumors of casting for another Superman movie (for some love interest, I believe).

So... get these movies out there. Give the DCU some time to breathe. Unlike Marvel, who has seen success with Spidey and other non-Avengers, the DCU has the advantage that their big guns are now (or have at some point) been in the JLA. Whatever they build on now with their movies COULD build right into a JLA movie.

We'll see.

Two last things:

1) The failure of a single JLA movie translates to potentially killing 20 movies or so. If 3 movies could be made for each member of the JLA, plus, say, 3 JLA movies... that's a lot of movies which one failed JLA movie could potentially screw up.

Now, I live in a life pretty muddied with delusion, but I do think that we're talking about at least ten other, non-JLA movies. A few Supermans, Batmans, GL's alone come out to 9 movies. Surely a WW movie is possible. So... you do your own math.

2) If the producers are worrying about the budget for a JLA movie, they're missing the point of the JLA. The JLA is huge. But, mostly, they need to pick up some Morrison-era JLA comics to see what epic storytelling in the JLA can really mean. Or, possibly, something like Ross's "Justice", or "JLA: Liberty and Justice".

Don't think Superfriends, think "The Right Stuff". Think "Superman: The Movie" times 7.

I'm just saying.

Sunday, June 01, 2008

Final Crisis #1




DC Comics' mega-event of 2008 is the Grant Morrison penned "Final Crisis". The first issue hit the stands Thursday, and I picked up the issue Friday.

From what I read, I would never recommend that the issue be taken as an entry-level comic to the DCU. The story is mired in DCU characters and continuity, and asks that readers have been paying attention to recent output from DC, but also picking up key collections as they've been released of late.

None of that is intended as a criticism. At some point, you're either allowed to tell stories for people who have been following along (see: Lost, BSG), or you're stuck in the perpetual cycle of episodic storytelling, where the reader can pop in and it doesn't matter if they're familiar with the concepts and characters before tuning in (see: Law & Order, most police procedurals).

The story actually seems to make events such as the abysmal "Countdown" make some sense, as well as the uncompleted, unnecessary "Salvation Run". It embraces characters from Kirby's 70's run on New Gods, Anthro and Kamandi, while seamlessly embracing recent events in the DCU, such as Johns' introduction of the Alpha Lanterns in Green Lantern. Morrison also plays with some of the toys he created during his mega-series "Seven Soldiers of Victory", and its probably worth returning to your issues or collections of that series to get an idea where he might be headed.

But what I've always enjoyed about Morrison's stories is that, despite the need for our heroes to win, his set-ups don't tell me how the story will unfold in a neat pattern I can consume with the predictability of a McDonald's meal.

Unlike Marvel's competing event "Secret Invasion", "Final Crisis" isn't telegraphing the ending before the story has started. I am picking up both series, and, honestly, compared to last year's "Civil War", I've been a bit let down with Secret Invasion since sometime last fall when Elektra was revealed as a Skrull in "New Avengers".*

I've already read considerable negative noise in the blogosphere on "Final Crisis", and much of it is a reminder of the grim state of the monthly comic. A lot of it seems to bemoan that the reader isn't able to jump into the story with page 1, which seems a bit unfair. Morrison does what he can to provide exposition without recounting 40 years of DCU history.

As I mentioned, I don't think this would be a great first comic to hand to someone, but I also don't think that asking readers to pick up on contextual clues or have the slightest bit of knowledge of the DCU as a comic reader is that tough of a request.

But to address some particular resurfacing internet complaints:

(a) If you have to ask who Dan Turpin is, well, bone up on your Kirby and New Gods reading, or just check Wikipedia. (b) Maybe if the reader continues to follow the series, s/he will be rewarded with knowledge of who characters are and what is going on.

(League special nerdy snark: If some are confused by "new characters"/ obscure characters (gasp!), you might want to note that DC is telegraphing to readers what MIGHT be important in upcoming storylines by what its including in its re-release of older material.)

