Blame 1986

People rightly complain that comic books were shit in the 1990s (and they were; there's a reason the 90s are called the Dark Age of Comics), but those seeds of shittiness were sown in the mid-80s, specifically 1986.

In 1986, DC Comics started Crisis on Infinite Earths to simplify continuity, because allegedly comic book readers couldn't keep track of which characters existed on "Earth-1" and which on "Earth-2". This is of course pure bullshit, as anyone who has hung out with comic book nerds knows they love learning trivia and arguing minutia. Hell, I could keep track of the fact that Alan Scott was the Green Lantern of Earth-2 and Hal Jordan was the Green Lantern of Earth-1, and that the former was magically based and had a vulnerability to wood while the latter was super-tech and had a vulnerability to yellow, before I was 10 years old.

Regardless, the "simplification" of DC Comics happened, and it screwed up a bunch of things in an attempt to cram multiple origins into a single universe. For example, Power Girl was no longer a grown-up Supergirl but was instead the descendant of an Atlantean sorcerer, and Hawkman's origin was broken so badly that I don't think it's ever been resolved (is he the reincarnation of an Egyptian noble? Is he an alien police officer from the planet Thanagar? I think that at one time they tried to make him be both at once). But instead of actually fixing things, this move instead resulted in an endless series of reboots that attempted to fix continuity: Zero Hour, Infinite Crisis, Final Crisis, and eventually Flashpoint which ended up throwing most of DC continuity into the bin and restarting the entire universe over again The New 52.

So yeah, that simplification worked out really well.


Compare and contrast that with Marvel Comics: while DC tends to reboot itself to varying degrees on a regular basis, Marvel doesn't reboot anything.  To avoid the whole awkward "Iron Man built his suit in the 1960s so he ought to be in his 80s right now" problem, Marvel just sort of nods in the vague direction of linear time. This is especially applicable in the case of decompressed storytelling, which is what you get when stories that could be resolved in a few issues are stretched out for 6 months to a year.

In 1986, Marvel comics began its transition from "good comic book stories" to "soap operas in spandex" as they systematically fucked over books and characters in the name of drama and increasingly decompressed stories. For example:

• The Thing leaves the Fantastic Four and decides to be a professional wrestler for... reasons. I was 13 at the time -- THE target demographic for this sort of thing -- and I thought this was one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. "Sure, I can believe that Ben Grimm, who is both rich and famous as a member of the Fantastic Four, feels unfulfilled and decides the best thing to do is become a fake wrestler. Riiiiiight."
• Steve Rogers is forced out of being Captain America and is replaced by Super-Patriot. He then becomes "The Captain", or basically "Captain America with a plain shield and the blue in his costume replaced with black", and he acquires a ridiculous sidekick named D-Man who is every awkward stereotype you can think of and who dresses in an outfit that looks like Wolverine's yellow-and-blue number hate-fucked Daredevil's old yellow-and-black costume. Ugh. 
• The Scourge of the Underworld kills a bunch of villains, culminating in a mass murder at The Bar With No Name. I don't recall ever finding out who this person was, just that it was a heavy-handed way to remove villains (who no one had seen or cared about in years) from continuity. 
• Cyclops goes from "heroic leader" to "massive shitheel" who abandons his wife and baby to take up with pointlessly-reincarnated Jean Grey, because mutants are a hot commodity now and the editors wanted to bring back the original five-man X-Band. 
• The Mutant Massacre (again, killing characters for no reason other than shock value), leading to the X-Men -- a top performing comic, by the way -- being splintered as half the team goes off to Britain to form Excaliber (a comic which I couldn't read, by the way, because it was direct-to-specialty-stores-only title and I didn't have one where I lived; I could only buy my comics off the spinner rack) and the other half was shunted off to Australia for some damnfool reason. This is also the storyline that gave us Jubilee, so now you know precisely who to blame for that. 

In short, blame 1986 for the trainwreck that was 1990s comic books.

'Comic Fans' Don't Have To Be Your Audience. 'Comic Fans' Are Over.

Wow, that title sounds familiar. I wonder where I've heard something like that before? 

When I spoke previously about the Exponential Outrage Theorem, I had no idea it would become relevant again so quickly, and in such a ludicrous manner. Several years ago, I commented that Marvel was playing a long game in diversity, and it was working for them; they were introducing new characters while promoting legacy characters to keep them around, which respected both new and legacy characters, and DC was making some very public and messy mis-steps.

