Tagged: Mindy Newell

John Ostrander on… The Substitute!

Ostrander Art 130811On June 10th of this year, Jon Stewart took leave of his job hosting The Daily Show on Comedy Central to go direct his first film, handing the hosting duties over to John Oliver, one of the show’s top “reporters.” This was a big deal to me – I’m a huge fan of the show but Oliver has never been my favorite performer on it. He’s been a little too over-the-top manic, playing at a character rather than being the character as predecessors like Ed Helms, Rob Corddry, Steve Carell and Stephen Colbert have done. Or Samantha Bee who comes off as a genuine lunatic (and I mean that as the highest compliment). I thought he was trying too hard to be funny rather than being funny.

Someone I would have picked over Oliver was Larry Wilmore – the dry and droll “Senior Black Correspondent.” I saw him doing a documentary about African-Americans and the Mormon Church in a Showtime special titled Race, Religion and Sex. His interviews were first-rate. I was somewhat disappointed they didn’t pick him to sub for Stewart.

I was also concerned that The Daily Show itself would suffer. Stewart has been so identified with it, rarely taking a night off even when obviously physically ill. There was simply no one else to do the job. Until now.

So, the summer wanes and Labor Day approaches and with it Stewart’s return to the desk of The Daily Show. How’s it gone without him?

In my view, surprisingly well. Oh, no question that I will be glad to see Stewart’s return but John Oliver has, overall, done a very good job. I get a better sense of Oliver as a person in his work as anchor for the show. He’s also been willing to play the straight man for the gang of comedic lunatics that comprise the show’s “reporters.” He’s been an adept interviewer, which is important because the interview sessions comprise about a third of the show. Stewart is still the better interviewer but Oliver is better than David Letterman. And he’s getting better.

An early criticism I had for Oliver’s anchorman duties was that he appeared to be imitating Stewart’s intonations and gestures and even posture. Understandable – you go with what works and you don’t want to lose the audience (I’ll bet that is one of Oliver’s recurring nightmares; that he loses the audience for Stewart). It’s gotten less as the summer has gone on, however.

My larger concern was the show itself. Stewart’s not just the anchorman for the series; he’s a writer and co-executive-producer for the show. He has set the tone for The Daily Show, I think, and that’s important. It’s not only a satire of news programs in general but of the news itself and how it’s covered. There’s a sense of real moral outrage running through the show that gives it the edge it shows. There’s a point of view that is consistently presented.

The show is biased and that’s fine; those who say it should be more balanced forget that this is actually a comedy show and not an actual news show. They proudly proclaim themselves a “fake news” show. However, in 2009 the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said that 21% of people between 18 and 29 said that The Daily Show was their primary source for news. Stewart and producers of the show have discounted that and suggested those who used the show as their only news source would wind up horribly misinformed.

My concern was, what would the show look and sound like without Stewart, no matter who was in the anchorman’s chair? I’m happy to say it still has the same voice, the same values, the same moral outrage underlying it.

That bodes well for the show’s future. I’m glad Stewart is coming back but, let’s face it, at some point he will leave and not come back. He may want to direct some more (depending on how this first film goes), he may get offered a gig on a broadcast network late night show, he may just get tired and want to do something else. This summer has proven The Daily Show can go on without him.

It will also give him a viable substitute on the nights when he’s too ill to perform or needs to be elsewhere. That’s a good thing; it will help keep Stewart from burning out. Will the sub/heir apparent be John Oliver? It depends; Oliver’s gotten a lot more visibility and credibility as a result of this summer’s experiment. I‘d be surprised if he doesn’t get more offers as well.

So let’s call the experiment a success – John Oliver showed he can do the job and welcome back Jon Stewart. Just don’t go away again too soon, okay, fellah?

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman: All Ages Be Damned!

Fishman Art 130810According to Robot 6 and a few other comic blogs Paul Pope pitched an all ages Kamandi series to DC. Upon hearing it, supposedly, DC responded “You think this is gonna be for kids? Stop, stop. We don’t publish comics for kids. We publish comics for 45-year olds. If you want to do comics for kids, you can do Scooby-Doo. Well, I don’t know how true that is, but it certainly brings a few thoughts to mind.

Let’s say that the statement was in fact true. We don’t actually know the context in which it was said. I’ll assume Pope can tell sarcasm apart from snark. So, if DC actually had the balls to be so rude to such a great talent, they’ll deserve the continued flack they seem to be gunning for on what feels like a daily basis. There’s so many things wrong with what they said… so much so I don’t even know where to begin. How about the beginning.