The art of the issue, by JG Jones, is phenomenal. He seems to have a tremendous ability to meld the mundane and the fantastic, and portray them side by side without either seeming silly (and did you see his Metron?). The coloring is excellent, the rendering and composition top drawer. I've mostly known Jones as a cover artist, but I'll need to do some research and see what titles he's previously handled. It's not the same hyper-realistic style we'd see out of Ross's watercolors, but there's always room at the table for terribly talented artist.

This issue included a lot of what I've found exciting about the DCU. The New Gods, The Question, Green Lanterns... and a history that extends back to the cavemen with Anthro and Vandal Savage, all the way to the 31st Century and beyond. This issue only plants the seeds of what could be a great series, but the pieces are in place. Fallen Gods, Red Skies... Color me intrigued.

I guess the watchword I'd share on Final Crisis is: Patience. Comic nerds can be such an impatient lot, insisting on instant gratification, plotting and pacing be damned. Just get to the fights, and don't ask the reader to work.

It seems the same lack of patience which has marred many reader's experience during the current, phenomenal run on Morrison's Batman (which is taking the better part of two years to come to a head) may also rain on the parade for Final Crisis.

What readers seem to forget is that super-hero comics are often plagued by writers and story lines that start promisingly, but end with a whimper. Look at virtually any 90's era DC cross-over, from "Final Night" to "The Death of Superman", and you'll see potential squandered as the big ideas come out of the gate first, and its all about the writer trying to scramble once they've got the reader's attention. And, honestly, I kind of felt that way about issues 3-6 of Marvel's Civil War (for this reader, the outcome that seemed most logical won out).

So give Final Crisis some time. Give Morrison's Batman some time. And, for God's sake, give All Star Superman its due. We're getting great comics from the guy, and it feels like we're headed to a point where DC has trimmed the excesses of the post-Infinite Crisis DCU and is finding out what really works.

And I think Final Crisis, given time, will define what that will mean for DC Comics for the next few years.




*Really, the story of Secret Invasion, to anyone who'se ever watched TV, should play out as a big superhero slugfest which will involve super-heroes realizing their teams have been infiltated by spies, go through unease that comrades have been aliens/ bodysnatchers/ commies/ what-have-you, and it will all end in a big fight where the heroes team up and push the enemy out into space. It's all very "They Live". With superheroes instead of Rowdy Roddy Piper.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

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.

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...

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

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.

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Saturday = Free Comic Book Day

Hey, Leaguers.

I don't think anyone has ever actually followed my suggestion to go to Free Comic Book Day, so I'm not going to dink around with trying to talk you into going and, you know, enjoying yourself at no cost, supporting the comic industry, learning more about the medium... blah, blah, blah.

But I thought I'd let you know it was occurring, anyway.

Not free, but costing you a low, low $0.50 will be DC Universe #0. From what I hear, its supposed to be pretty good. But, you know, I don't know. Because when I showed up at Ye Olde Comick Shoppe today, they hadn't received the weekly shipment. Which sort of freaked me out. And means I have to go back to the comic shop again this weekend.

Anyhow, DC Universe #0 is supposed to be a good starting point for anyone wanting to find out not just who Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman actually are as comic characters, but what sort of world they live in (bonus: that world contains AQUAMAN). And even if you don't know and don't care, its about the price of a pack fo gum, so you aren't going to lose much, and you'll get a bit more of a clue as to what the @#$% I'm talking about when I go on one of those rants.

Here's some information on FCBD.

Here are some comics who I think you might be interested in grabbing:

All-Star Superman #1
Tiny Titans #1
Project Superpowers
Graphic Classics - Special Edition
Disney's Gyro Gearloose
EC Comics Sampler
Marvel Adventures - Iron Man
The Moth - Greatest Hits
Kids Love Comics! Comic Book Diner

Friday, April 25, 2008

Countdown and Death of the New Gods: A fanboy rant

Well, so that's over.

I want to be be clear here as this post begins: Will this post come off as fanboish, and all that fanboyishness implies? Yes.