Since DC's Rebirth event, they've become wildly popular amongst comic fans, and the diehard Marvel purists (as well as more casual fans) are starting to turn away from Marvel due to creative decisions such as the disrespect shown the character of Thor, turning the ev0l cis-het white male Captain America into a 'Nazi', and the introduction of a black girl who got her start by stealing things from MIT as the new Iron Man lead. Sales have slumped a bit in comparison to DC, who is not only overtaking them in comics sales and popularity, but also just had their first broadly-accepted cinematic universe movie in the fantastic Wonder Woman (which despite having a female lead and a female director, was devoid of any out-of-place identity politics).

Last week, an innocent Marvel editor took some of her co-workers to Ben & Jerrys, and posted a selfie getting milkshakes. This innocent act earned her a deluge of abuse, harassment, and threats, which were detailed on such sites as Bleeding Cool, Upworthy, The Mary Sue, and talkradio.co.uk, who went so far as to label this the "new Gamergate." OH! That explains the title. I was wondering where I got that from. So these articles went on, as they always do, to display the requisite six nasty tweets the editor...

...what? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm being informed that they did not display the six requisite tweets from literal nobodies. Bleeding Cool supplied 5 mild tweets from literal nobodies, Upworthy only 3, and both sites showcased a literal deluge of support from industry insiders, fellow co-workers, and assorted random people. The Mary Sue supplied no negative tweets at all. No screenshots were provided of the alleged DMs from anyone. Most of the coverage consisted of this same pattern: a small example of mildly rude tweets, then easily 3-4 times as many pictures of random people with milkshakes supporting the editor and her friends. This hardly paints a picture of hostility. In fact, The Mary Sue even went so far as to respond to the criticism of their coverage with what can only be described as plugging their ears and shouting "I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I??" This is quite possibly the most juvenile piece I think I've ever seen on their site, and that speaks volumes.

With all due respect (that being very little) to talkradio.co.uk, the only way in which this seems to be a 'new Gamergate' is in that an enthusiast press is attacking its audience for what seems to be a minor slight at most, all the while celebrating what good people they are. I've seen far too many overblown outrages over the last few years to take anything at face value anymore, and the evidence is getting flimsier and flimsier each time it happens. This is, by far, the most exaggerating instance I've seen. It's so exaggerated that someone did some preliminary math over in Reddit's r/comicbooks and, basing the number of Marvel readers (conservatively) on the number of issues of their biggest book sold (roughly 225,000) against the 7 negative tweets they found (reminder that Redditors, at least most of them, are not paid to do the work that journalists don't bother to do), they came up with the fact that three-thousandths of one percent of Marvel readers objected to the milkshake picture in any form.

I am tired. I am very tired. This tires me. But I will not stop pointing out the sheer BS that happens every time something even remotely controversial gets drummed up in entertainment press. This is by far the worst offender so far, as it's provided the least actual coverage of the alleged wrong-doings and wasn't even based on an announcement or change or anything like that, but just a selfie.

Stop trying to paint your readership as monsters. Stop trying to fit your customers into a little 'basket of deplorables' and expecting them to thank you for being good people when you do. It doesn't work like that.

Preacher: Adaptation Blues

When I was 18 years old, I shared a flat with a couple. Odd pair, a slightly plump bisexual girl and her effeminate, slightly hippy, slightly techno boyfriend. One of the defining moments of this period of my life was discovering Garth Ennis's Preacher comic series. I remember clearly one night finishing one of the volumes and racing over to Books-A-Million (forgive my plebian tendencies, we didn't have a Barnes & Nobles in the roughly-six-horse town I lived in at the time) and begging them to open the doors a minute before their closing time to pick up the next volume.

When I initially heard Preacher was being adapted for television I had very mixed feelings. I felt that television was the best medium for the series, as the story was far too broad to tell within the limitations of a roughly two hour film, but I was wary at the involvement of Seth Rogen. Rogen has made his name in awkward/pothead humour films, which are some of my least favourite genres in existence, with Pineapple Express, Neighbors, Superbad, Knocked Up, and the unfortunate This Is The End, which had to stand up against Edgar Wright's finale of the Cornetto Trilogy, The World's End and really didn't fare well in my eyes. Seth Rogen is not somebody who I trusted to understand Preacher properly.