“We don’t publish comics for kids.” You don’t say. I recall a while back DC had a whole line of comics for kids. I assume though, that it wasn’t profitable, even with the acclaimed Art Baltazar and Franco’s Tiny Titans, and Mike Kunkel’s Billy Batson and the Magic of Shazam. Oddly enough though, when I type “DC Comics for Kids” into Google, I seem to be directed to dcnationcomics.kidswb.com! How odd that a company that doesn’t publish comics for kids seems to do just that. Of course my only real options for DC kids comics these days are Scooby-Doo, Looney Toon, Lil’ Gotham, and Adventures of Superman, I might tend to agree that they indeed don’t. Not to knock Superman or Lil’ Bats, but comics for kids amongst the big two always seem to be cordoned off, and rarely beloved. To be even more fair? The only time I’ve personally ever cared to peruse an all-ages book by either Marvel or DC has been Tiny Titans. Then again, I’m not the target audience of less-than-mature comic books.

I’m also not 45, but I get the potential point they are hypothetically making. That point though, is a terrible one. No company in their right mind should be aiming to please 45 year olds. While I plan on being a comic book reader until I’m unable, I freely admit that a comic (and let’s be bland and say traditional super hero comics) should be targeting a younger market. Go back and read something from the silver age. Stan Lee and his ilk wrote simplistic stories with solid doses of emotional depth. It was only when the industry went goth––and started getting mean, and angry – did the product by-and-large seem to start aging with its audience. The point though is this: yes… teens, tweens, and toddlers alike seem to not be embracing the super heroes as much as the Yuhi-Ohs or whatever. What a load of bull-pucks.

This is where I’m perhaps the angriest. There seems to be the insane undercurrent within our niche industry that somehow, someway we need to reach the kids. How the future of our livelihood depends solely on our ability to make ankle-biters know we’re here with funny books. Guess what? We won, years ago, and no one noticed!

Go to Target, Wal-Mart, and the like. Do you see Avengers T-Shirts? Do you see Batman underoos? Do you see an entire aisle of toys that are comic related? Because I do. Go to the electronic sections of the same stores. Do you see the literal wall of DVDs that are comic book related? If you don’t, you’re blind. Facts are facts: Super-Heroes of Marvel and DC are in the zeitgeist. And while comic sales are seemingly no better (as in, kids aren’t rushing in droves to their local comic shops like we all seem to hope…), the fact that the movies, TV shows, and merchandise is out there. For those kids who want more than a movie, show, or toy to play with, there will always be comics. Hell, that’s exactly how I myself came into the industry!

If I were to play devil’s advocate for only a second, I can see between the poor choice of words spoken to Mr. Pope. He pitched a character that by and large is unknown. And while his name brings with it an audience, a Paul Pope Kamandi book doesn’t necessarily come close to the potential profits of a Paul Paul Batman book. At the end of the day, as much as we may love those tertiary characters deep within the catalogues of DC and Marvel… those two companies don’t stay in the black because of them. Marvel makes its money on Spider-Man, the X-Men, and the Avengers. DC does with Batman, Superman, and to a lesser extent Wonder Woman / Green Lantern / Flash. Show me the bottom-line earnings of a Kamandi or a Ka-Zar book, and I’ll show you why DC offered Paul Scooby-Doo.

That being said, I’d personally love to see his pitch and take on the character. He’s incredibly talented. And just as I would have wanted to see the Static Shock John Rozum originally pitched for the New52. To me what this pull quote really makes me think is this: There needs to be a way for Marvel and DC to allow amazing creators to drive their own ship, and still make money. Reduce their pre-production / up front pay in lieu of per-piece pay. Release the book digitally only, and then collect it into a printed trade if the sales permit it. Open up the catalogue and let creativity be the driving force of what you put out. Certainly we know that the pulp and paper market will only live so much longer. And beyond that? When a creator wants to deliver an all-ages title? Embrace it! A comic that can be read and enjoyed by more than one demographic only increases the possibilities of readership.

You think you can step on creators as much as you want? Why don’t you just go back to publishing Scooby-Doo.

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander: The Essence

Ostrander Art 130804A week or so ago I was talking about how in the Man of Steel movie they had Superman kill someone. No spoiler alert: if you haven’t seen the movie yet, it’s your own damn fault. It did violate one of the traditional tenets that marked Superman as Superman – he doesn’t kill. Lots of innocent bystanders must have also died during his battle with Kryptonians in Smallville and Metropolis but hey – collateral damage.

I did note, however, that characters that have been around a lot need an updating to keep them relevant to the times in which they are being read/watched. The question to me is – how much change is acceptable before you’ve altered the character so much that they are no longer really that character. What defines each character? What are the essentials?

I read in a recent Entertainment Weekly that Andrew Garfield, the current movie Peter Parker/Spider-Man, suggested that the next Mary Jane actually be a guy. Have Peter explore his sexuality with a guy. Even the director, Marc Webb, when asked if he had heard Garfield’s idea, seemed to do an eye roll.

That idea certainly isn’t traditional Peter Parker and got some discussion, but is it that far off? I’m not saying I endorse the idea but wouldn’t it make Peter more contemporary, something to which younger readers/viewers might relate? Would a bi-sexual Peter Parker be any less Spider-Man? Would a Peter Parker in a lip lock with a guy be more shocking than a Superman who kills?