For readers who are not following the DCU, two years ago DC Comics launched a series entitled "52", a weekly series, each issue encapsulating a week in the life of the DC Universe. While interesting, its not clear that 52 managed to fulfill its goal of giving the reader an eagle's eye view of the DCU and the new status quo following Infinite Crisis.

Selling almost 100,000 copies every week seemed like a pretty significant success for DC, and so they followed with "Countdown".

I have a number of issues with the current administration at DC Comics, but many of them can be boiled down to two points:

1) DC has seemed far more interested in "stories" cooked up as editorial, status-quo-changing ideas rather than as organic tales with a natural arc from point A to point Z. It seems as if Didio and Co. are much more interested in where the characters will end up, rather than how they managed to get there. Which, correct me if I'm wrong, is sort of the point of telling a story.

Instead, DC has determined finishing points for their characters and don't really seem to care whether or not plot points B-Y make any sense, or occur in any particular order. Or, whether its a satisfying read with an engaging narrative arc.

Countdown has not been the only offender.

2) Unable to convince the DC A-list writers and artists to get on-board with this cockamamie scheme, Didio rounded-up a team of writers that never met an idea of Didio's they didn't like. It's my guess that Dini may have plotted the original Countdown story, but it was this team of writers that put words in the character's mouths and came up with the execution of the action. Unfortunately, these were mostly DC's B and C-listers. The guys who seem willing to take on 2nd and 3rd tier books and who are asked not to mess up the character too much until someone else takes over the title in order to boost sales.

In my opinion, the issues you'll see in the rant below trickle out of the above two issues.

The concept behind Countdown was that it would act as the "spine" to the DC Universe, and idea I've always felt was a pretty good idea. A central book which would reflect and define the events of the DC Universe. I now see that idea was not one of my better ones.

The troubles started with the absolutely abysmal cross-over "Amazons Attack!", which was supposed to be a major event, I guess. Unfortunately, it was terribly executed, made no sense, and reflected how little thought had really gone into Wonder Woman by the DC powers that be with the Infinite Crisis re-launch.

Add in the side-events, such as the death of Bart Allen, and Countdown was a colossal trainwreck this year for the DCU. The idea of tying the books together didn't really work. And shouldn't work over the course of a year. At best, that's a one month event editor's should try every year or two. If not less frequently.

Marvel's Civil War may have succeeded far better for one single reason (aside from the writing, and there being a point): Something explicit was happening in the Marvel Universe, so each character had an opportunity to react to it. Countdown chose to be a story of covert happenings and occurrences on other-dimensional versions of the DCU Earth. From the first issue, there was never anything for the characters in the other books to actually react to. Certainly there was no sense that anything was "Counting Down".

One of the funnier things, to me, about the whole Countdown debacle started when I was writing for Comic Fodder. Contributor Jason C. had proposed we write a series of alternating articles, ostensibly about Countdown, but to never actually discuss Countdown in the articles. "Because", he explained, "Countdown isn't about anything." I think I understood at the time, but Jason C. has a PhD, and I do not, and so it was that every few weeks upon closing an issue of Countdown, Jason's words would come back to haunt me.

For a sampling, go here and here of what was to be a year-long meta-joke, that only ran 6 installments.

Structurally, Countdown broke down almost every issue to show you what was going on with some aspect of the "Countdown" story. There was a storyline featuring a rogue Captain Atom as "Monarch", forming a trans-dimensional army to do... something. With a character called Forerunner, who was... supposed to do something...

The "Challengers" were supposedly hopping from Earth-to-Earth across the DC Multiverse in order to find Ray Palmer. There was a mysterious tattoo we were supposed to learn more about, that looked like the symbol of The Atom. The Challengers were made up of Donna Troy (DC's answer to the lifeless student council president), Kyle Rayner (the fifth wheel of the GL Corps), Jason Todd (who should have stayed dead), and a Monitor.

The Monitors were supposed to care about people jumping from world-to-world, but why they cared was never made clear.

Darkseid was up to... something.