Picture courtesy Business Insider

As a young Atheist, banished from a church a year prior (for reasons maybe I'll go into later), Preacher was a story that struck a chord with me. A man of God, given a great gift with a terrible knowledge, sets out to hold God accountable. The anger against organized religion that was boiling inside the 18-year-old me resonated with that message at the time. Now, an undisclosed-but-significant amount of time later, I've calmed somewhat, and despite how juvenile and (ironically) preachy Ennis could be at times, now I just want to see the story done justice.

Preacher premiered on AMC last spring. When it first came out, I missed the premiere, so about a month later I watched the first four episodes... and it was rough going. I have to admit, over the years, I've read the series multiple times, and own a trade paperback release of every volume, including the cover collection and the side stories with Cassidy and the Saint. The series had a very high bar for me, and in those first four episode, it did not meet that bar. Annville was there, but it seemed like every single story element in 7 volumes of the comic series had been packed into a single town, and somehow the series still moved at a snail's pace. Aside from a decent joke about Tom Cruise being vaporized by Genesis, nothing really appealed to me. The Reverend Jesse Custer seemed to be a good translation from comic to screen, only losing his wilder hair and white jeans in the process, I was confused by Tulip being black (until I realized that I'd lived 10 years in the armpit of Texas and the demographics actually justified that entirely) and I absolutely hated Cassidy. I was confused why Arseface lived in Annville and why his dad actually spoke to him. I was confused why DeBlanc and Fiore dressed like business-casual cowboys and were in Annville. I was confused why Odin Quincannon's meat-packing plant was located in Annville. And I was confused why it felt like, in the first four episodes, absolutely nothing happened.

This week, I've sat down and watched the remaining six episodes of the first season as well as the first four (that have aired so far) of season 2. I've softened a little, as starting near the end of season 1 the pace has picked up considerably and the "road trip" tone of the comic series is starting to manifest, and I've even gone so far as to purchase the Jesse Custer figure that NECA released (but not the Cassidy figure). Some of the more drastic changes they've made to the series (why is the Saint immune to Genesis? Why did they nerf his guns? Every shot kills and no shot misses. That's the Saint's Colt Walkers. Why was he just in Hell and not a replacement for... well that's getting a little too much into the lore. Read it for yourself, trust me) are bothering me.

Taking his place on the DC Screen Shelf. Anyone tired of my toys yet? 

I have to wonder if Seth Rogen and friends read the books or just a summary of them. Irish vampire? Check. Girlfriend named Tulip that's good with guns? Check. Texas preacher with the Voice of God? Check. But the details, almost every single one, have been changed, and I can't say for the better. I always give a series the first season as a trial ground and assume it's going to suck, and I grant it that the second season, so far, is better than the first, but I have yet to have any confidence in this adaptation. We'll see how it goes from here on out, and I'll check out the episodes as they come, but I'm still wary.

Batgirl and the DCEU

You may or may not be aware that I'm a fan of DC's Batgirl.

I'm not sure if I've made that clear or not.

If I haven't, I apologize.

Sincerely.

I must not have made it clear up until now. At any rate, to retread that ground, Barbara Gordon is a character that I very dearly admire. In almost every iteration, her origin comes about in that she sees someone doing something about the crime and corruption that plagues her city and makes her father's life that much harder, and takes it upon herself to do something as well. And when that something brings about a tragic situation, she doesn't allow herself to be victim; she takes what she has left and makes something even more powerful out of it. In my opinion, Batgirl/Oracle/Barbara Gordon is one of the most powerfully conceived and written characters in the superhero genre, and I personally have a Batgirl in some form or another nearby to keep me going when times get rough.

News has broken today that DC is looking to expand their universe a little more, and as such is negotiating a deal with Joss Whedon to write and direct a Batgirl movie.

I'm very worried. I'm very worried and I don't want this to happen. As much as I'd love a live-action realization of Batgirl, especially one tied into Ben Affleck's Batman, I categorically do not want Joss Whedon within a country mile of this project.

Don't get me wrong; Joss has contributed a great deal of good to entertainment. Back in the day, when he did Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly, and Dollhouse he was on fire. He had a real talent for making believable and respectable heroes and villains out of both male and female characters, something that hasn't always been handled well. But lately... look, I like the Avengers movies, but that tone only works with Whedon's snappy, irreverent dialogue. Batgirl has bits of light-heartedness, but she faces very serious and very dark threats, and survives and thrives against terrible odds. Batgirl does not live in the Avengers' world.