The comics’ Spider-Man has taken it further. In the book, Spider-Man’s old foe Doctor Octopus has taken over Peter’s body and life and identity of Spider-Man with Peter looking real dead and gone. Otto Octavius is now Spider-Man. WTF?

The powers are the same, but the character sure isn’t. Is it the powers that define who Spider-Man is or is it the man behind the mask? If the latter, is this really Spider-Man?

This isn’t the only character to which this has happened. Iron Man has had people other than Tony Stark in the armor. Batman has had a couple of people under the cowl. And let’s not start on Robin. Or Batgirl.

The stories of Sherlock Holmes have also lent themselves to numerous interpretations. There are currently two TV series that put Holmes into modern day. I only really know the BBC series, Sherlock, but despite changing the era it feels so Holmesian to me. It feels like they got the essentials right.

I did it myself with my own character GrimJack. First I killed off the main character, John Gaunt, then I brought his soul back into a clone of himself and then, eventually, I had him reborn into another person, James Edgar Twilley, although again, it was the same soul. Munden’s Bar remained but the supporting cast was different and I had bounced the whole thing down the time line a hundred years or so and the setting of Cynosure was also changed.

I knew why I did it at the time. I felt my writing was getting stale and the character was as well. We hadn’t been around all that long but I felt we were getting tripped up on our own continuity. Sales were eroding. My editor asked me to come up with some way of making the book dangerous again.  That’s how I chose to do it.

Was it still GrimJack? Yes, I felt it was – in its essentials. An alienated and violent loner in a strange city living by his own code. Same soul, two lives. It still felt like GrimJack.

I’m willing to bet that most re-examinations of a given character or concept stems from that – to look at it all with fresh eyes, to make the reader/viewer do the same. To me, that’s trying to get to the essentials.

Maybe we aren’t all agreed as to what the essentials are in any given character or concept. That may vary from person o person, fan to fan. I think that’s why there are quibbles right now about Man of Steel; if Superman not killing is essential to the character, there’s a problem with the newest version. On the other hand, if “do not kill” rule is just like wearing red trunks, then it’s not essential. Is the Man of Steel Superman?

That comes down to you.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman… “and now a word from my sponsor.”

Samurnauts 2Hello all. I freely admit that this week I’m in production hell. I have 11 pages of my own story to letter. 18 more to letter when I get pages in from Matt and Kyle. And then we have to make sure Matt’s beautiful sepia ink washed pages are properly flatted, and carry a steampunk look worthy of Samurnauts quality. All of this needs to be done by the time we’re supposed to be clocking in to our day jobs, come Monday morning.

This is if we’re lucky enough to have some copies of said new book in time for this week’s Wizard World Chicago. Simply put? We have to have the book done. Why? Because issue one debuted at Wally World last year. To show up literally a year later with nothing new in hand, save for a couple Adventure Time/Star Wars posters? Not our style.

So, when in need of inspiration this week to submit a column (instead of phoning in one, like Michael Davis did this week. What?)… I turned to my rock. My redeemer. The one person who above all else makes me a better man. My lovely, intelligent, not-standing-right-behind-me-feeding-me-adjectives wife. I asked her to compile some thoughts of our now 10 years of courtship-turned-marriage. So, I present to you now, my ComicMix brethren… a little sub-article action from Mrs. Kathy Fishman.

Kathy Fishman: So I Married A Comic Book Maker

When I first started dating Marc back in 2001, I wasn’t big into comics. My knowledge didn’t go beyond recognition of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. I didn’t know about the Justice League. I didn’t know there were companies called DC and Marvel. Not to say I wasn’t a nerd in my own right, mind you. I’m a big movie and pop culture nerd. I retain facts that normal people don’t. Marc likes to joke that I can name certain production people like best boys and key grips, accountants and caterers. I’m actually pretty passionate about movies and it irks me to no end when people don’t get a quote just right. But that’s me.

When Marc first told me that he wanted to make comics for a living, I won’t lie: I was skeptical. I thought he would get bored with it or completely abandon the project when things didn’t quite take off. Little did I know about Marc’s perseverance and commitment to this idea. With the help of his “brothers from other mothers”, Matt and Kyle, Unshaven Comics took a few years to really get off the ground. In 2008, they started with a commissioned piece entitled The March, which after years of attending Wizard World as fans, they were now on the other side of the table. It did decent enough and I ran after Dan DiDio to give him a copy and ask him to visit the table. I did corner him, but he never did come to the table that year. I was mortified.

Since those humble beginnings, I’ve watched Unshaven Comics come to create something that all ages can enjoy. C’mon, who doesn’t love an immortal kung-fu monkey? Each year, old fans ask when the next one is coming out, and I’ve seen first hand how each con attended by Marc and the boys garners a wealth of new fans. And each year, we get closer to San Diego, the holy grail of comic conventions. I admit it; I’m in this game for the eventual vacation to visit Michael Davis (What?).