For some reason Karate Kid and part o Triplicate Girl from the Levitz/ Giffen era Legion was there. And had Space Herpes.

Jimmy Olsen (one of my favorite characters of the Silver Age) was involved, probably to revitalize Jimmy as a character. Unfortunately, the writers seemed to hate writing Jimmy, and never bothered to give us a reason to like Jimmy or care.

Harley Quinn and Holly Robinson, two characters who've never been that popular in the DCU, were death marched through a nonsensical plot that I'm embarrassed to even describe, and came off as equally grating and useless to the entire Countdown story.

Speaking of useless, Flash villains Trickster and Piper shared a storyline that was supposed to give off the same spark as the movie "The Defiant Ones", but came off more like "Fled".

And, of course, the character self-immolation DC felt was necessary for Mary Marvel, the only non-whiny female teen in the DCU (well, I guess we have Misfit now over in BoP).

A few things:

-It seems that none of these storylines would have been approved by DC as a 6-issue mini-series, so why they were part of DC's YEAR LONG, 52 issue event is a mystery.

-It seems that having a writer who was passionate about any of the stories might have been to the overall story's benefit. Instead, rotating through writers every week... didn't work. I can't shake the feeling the lack of enthusiasm stemmed from the D-list level of characters, and, of course, the fact that the story made no sense.

-Somehow the series lasted 52 episodes, and yet we learned nothing about the characters. How does that even happen? The one character who actually HAD a character story-arc was Mary Marvel, and her awakening was literally magically infused.

-The characters carry a person with a deadly virus all over the place instead of just quarantining them. Plus, if you're familiar with how diseases spread, kids... pretty much the whole JLA/ JSA and the DCU should have been infected as Karate Kid should have been contagious before showing any symptoms. Plus, when, where and how did he get infected?

-The plot was not just all over the map, it was across 52 maps. Not a single storyline had a satisfying conclusion. In no way did the events of the final seven issues or so really tie into the first 40+ issues. Instead, our protagonists just stood around watching events unfold on Apokolips, on Earth-1, on Earth-52 and sort of through the whole series, really. Aside from mindless brawls here and there, did anybody actually DO anything in this series?

-The whole Morticoccus thing was just awful. As was Brother Eye/ OMAC. What was I supposed to get out of that? Where in continuity Kirby's ideas came from? From frikkin' Karate Kid?

Oh, DC. Do you ever write these things down, sleep on it, and look at it in the morning to see if they make sense before you start writing the script? Because it sort of feels like the whole story was the result of cramming for finals on too much coffee and No-Doze.


I'm inclined to believe something pretty major happened at the DC offices somewhere around week 15 when they realized readers were staying away in droves. It can't have helped that writers on other books were having a bear of a time trying to tie back into Countdown in some way, when the story wasn't really much of a story.

Unfortunately, DC was more about saving face with keeping the weekly machine going, rather than actually fixing the problems of Countdown. Or someone grabbing the editor and asking him if he actually asked what the story was before the damn series got started.

To add insult to injury, DC launched several companion series, many of which I began reading, and stuck only with "Death of the New Gods" through to the end. I am sad to say I was not enjoying Steve Gerber's work on Doctor Fate prior to Gerber's death, but after the very straightforward and interesting idea of Kent and Inza Nelson plus helmet was tossed to the side, I'm afraid yet another adaptation of the Fate idea just wasn't working for me. At all. Nor did "Countdown to Adventure", that Lord Havok series, or whatever else they were throwing my way.

In truth, "Death of the New Gods" reminded me why I'm not much of a Jim Starlin fan. Starlin has a reputation for the cosmic, but when simultaneously reading Kirby's original work, side-by-side with this series, Starlin comes up far, far short in understanding the characters, dialog, and energy that Kirby put into the original work.

Like Countdown, Death of the New Gods seemed largely plotless, and the reveal of the murderer wasn't just disappointing, but a smear on the work of Kirby and the many writers who have come after in an attempt to keep Kirby's flame alive.