I worry that Joss is going to adapt the Burnside Batgirl -- the one with the leather jacket and yoga pants and social media fixation, who fights cross-dressing gold lamé-suited villains -- and not the one who's been hardened by the world, who wears the composite armour and fights Dollmaker and Joker, the Barbara Gordon who once faced down DC villain Prometheus from her wheelchair with nothing but her escrima sticks and her wits.

I have no confidence in this project, unless I get verification that it's not Burnside and that Gail Simone is being brought in to consult on it. As much as I may disagree ideologically with Simone, she's contributed the most to the character, and has the most respect for who Batgirl intrinsically is, and I don't feel like Whedon will be able to faithfully recreate the character onscreen with it. Without Simone, Barbara's just going to end up being a 4-foot-11 kung fu waif. And that's not Barbara Gordon; that's Cassandra Cain.

Basically, Joss:

Not This

Do This

The TMS Chronicles: Majoring in Economics?

It's that time once again, where I pick up on the exploits (words chosen carefully) of one of my favourite digital rags and their quest for clicks. TheMarySue has really hit it out of the park this time, with a stunningly titled article called Don’t Blame Readers for Low Sales of Diverse Comics. 

In the simplest terms here I'm going to say this: No. No, I am definitely going to blame readers for low sales of diverse comics. 

But let's look at some of their reasons first. Their article is allegedly a rebuttal to another one, titled Comics: You’ve Got Your Diversity, So Why Don’t You Buy Them?, but it's written in such a way that the original article serves as its own rebuttal to TMS's, so again I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, but it's a dead horse that refuses to roll over and die completely.

When it comes to accessibility, everyone doesn’t obtain their comics the same way. Some may visit their local comic shop, bookstore, or even Walmart.

The original article takes this into account, and even if it didn't, I guarantee you Marvel knows how many copies of Ms Marvel Wal-Mart sold, returned, or had to mark as loss prevention.

Others may buy digital comics from places like Comixology or Humble Bundle. 

These are two completely different beasts. Comixology reports that information back to Marvel and DC, so they know how many copies of what book are selling, and can take that into account in deciding which titles continue to be renewed. Humble Bundle, on the other hand, probably doesn't report that, but in the end it doesn't matter because the way profits are set up on those a customer could pay all of their money towards a charity, towards the publisher, or towards Humble itself, or split it any of those ways. That's not a guaranteed return, no matter how much the comics are enjoyed by the end user.

Moreover, some people borrow comics from other people who bought comics, such as a friend or a library.

Look, I'm sympathetic to this one. When I was a kid and didn't have much money, I had to borrow comics from friends, too. The first issues of X-Men and Excalibur (which would later become one of my favourite books) were borrowed from a friend. But as much as I enjoyed those, and later went on to buy marvel books of my own (including a lot of those issues I'd borrowed), they only counted as one sale: the original purchaser. If one person buys a comic and 20 people read it, that's not 21 readers in the business sense, that's just one.

Another important factor to consider is whether comic shops are friendly enough to their customers that they want to buy comics. In 2014, Comic creator and cartoonist Noelle Stevenson made a Tumblr comic about how men treated her at a comic store. While tools such as Girl Wonder help with finding comic shops that treat their female customers well, there are still less respectable comic shops that can discourage female comic book readers.

There's precisely one way to go about fixing this: Go to the comics shops in droves. Fill them with women to the point that any icky cis-het while dudebro comic shop owners see a change in their bottom line. What you're having to overcome is being part of a demographic that another demographic associates with ridicule of their hobby while growing up.

It will take time. There will be misunderstandings. But change is slow and painful and worth it. If you want to be part of your local comic shop scene, then make yourself a part of it.

Sometimes, accessibility is also tied into whether or not people can afford to buy comics. As a comic fan on a budget, I rarely buy comics more than a few times a year (birthdays, a couple personal treats, and Christmas).

Again, I get you. I feel terrible today because I just bid $40 on an imported figure of Lightning from Final Fantasy and another $30 on an out-of-production unmasked Batgirl figure. I got bills to pay, too, but having a hobby can be expensive and it's a sacrifice you'll have to make. You either buy the product and show your support of the manufacturer in a way that impacts their bottom line, or you blog about it and give moral support. You may decide which is more important, but you won't necessarily come to the same conclusion as the person selling it. Also, did you just say that you write about comics but hardly ever buy them?

Of course, you can’t buy or read any comics if you don’t even know about them.