So what has it been like for me to watch my husband try to live out his dream while juggling a day job, a wife, a toddler, freelance work, bills and just life in general? Well, it certainly has not a bowl of cherries. It’s annoying because we don’t spend a lot of time together. It’s frustrating because something will get in the way of production like an emergency freelance job which leaves poor Marc frustrated. But, at the same time, it’s awesome to watch the process. It’s awesome to watch little faces (and big faces) light up at the mention of the word “monkey”. It’s precious when our son Bennett sits on daddy’s lap, and proceeds to steal his Wacom pen, and runs around the basement to Marc’s chagrin.

If this endeavor takes time away from his family and there’s no guarantee it’ll be lucrative, then why do I let him do it? Because I like seeing him happy. Because I know he’s passionate about something. Because I promised to support him. Because I believe in the end product. Because I love him. Who am I to take away something he loves? It’s not some hobby for Marc. This is what he wants to do. It’s not my place to squash that.

To Marc, and really to all the Comic Makers out there: I say keep on keeping on. Frustrating or not, I will support you and Unshaven Comics until the day you decide to no longer make comics (Marc: which is never!). In the immortal words of Stan Lee, with whom you share a birthday: Excelsior!

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander: Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day

OStrander Art 130728There are certain films I’ve discovered just by channel surfing; likewise, there are films that I know and when I come across them (again, channel surfing), I may stay to watch a given scene and then find myself watching the film through to the end. Most of the OT Star Wars movies are like that; so is Casablanca. This morning my Mary and I came across another, Miss Pettgrew Lives For A Day.  I found it first on TV, bought a copy, and today watched the movie through to the end anyway.

The 2008 film stars Amy Adams, Frances McDormand, Ciaran Hinds, Lee Pace, Mark Strong and Shirley Henderson, among others, and it was directed by Bharat Nalluri with a screenplay by David Magee and Simon Beaufoy adapting the 1937 novel by Winifred Watson.

I suspect you’ll already know Amy Adams’ and Frances McDormand’s work. Bharat Nalluri may be more known to ComicMix readers as the man who directed episodes of MI-5 and Torchwood: Miracle Day. Writer David Magee wrote Finding Neverland (another film I love) and Life of Pi. Simon Beaufoy won an Academy Award for Slumdog Millionaire and has also scripted the upcoming The Hunger Games: Catching Fire as well as The Full Monty.

Ciaran Hinds has a mixture of films to his credit. He played Dumbledore’s brother in the final Harry Potter film, was also in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy as well as John Carter and Game of Thrones. I thought he was very hammy in Political Animals, the Sigourney Weaver TV miniseries but he’s wonderful and understated in Miss Pettigrew.

Mark Strong was in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and John Carter as well and also played Sinestro in the Green Lantern film as well as Lord Blackwood in the Sherlock Holmes film with Robert Downey Jr. Lee Pace is in all three Hobbit movies and will be playing Ronan the Accuser in the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy film.

Why do I tell you all this? To drive home that Miss Pettigrew has a really good pedigree and it lives up to it.

The story is gossamer light for all that it’s set in London in 1938 on the eve of World War II. That gives the film an underlying shadow; we know what’s waiting in the wings. So do some of the characters and it adds a poignancy to the story.

The story? Imdb does a nice job of summarizing the story so I’ll quote it: “War threatens London as Miss Pettigrew, a destitute governess, filches a client’s card from her agency and presents herself at the door. A singer named Delysia Lafosse wants a social secretary as she seeks a West End role by sleeping with a feckless producer in the bed of Nick, a smarmy nightclub owner with whom she also dallies. She ignores Michael, her piano player, who loves her and has tickets for New York on the Queen Mary. Miss Pettigrew’s job is to make sure Delysia gets the part. Over 24 hours, Miss Pettigrew is also called upon to help an ambitious and unfaithful fashion editor patch things up with her older fiancé, a lingerie designer. Has Miss Pettigrew found her calling?”

Amy Adams is Delysia and she’s perfection. She has superb comedic timing and shows real heart in a character that could otherwise be described as flighty and manipulative. The character is a fake but there are reasons why and a past that comes up at key moments. There’s an innocence to her. And it’s a brave performance. At the emotional climax, when she sings “If I Didn’t Care”, there are notes where Amy Adams shows us that Delysia is a good singer but not a great one. She’s not as good a singer as Amy Adams proved in Enchanted. You can hear that song on YouTube.

Listen to how the real character breaks through as she sings the song and discovers where her heart truly lies.

Frances McDomand’s performance as Miss Pettigrew is a lesson in underacting. The character starts very cold and distant, with a very set idea of what is right, and it all gets turned upside down as she encounters Delysia. Her heart, her warmth, opens up as she deals and helps the chaos that is the younger woman.

All the actors are wonderful and the movie itself could have been made in the 30s – all the period details seem so right. It’s a beautiful film to look at and the costumes and the cars and the sets all establish a reality – one that you know is soon to vanish. I never escape the underlying threat of war that runs through the film.

Just wanted to share a film that has become one of my favorites. Will you like it? Beats me. But if you’re a tad tired of superheroes right now and explosions and all that, you might want to give it a try.