Countdown could have been easily read and enjoyed without Death of the New Gods, but would have left An early issue or two of Countdown, and Issue 2 of Countdown feeling a bit out of place. Not that the conclusion to Death of the New Gods and the events of Conclusion match up in any satisfying way...

In truth, Countdown and Death of the News Gods each turned out to be enormous disappointments. And the worst part is, because I took a risk, week after week, believing DC had a plan in mind, I was going to get something out of all of this when the story wrapped up. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case. Which means I'm out a lot of money for collecting both series.

So what to do now?

DC Universe Zero comes out Wednesday. Is a single issue, and written by Johns and Morrison. And is 50 cents. So I'll pick that up. I'll pick up Final Crisis, mostly because I trust Morrison.

As per DC's next weekly series... I'm picking up the first four issues. I trust writer Kurt Busiek to an extent, but I'd be foolish after this debacle to keep going back to a weekly series and expect that DC had a master plan in mind if its looking like they really don't.

I might swing a bit to the left, but I believe capitalism works. When i used to write at Comic Fodder, i would always encourage readers to "vote with their dollars". In a way, I did vote with my dollar. I voted that I had confidence that DC had a plan, and I wanted to be on board to see what that plan was. So I took an expensive gamble and I lost.

Do I feel like a sucker: I didn't. Not until that page where the new team of The Atom, Donna Troy, Jimmy's insectoid ladyfriend and someone else decided to front with the Monitors, which I totally didn't buy. At that point, I was left wondering where the hell they came to the conclusion that the people who stood by and watched two worlds die were going to (a) hold anyone responsible for stuff that, really, had nothing to do with the Monitors, and (b) how they were going to do something now, when they hadn't done anything before. At that point, I felt like a sucker, because I realized DC had spent the entire Challengers storyline setting me up for a series that sounds very much not up my alley, and I'd give 12 issues before cancellation.

What DC can do for me:

52 left a lot of hanging threads. The Island of Mad Scientists. Lady Styx. Steel. Do wright by these. (And Infinity Inc. is not, by definition, doing anyone any favors).

If you want to do a weekly comic, think about a new format. It doesn't need to be a year-long. Think anthology. Think classic Showcase formatting. I'd read a weekly book featuring c-list characters, especially if I knew storylines were going to wrap up and not last for 52 issues.

Pay attention to what made The Sinestro Corps War story work in Green Lantern and GLC. Note how it didn't have a multitude of mini-series tied in. Note how the story built out of characters and character motivations, and not just "let's make Mary Marvel Evil".

DC does have an aging audience of older readers who have seen it all. The references to older events in Countdown were interesting, but you can't base a storyline around nostalgia for work that is significantly better than what you're putting on the page. Don't remind me you're nowhere near as talented as Jack Kirby by trying to use his ideas, or that you're not even as much fun as the old Superman's Pal comics by referencing Jimmy's many transformations.

Signs indicate that DC has learned many lessons from Countdown. Heck, the latest DC Nation column read something like an apology for Countdown (not yet online).

So I don't count DC down for the count yet.

If you take a look at the line, the Batbooks are the best they've been since I started reading Alan Grant/ Norm Breyfogle and was wowed by Jim Aparo's Dak Knight. The Superman books are in good hands and seem to be headed in a clear direction, with a new continuity that ties in the best of all the eras of Superman. Green Lantern is amazing. Gail Simone is pulling Wonder Woman out of the gutter, and simultaneously talking to previous authors of Wonder Woman about what made the character work for them. Justice Society is a great read every month. And Justice League ain't half-bad, either. Even the formerly luke-warm Legion series is a page-turner. And I really dug the latest Suicide Squad run.

Count me in for Morrison's work on Final Crisis.

It's too bad the "spine" idea didn't work out, but I understand why it couldn't. I just wish it hadn't set me back so much dough.

Monday, April 21, 2008

I admit relief...

It seems the Justice League movie has been "tabled", according to super-producer Joel Silver.

Read here.