Invalid. Agreeing ideologies practically own Bleedingcool, ComicsAlliance, and any number of geek culture websites, and if you don't feel you can trust people who agree with you on practically everything, go to your local comic shop and ask "What's new? What's good?" I'm sure icky cis-het white dudebro will happily make a suggestion if you can give him a clue to what you're looking for. On top of that, I Googled "diverse comics" and not only was given a ton of suggestions including your own article, a Tumblr blog and Facebook group dedicated to diverse comics, but also a Google image search including Miles Morales, female Thor, Sam Wilson's Captain America, Ms Marvel, and some book I'd never even heard of by Gail Simone. It's 2016, people. If you want to know about something, it's never been easier to look it up.

Even television shows like Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Jessica Jones aren’t as diverse as they could be, with characters of color either relegated to the background or killed off.

You... you do know that Jessica Jones review I wrote was a parody, right?

Comic book readers and potential comic book readers are just as diverse as the characters and stories they want to see. They are more than just numbers and statistics, but readers with circumstances and personal preferences that affect how they read comics. Instead of blaming existing readers for not buying diverse comics, we must devise better ways to make them accessible and draw in more readers —something all publishers should be interested in.

Yes. Yes, they are. And they've always been. They're just more vocal about it now. And that's great, but they can't *just* be vocal. They have to go out and support their favourite books, otherwise they can't cry foul when a metric shit-ton of collectors go out and buy All-New All-Female Thor #1 and then the sales figures drop by 75% by issue 4.

Dedicated fans know that the fundamentals will always be there, and they'll buy Captain America when Steve Rogers has the shield, and they'll keep buying it and enjoy Sam Wilson flying around on his mechanical wings with the shield because they know eventually Steve will be back. Be dedicated fans, or don't be surprised when A-Force or Totally Awesome Hulk are cancelled because less than 10,000 copies are being moved every month.

An Open Letter regarding #ChangeTheCover

As of the time this is published, indeed as of the time that I write this, I already know it's too late. The artist of the cover to Batgirl #41, under pressure from a mob of neo-Puritanical zealots, has requested that DC not use his artwork for Batgirl #41. I no longer have a dog in this fight, but I refuse to give up completely.

To Mr. Rafael Albuquerque: your cover was fantastic. It upset some people, and that's okay. It was supposed to. It was art, and art is often upsetting. And pleasing. And evocative, scary, titillating. And inspiring. And when it comes to Batgirl, it was inspiring.

Not because, as some complete numpties have suggested, because I as the reader was supposed to identify with the Joker and feel a sense of power over Batgirl. That's, pardon me, fucking ridiculous. How the hell do you seriously suggest that someone identifies with Joker? There's not just something wrong with Joker, there's very nearly nothing right with Joker. Another few mis-wired neurons, and the man would probably not be able to sit up straight or feed himself. Anyone who thinks that the audience is supposed to identify with Joker has something seriously wrong with themselves. And I welcome any accusations of ableism that statement brings.

No, Mr. Rafael Albuquerque, it inspired me because I knew by the end of the story, Barbara would overcome the fear shown in her eyes, and being the character I identify with in the book (that's right, neo-Puritanical zealots, a cis-het-white-dude can identify with a formerly disabled woman) that inspires me. I've had some really dark, really low points in my life, and it was around then that I picked up Birds of Prey for the first time. I'd had no idea what had happened to Barbara Gordon since the tragic events of The Killing Joke, but what I saw was amazing, and I fell in love with the character ever since. A lesser person would have allowed themselves to be relegated to the background, but not Barbara Gordon. She became even more indispensable to the DCU than ever. Seeing her on that cover, I knew she'd overcome her greatest fear: Joker and a gun. Because that's what Barbara Fucking Gordon does.

It's a human character that has one great, paralyzing fear. No pun intended.

I am shamed that you may have received threats and harassment over your commissioned artwork by the comics fans (the official word is you didn't, but I was watching the hashtag. I know what I saw), but I also feel that you're apologizing to the wrong people. I really don't believe it's the actual fans of Batgirl that are giving you grief over this. You had nothing to apologize for.

To Cameron Stewart: You didn't so much throw Rafael under the bus as you drove said bus yourself. And then backed up over him.And then drove for 17 blocks with him stuck to the undercarriage of the bus. Nice job.

Which leads me to DC: You've capitulated to the formless cacophony of people that not only weren't going to buy your product in the first place, but would likely have found something “problematic” with whatever you put out, even if it were a relaunch of Archie Comics where Betty and Veronica realize they don't need Archie, form a relationship with each other, then set out to smash the Patriarchal culture that Jughead reinforces.