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING (and so on): Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman: Crunch Time

Fishman Art 120727Here I sat, with my blank screen yelling profanity at me for not knowing what to bitch about this week. And like every piss-poor English student in high school, I’m opting to begin this week’s column with a “when I didn’t know what to write…” introduction. Well… When I didn’t know what to discuss this week – be it a lamenting on the newly announced Superman-Batman movie, going over both my desire and fear to attend SDCC, or finding another excuse to discuss why I’m seriously considering purchasing the Summer Slam Pay Per View E I opted instead to use a timely fallback. What’s on my art table right now?

Well, after learning that having a toddler running around in one’s life makes working on a comic less than easy, Unshaven Comics is finally rounding the bend on producing our next comic. The Samurnauts: Curse of the Dreadnuts #2 will end up encompassing about 200 man hours when it finally reaches a printer. As it stand as of this writing, we are amidst final coloring (on my half), final inking (on Matt’s half), and prepping to create the cover. In simpler terms? We’re screwed like non-white kids wearing hoodies in Florida. See, MOTU? I can be racially charged too!

By the time you gentle readers afix your eyes to my ramblings we will have essentially one week left with which to letter the book, finish the cover, and put it all together in time for our home show, Wizard World Chicago. And somewhere in there, we’ll have to be sure that we spelled things right, that the story makes sense, and most important… the book is leaps and bounds better than issue 1 without lessening the impact of said first issue. This is where and why Unshaven Comics exists, kiddos. We built our studio on passion. We take pride that the books that land on our table earn us fans, respect, and and a continual sense of determination to continue to create. And boy did we wish we’d only just started working, because ComicMix Pro Services sure coulda come in handy. Hey Mike, where’s my check for name dropping?

This passion is every reason why I’ve little to no doubt that over the next week or so, I personally will be working every evening well into the following morning. This passion is why I’ll gleefully pull all-nighters – live screen-casting via Google hangouts for the morbidly curious – in order to meet our printer’s deadline. This passion is what makes seeing a fan plunk down a fiver for my lil’ rag the best feeling in the world (short of everything having to do with my wife and son). This passion may never make me, Matt, Kyle, or our Samurnauts rich and famous… but it will remain our legacy without fail.

If Unshaven Comics ever had a mantra to live by it would be “doing what we do, one fan at a time.” We know that those who are lured by our whimpering and desperate eyes from behind our artist alley table, are likely to give us that chance to earn their fandom. With a book built not for profit margins, and licensing security, but for the enjoyment of sequential fiction, we know that we leave everything on the page. This is our crunch time, and I appreciate those that respect we who toil for our wares. Wish me luck, everyone.

And come August? Get ready for a book that features zombie-cyborg pirates with jetpacks, transforming motor-cycle super armor, steampunk warriors, metal tentacle pirate ships fighting giant robots, and an immortal kung-fu monkey in a spacesuit.

Back to the grind!

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander: Man of Steel, Man of the Hour

Ostrander Art 130721The new Superman movie has been out for some time now and most folks who want to see it probably have and those who want to comment on it probably have. I shied away from Man of Steel as a topic simply because everyone has had their opinion but the questions I want to pose here are at somewhat an odd angle. If you know me, you’re not surprised. Still, there will be spoilers so, if you haven’t seen the film and don’t want to be spoiled, avoid the rest of the column.

I’ve written here and there that the character of Superman needs to be re-examined and re-invented every so often if it is to remain relevant to it time. I think I read the director (Zack Snyder) and/or its writer (David S. Goyer) and/or its producer (Christopher Nolan) say something to the effect that this was their intention. This wasn’t going to be a “comic book” Superman but examine him as if the character was new. Actually, I’m fine with that as an idea. I think any version of Superman still needs to be recognizable as Superman. I would have preferred they kept the red trunks but that’s not necessary to be true to the character.

If Superman is being invented for this time, what does this version of the Man of Steel say about our time?

It is, by design, a dark film. Superman’s costume itself runs dark – the blue could almost be black, the red “S” in his chest shield is more of a crimson. Not only does Superman not have red trunks, there is nothing yellow or gold in the costume. Nothing bright. And yet Superman claims that the sigil on his chest actually means “hope” in Kryptonian. Is this a hopeful film?

Pa Kent, as played by Kevin Costner, is morally ambivalent. He’s afraid that if normal humans know what Clark can do, they’ll reject him. When a young Clark saves a bus full of fellow students from drowning after the bus goes off a bridge, Pa Kent reprimands Clark who asks, “Was I just supposed to let them die?” Pa Kent’s reply is “Maybe.”

Pa later dies, not of a heart attack, but in a twister. Clark could have saved him but that would have meant revealing his true nature. Pa silently and sternly forbids it. And dies. The difference from previous versions is that then Pa dies of a heart attack; there’s nothing Clark could have done. In the Richard Donner film he says, “I have all this power and I couldn’t save him.” In Man of Steel, Clark could have and didn’t. I think that’s significant. The Donner version brings out the humanity in the superhuman and shows his limitations. In MoS, the fact that Clark obeys his father and lets him die when he could have saved him says to me that he has accepted his father’s paranoia. Ultimately, Jonathan Kent is wrong; Superman is accepted by humans, but only after killing a fellow Kryptonian.