Everything about the movie's production sounded... wrong. It reminded me very much of the press coming out regarding the attempt at a Superman movie before Singer took the reins.

-It was not going to be a Magnificent Seven-style story, bringing the JLA together.
-Rumors were floating that it involved Brother Eye, which works in DCU continuity, but would baffle fans of the Batfilm franchises and cartoon.
-In order to avoid conflict with the Superman movies, rumor was it was to have Superman "dead" through the film. Dead. Ie: We don't need Superman for this movie, a point with which I will not agree.
-They were casting young, hip and sexy with CW-style fluffy bunny actors.
-They were talking about one of the old Mad Max guys for Martian Manhunter for some reason. The last live-action J'onn we got was played by David Ogden Stiers. A fine actor, but... not exactly super-hero material.
-Not casting Bale as Batman and Routh as Superman seems... short-sighted.
-It all sort of had the same vibe as the failed 1997 TV show for some reason.

I would love a JLA movie. A huge, Earth-shattering Morrisonian epic would be great (WWIII?). I sort of got the feeling the screen writers picked up recent JLA comics to see what the comic was actually like, were impressed that it's not the kiddie faire they assumed they'd be adapting, and started lifting from Rucka's "Project OMAC" series and Countdown to Infinite Crisis rather than actually understanding how all of this fit. This was serious, latter-day JLA lore, when the DC was in need of rebooting and retro-fitting, not entry-level stuff.

So, yes, I am happier with no JLA movie rather than a compromised JLA movie.

Also, WB... Morrison will soon be done with many of his comic-writing duties. I am sure Paul Levitz and Dan Didio have his number, if you'd like it.

Monday, March 31, 2008

My Favorite Force for Evil: Part 1

I won't bother to get into the context of why we were talking about it, but I was asked Sunday evening: I don't think there's any question regarding your favorite hero, but who is your favorite villain?

I'm going to assume that what was meant was Comic Book Villain.

If you believe movie critics, superheroes are only as good as their villains. Now, anyone who actually reads superhero comics knows that statement is suspect, and should really read: a superhero is only as interesting as the challenge put to them. And in the movies, superheroes tend to run into their more colorful villains, usually pared down for a 2-hour action adventure, and cast with colorful actors who get to have fun with it.

Because the DCU and Marvel U are somewhat unending, and villains recur, its not the same, neat package one gets in a movie. Believe it or not, the occasional story doesn't even feature a villain (it's true!). So my criteria may be a bit different from what one sees in the movies.

It's also worth noting that superhero comics are respectively full of a multitude of villains for every hero (after all, Batman can't fight the Joker every issue, and Superman can't try to arrest Luthor every issue). Some appear once or twice, and then disappear. Others appear as an afterthought, and through the magic of re-use and popularity with fans, they can become as central to a company's entire line of comics as any superhero (ex: Lex Luthor).

So... yeah.

There are various criteria one can use for a good villain. Costume. Motivation. General characterization. Initial vision for the the villain. How that vision has expanded over the years. And some may like villains for their somehow noble nature, such as Magneto or the occasional turn by Dr. Doom.

DC is littered with great villains, and I think the past two decades have seen DC really embrace and understand how to turn a villain from a cardboard cut-out to a three-dimensional character, all on their own. In a lot of ways, Marvel has been ahead of DC in this area since their inception. But, lately... Perhaps its pop-psychology, but villains now have rich pasts, goals, etc... just like their heroic counterparts. Hell, I'm a big fan of Geoff Johns' Flash thanks to his treatment of some of DC's second-string villains.

As classic as his heroes have become, I'm also a huge fan of several of Kirby's villains (which include several Marvel staples, from Mole-Man to Galactus. From Magneto to Doom). There's vision there from Kirby, and while it may not have always shone as brightly at DC as at marvel when it came to establishing a line of villains, he did some amazing work.

At the end of the day, my favorite villain (often copied, but never equaled) is Kirby's creation, Darkseid.



You might actually remember Darkseid from the 1980's version of Superfriends, "Galactic Guardians", which took an interdimensional/ interplanetary despot and made him safe for the kids. I assure you, he's not all about trying to make Wonder Woman his ladyfriend.

Darkseid's single desire: attain The Anti-Life Equation, which, once mastered, would give Darkseid complete dominion over all life.

If that doesn't give you a pretty good challenge for your resident heroes, I don't know what will.

Already without the Anti-Life Equation, Darkseid is massively powerful, perhaps more so than Superman, with whom he has gone toe-to-toe. He's obtained the power of the Omega Force (which he stole from his brother, seemingly killing him). He poisoned his own mother to become master of the planet Apokolips. He keeps several fiefdoms of power, constantly struggling for his favor, and the citizens of his planet are known as The Hunger Dogs, and are treated as nothing more than expendable slave labor to tend the fire pits of Apokolips, which fuel his engines of destruction.

With all that going for him, Green Goblin doesn't seem like that big of a deal.



Darkseid's intervention on Earth began in, of all places, the pages of Jimmy Olsen, when Kirby took over the title in the 1970's. It was part of Kirby's four-sided storyline of the Fourth World, featuring a pantheon of celestial beings who had brought their conflict to our backyard. From shadowy figure to fully realized despot, Darkseid would repaint the landscape of the DCU and provide the villain of villains, the final threat which Earth would always have to keep in the back of its mind.

Wonder Woman and Superman are two of his least favorite Earthlings, and there's significant history with other heroes as well. This is not to mention the ongoing feud with the peaceful counterpart to Apokolips, New Genesis, where his son, Orion, was raised and turned into a weapon against Apokolips. In fact, a treaty with new Genesis (mutually beneficial, lest the two planets destroy one another), is kept intact only if Darkseid never shows outward aggression toward Earth.



Darkseid, by the way, believes that portions and/ or all of the Anti-Life Equation exists within the human genome. And he's tried to harvest many times before.

Darkseid is infrequently hands-on, and prefers to allow his various minions, from Kanto the Assassin, to Granny Goodness, do his bidding. He also has a sychophant sidekick in the malicious DeSaad, who takes pleasure in pain (Darkseid is simply unmoved by suffering). When Darkseid finally does get involved, the earth tends to shake, walls crumble, etc...

In addition to the comics and Superfriends, Darkseid has appeared in the Superman and Justice League cartoons. Rumors also circle as to whether Lucas drew some of his inspiration for Darth Vader and the Death Star from Darkseid and Apokolips. That's a judgment call, but there are certainly similarities.



What Darkseid would actually do with the Anti-Life Equation is unknown. Unlike Mongul, his cheese-colored counterpart, Darkseid is not about suffering. He's far more about control, and would likely squeeze free will from every last being within his reach.

As a "god" (little "g"), Darkseid has time on his hands, and so he's as much a schemer and planner as anything. He plays games for power with beings like Eclipso and Brainiac, and thinks little of forming alliances with Earth heroes when the occasion calls for it (Our Worlds at War).

In short, he's a big, spooky dude. Who can also atomize you with the red Omega Beams which fire from his eyes. You can't distract him to save yourself, as he is single minded about the Anti-Life Equation. You can't offer him anything he doesn't have as ruler of a planet, but the knowledge of the Anti-Life Equation and what might lie beyond the Source Wall. While not containing the flawed nobility of a Magneto, Darkseid is almost difficult to label as twisted and bent like so many other heroes. Instead, he's a single-minded force of destruction, like a force of nature in the DCU.

In many ways, of all the villains in the DCU, none has carved out their own mythology to such a degree without relying on a co-dependent relationship with a superhero to define them. That's a respect the writers and artists seem willing to give Darkseid, recognizing the place in the DC pantheon which Kirby created for him. And I've always found that more fascinating than, say... Sportsmaster.

And, yes, Thanos is interesting, but he's sort of the poor man's Darkseid.

Hope that answers your question.

I'm going to spotlight a few more villains over the next few weeks. This has been kind of fun.