That’s perhaps the most controversial element of the new movie. Superman winds up killing General Zod. Snaps his neck. Zod had said he wouldn’t stop killing humans and was in fact about to incinerate a small group of them with his heat vision. Superman begs him to stop but he won’t. So Kal-El kills Zod.

Are we supposed to view this as a no-win situation, to say Superman had no other choice? Does that make it acceptable? Superman immediately feels horrible but was there really no other way? Are meant to agree, to empathize, in this era of “acceptable collateral damage”? Or should Superman be better than that? He was in the past; does this make Superman more realistic? Is that what we want? Is that what we need? Is that who we are?

I was talking recently with Mary’s friend Sherry (a lovely person) and her ten year old grandson, Gavin Simpson. He had seen Man of Steel and I was curious about his reaction; ten years old is the prime time for becoming a Superman fan.

Gavin has seen the other Superman films and knows about the comics but this would be his Superman – the one he sees on the big screen when it first comes out. He liked it but he didn’t love it; he said that the fight scenes at the end went on too long (I agree). He also felt that Henry Cavill, the guy playing Kal-El, didn’t project enough of Superman’s essential goodness. That’s an interesting point.

Most tellingly, when I asked Gavin about Superman killing Zod, he didn’t care for it. When I asked him why, he was clear and firm: “Superheroes don’t kill.”

These days, evidently they do, including the first, brightest, and the most iconic. It makes everything more realistic. It makes Man of Steel the Superman for our time, according to those who made the film.

Does it?

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman: Top 5 Reasons Batman Beats Captain America

Fishman 130720OK, honest confession time. The geek blogger extraordinaire for Chicago’s newspaper Red Eye, Elliot Serrano, posted on his Facebook page that there were three things he knew to be facts:

  1. Schroedinger’s cat was dead. There’s no air-holes in the box.
  2. Superman never kills. For any reason. The End.
  3. Batman would lose in a fight to Captain America.

Now, upon seeing this – perhaps because I was in a crabby mood – I was immediately consumed with anger. I swore vengeance on Elliot. Luckily he’s of the sporting kind, and told me I was allowed to disagree with just one of those aforementioned facts. Well Mr. FancyHam? Let’s tackle this issue of one Mr. Rogers and Mr. Wayne. Submitted here for you, Elliot and my intrepid Fishmongers…. the top five reasons Batman mops the floor with Mickey’s super soldier.

  1. Gadgets. Unlike Cap, who chooses to limit his preparedness to a shield and a few MRE’s stashed in an errant thigh-pouch, Batman’s utility belt is 36” of versatility built for battle. Beyond a plethora of Batarangs and smoke pellets, Cap will also have to deal with freeze grenades, plasma torches, electrical tazers, and lord knows what else is tucked away. Sure, most of these will end up being a distraction at best when it comes to a full-on fight for nerd-supremacy, but that’s exactly what they are there for in this case. Batman unloads his belt busters to throw Cappy off his game. And then? Bat-boot to the face.
  2. Combat Training. Captain America is easily considered on the top fighters in the Marvel Universe. Obviously he went through boot camp basics after becoming a super soldier. After he thawed out, he continued to train on the battlefield. He is the ultimate soldier. His combat is built to stop an opponent quickly, so that he can move on. Batman, in contrast, is a student of the world. He took years – years – to hone his craft. He learned martial arts from several masters. He learned the art of escape from top escape artists. He learned to use fear and his environment to his advantage. And then? Then he learned on the field. Cap fans will be quick to point out that Rogers has been fighting since WWII. What they tend to forget that in cannon he was frozen for a solid 40 or so years. In my mind, he’s technically the same age as Batman in this mock fight. With that in mind, Batman has had more training, from better trainers. Beyond that? Batman has fought super soldiers before. And they didn’t win either.
  3. Friends. Captain America has the Avengers at his disposal. That’s quite a lofty roster. He also could claim a few X-Men, and his former sidekick The Falcon. Batman has the Justice League. He also has large parts of the Justice Society (I’m so not counting the New 52, suck it.). And when it comes to sidekicks? Bats has a small army there too. If they stood across from one another on the field of battle? Sorry Mousecateers. You’re outgunned, outnumbered, and out-Batmaned.
  4. Stategic Thinking. Sorry kiddos, this is gonna be a mean point to make. Face facts: When Captain America wants to win the day? He punches things and makes speeches until Reed Richards or Tony Stark figure out what to do. And when Tony disagreed with Cap? Well, we all know how great things turned out after Civil War, right? In contrast Batman’s so good, his backup plans were good enough to detain the Justice League. His A.I. almost broke reality down because it could. And when he needs to save the day? He can do it from his wrist-top computer while he’s crotch-punching the Riddler.
  5. Vehicles. Look, no good fight can be with just bare knuckles alone. Captain America has had a few cool rides every now and again. Batman has the Batmobile. Now, if I were to be so kind and give Cap the Triskellion to borrow for this little fracas, he just might have an edge. But if I were to be that nice? Well I’d have Batman borrow his Justice League space-station. And the heli-carrier can’t go into space. What about SWORD you ask? Sorry… it’s dealing with some problem with asteroid-M. At the end of the day, we know the Batmobile has way more tricks than any S.H.E.I.L.D. Hum-Vee. Plus chicks dig it. That alone tips the hat towards Batman.

I see it like this: Captain America is very skilled. In a bare-knuckle brawl against Bruce Wayne, in a ring, with no prep time, and nothing to fall back on? He’ll get in more than a few good licks. But a comic-book fight is not so cut and dry. If it were, it’d be boring. In this dream-fight, Cap and Bats would hurl everything they had at each other. After Superman and Wonder Woman drag Thor and the Hulk to the other side of the world… After Nightwing and Bucky are sucking down pity beers in a local pub over how short their run with the big-boy pants on was… After the Batmobile and Cap-Cycle are in ruin… after every last gimmick and gadget has torn Cap’s uniform into rags… After Batman resets a dislocated shoulder from one to many hits from a shield…. It comes down to two men ready to end the fight. Batman is better trained, and smarter. Captain America, even with enhanced speed and strength, is no different in Batman’s eye than any of the cadre of folks he’s bested in combat.

With a final firing of a Bat-Flare to the face (he was hiding it in his glove), dazed and confused… Batman sidesteps Cap’s haymaker, dodges the feinting jab Cap tried to sneak in, and jumps over Cap’s now clumsily executed leg sweep. After that? It’s just five quick thrusts to pressure points Stevie didn’t even know existed, and then a long nap. Broken, but not beaten… the Bat limps away in victory. And Elliot, if you’ll look under your chair, you’ll see this fight was decided before if even began. When the dust settles down, Batman is Batman. Captain America is just a patriotic drug-user.

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander: Late To The Party

OStrander Art 130714I’m not often the firstest with the mostest. Ask Mike Gold. I was resistant to getting a computer despite his urging until, of course, I got a computer. Then I was gung-ho (and remain so). Friends back in the day told me that I had to read Lord of the Rings. My reaction was – no, I don’t. Until, of course, I did read The Lord of the Rings and became a huge fan.

There’s a couple of movies that were like that for me. For whatever reason, I resisted looking at them while they were in the movies theaters. Later, I caught them (or part of them) on TV and then discovered I really liked them. I now own DVDs of these films (yes, I’m resistant also to Blu-Ray so far; we all know how that will end but I remain stubborn at the moment).

The first of these is Disney/Pixar’s Cars. You’d think I’d be first in line because I was (and largely still am) a big Pixar fan. Part of me still prefers 2D animation but Pixar absolutely won me over with its stories and characters and the wit of their scripts. But Cars just struck me as pandering to NASCAR (another cultural phenomenon to which I remain resistant) and I passed . . .until I saw it on TV.

D’oh! (Did I mention I was also resistant to The Simpsons for a long time?)

Cars is every bit as good as any other Pixar film and has a great cast. It has Paul Newman in his last performance, for crying out loud! Owen Wilson, Bonnie Hunt, Tony Shaloub, Cheech Marin, and George Freakin’ Carlin all contribute. It even has Tom and Ray Magliozzi from NPR’s Car Talk (highly appropriate but such a nice touch). The animation is first rate with some absolutely stunning backgrounds and a story that involves and tugs at the heart. Love the film and would have loved seeing it on the big screen )if I hadn’t been so danged snobbish and stubborn. That’ll teach me.

No, it won’t.

There’s also The Adjustment Bureau, adapted from the short story “Adjustment Team” by Phillip K. Dick, who has had a stellar record providing grist for Hollywood’s mill – Bladerunner, Minority Report, and Total Recall (twice) among others. It stars Matt Damon and Emily Blunt and features Terrence Stamp (a favorite of mine). It’s odd that I missed it – I really like Matt Damon and would usually watch anything with him in it but this got mediocre to tepid reviews for the most part.

I can see why. There’s a cosmic plan involved and guys in dark suits and fedoras who may or may not be working for someone who may or may not be God. Possessing a fedora allows you to travel through certain doors and wind up in a different part of the city. Damon and Bloom play very star-crossed lovers whom the cosmic forces are trying to keep at bay. It all gets a little arcane and hard to swallon.

But…

Damon and Blunt are terrific together. They have such a natural chemistry that, for me, it sells the film. I want these two people to be together no matter what cosmic forces decree they should not. So I bought the DVD.

Which leads me to another Matt Damon film, We Bought A Zoo, directed and co-written by Cameron Crowe. The film also stars Scarlett Johansson, Thomas Haden Church, and a lovely supporting cast. It’s the story of a widower with two kids who ups and buys a struggling zoo and tries to renovate and re-open it. It sounded a little Hallmark Channel to me, especially the title.

My bad. I’ve gone through the grieving process for a spouse (albeit without children) and the film feels true to me, as does Damon’s performance. Again, great chemistry with his co-star, Scarlett Johansson. I’m leery of films that focus on kids and animals –they can come off cloying and/or annoying – but the children and the beasties come off very well. Again, I think the reviews were tepid and the title probably kept some viewers away (it kept me away). That’s unfortunate; I think many folks – like me – have discovered it since its initial release and enjoyed it.

There are other films that I ignored in their first release – Amelie comes to mind – that I discovered later. Thanks the powers hat be for DVD.

Or Blu-Ray. Which I’ll get around to owning.

Someday.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman: Marctaku – A Study In Anime

Fishman Art 130713This past weekend, Unshaven Comics took a leap of faith. We attended our very first Anime Convention. To be honest, we had little expectation. The Samurnauts, while well-rooted in Sentairoots, isn’t Manga in any sense of the word. It’s pastiche. It’s homage. For those not initiated, it appears only to be tongue-in-cheek. But I digress.

We purchased a table at the third annual Anime Midwest show, now in the lovely Hyatt Hotel in Rosemont, Illinois. Considered perhaps to be the little brother to the now monumental A-Cen show from a few months back, we were unsure if the show would be heavily attended and how we would strike the fancy of a fan-base we as a creative unit are only marginally related to.

Oh, how surprised we were. But first, a bit of backstory.

Speaking only for myself, my relationship to the Japanese comic/movie/TV Show empire was one of tepid acceptance. Shortly after meeting Matt and Kyle in 6th grade, it was clear that I would need to get on the Manga train. By 8th grade, Kyle and his brother had a basement full of VHS tapes (both booted from Japanese TV, and purchased at Suncoast Video), and a near encyclopedic knowledge of dozens of series, both in print and on screen. Matt was a longtime fan of Guyver and Neon Genesis Evangelion as well as dozens of other giant robot animes. Just as when your girlfriend decides to be a vegetarian begets your becoming a vegetarian, so too did I find myself sampling several series from across the pond.

I found several that I genuinely loved. The gritty Angel Cop with its leather, boobs, and super psychics. Record of Lodos War, homage to Tolkien with a Japanese twist. Akira, of course. And a smattering of others. I found most Anime to be kindred spirits to the comic books and super heroes I held dear, but with a foreign (natch) and mature manner about itself. Sitting down to a marathon of Evangelion left me both emotionally drained and completely inspired.

Unlike American action, the Japanese love (even in animated form) to let action unfold without a shaking camera. They like to pepper stories with emotional breaks and pauses. Every so often they even let complete sequences go without dialogue, letting the artistry on screen do all the communicating necessary. Their stories tended to be more complex, and with more expansive universes (albeit rarely shared like the DCU or 616). In simplest terms? Manga and Anime represented to me a world and culture that could easily be obsessed over and beloved by a sect of nerd-culture. Me, perhaps, if only from afar.

We were told by many friends that Anime Shows tend to be “friendlier.” Upon entering the hotel, I immediately recognized why. Comic book fans share a love of a wide-berth medium. Anime fans tend to be closer knit. While there are just as many genres, styles, and sub-sub-cultures within the Otaku world, here I noted that the relative age of the fan was younger than I’d been used to seeing at comic-cons. The show itself was also more akin to what comic-cons used to be like. Here was a convention that was built in celebration of the medium, not just vapid promotion. The brunt of the show attendees were there to view episodes, attend panels, contests, discussions, and enjoy the company of their brethren. The dealer room we sat in was merely one small hall amongst several others. Not the star of the show, just another part of it.

It was perhaps this that made things so lucrative for us. With fans able to attend so many different things while at the convention, our little dealer room was there for them to explore and to discover. When we made our pitch, much like at comic-cons, we were met with laughter, and quizzical looks. But unlike comic shows, we rarely heard the all-too-common “I just got here, and I’m making some rounds. I may be back.” Instead, we were given a “yes!” or a very polite “no thank you.” Matt sold 10+ commissions. I sold a few Domos. It was, for all intents and purposes, one of the most profitable shows we’d ever attended.

Beyond simple dollars and cents though, I come out of the experience once again inspired. Here this group of fans still celebrate their medium more than they snark at it from a far. Here cosplayers dress less to impress and more to get hugs and high-fives. Here is a convention more attuned to the type of event I long for (and will see again first hand in Baltimore – which still stands as the most comic-booky con I’ve had the pleasure to attend). I tip my hat to the Otaku. Anime and Manga is a once forgotten love-like of mine that I think I’ll have to revisit. Sometimes all it takes are a few pairs of enormous eyes to open our own, no?

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

Categories

Archives

Everything you need to make great comics!

comicmix-pro-300x69-2

Nucleus X

Bookshop Zaks