I had empathy for you, though, up until now. It hasn't been easy, I know, watching Marvel drag itself out of the financial collapse, dust itself off, and become an entertainment powerhouse whilst simultaneously playing a long game at easing into diversity in a natural way. And you were catching up. It wasn't as fluid or as smooth as Marvel's changes, but it was there. When they stumbled with Thora (a blatantly unlikeable character that's only been positively received among those whose ideology is being blatantly pandered to). But following up Gail Simone's powerhouse writing with cheap-webcomic art and a writer that openly referred to the title as “sjw”? I'm not sorry anymore that it's resulted in accusations of transphobia and reinforcing rape culture.

By editorial mandate, you have undone years of hard work on a character that is very personal to me, and that's a bed I'm content to let you lie in. I was prepared to sit out Cameron Stewart's run and check back in when a new creative team took the lead, but since buckling to #changethecover, I no longer have faith in the creative direction that could possibly be taken. Any risk in storytelling will, going forward, be measured against the possible social media backlash by people that feel no connection to the character or her stories and wouldn't have purchased the final product anyway.

DC, my trust is broken. I'll go back and read through Birds of Prey again. I'll read Gail Simone's run on Batgirl again. I'll go back and read Batgirl: Year One, and even the Cassie Cain and Stephanie Brown stories where Barbara is mentoring them. I'll even go rewatch that painful Birds of Prey TV series for Dina Meyer's excellent Babs, but I'm scared to come back to you now, as it's clear you're not writing for the fans. I'll leave you to your drunk party girl Batgirl and smiley selfie covers. I hear there's a great writer doing some good stuff over at Dynamite with Red Sonja in the meantime.

As for the rest of you: In response to "just how wrong Barbara's tears are", compare that cover to this video. This is probably the most messed up thing I've seen in Batcanon. (Spoilers for Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker)

In conclusion:  The Joker is a messed-up individual. He does things to hurt people to get at other people. Barbara is not alone in this. Tim Drake and Jason Todd were both victimized to hurt Batman.

Morales vs Thor: A Study in Contrast

Pardon me while I plug in my waffle iron once again. This really should be the last time that have to bring up female Thor.

In fixing my poor education on the subject of Peter Parker, I've recently read through the last half of his Ultimate Spider-Man run, into the second volume that culminates in the death of Peter Parker and the rebirth of the character of Spider-Man as Miles Morales. It's something that echoes and contrasts nicely the difference in the handling between Miles Morales and the mystery female Thor.

The main contrast between these two situations is the respect in which the handover from seasoned hero to rookie newcomer is handled. In Spider-Man's case, there was an epic six-issue final battle in which Normon Osborn, as a hulked-out Green Goblin, escapes SHIELD custody, springing some of Spidey's biggest and baddest adversaries in the process and begins a hunt that ends at Aunt May's house. Spidey, Human Torch, and Iceman face off against Goblin, Vulture, Electro, Sandman, and Kraven. Parker is particularly heroic, having just survived being shot through the torso taking a bullet that was meant for Captain America, as he webs himself shut and drags himself to the battle, before crushing Goblin with a truck. Aunt May even gets a shining moment of awesome as she shoots Electro down with her own revolver. And in the end, Parker is given a magnificently noble send-off, in which a young boy is standing in the crowd watching as the life slips away from him, and he finally makes peace with being unable to save his Uncle Ben. A young boy named Miles Morales.

Morales's uncle is the Ultimate universe version of The Prowler, a professional burglar (that bears an uncomfortable resemblance to Deadpool) who does a job on Oscorp labs only to unwittingly provide a ride to an enhanced spider that ends up biting his nephew. The first 10 or so issues, as far as I've read, of Morales has him treating Peter Parker's legacy with awe and reverence, and rightly so. He's a young kid, younger even than Parker was, coming from a different background and a different life experience. His Uncle Ben moment comes when, after discovering his powers, he gets to the scene of the final battle too late, and blames himself for Parker dying. His appearances are initially met with hostility, then slow acceptance, particularly with Jessica Drew, Parker's female clone and Spider-Woman of the Marvel Ultimate universe. Morales has a natural and believable amount of self-doubt for someone of his age. A palpable sense of “Who am I to take Spider-Man's place?”

Pictured: The Absorbing Strawman

Pictured: Character Assassination
on a female villain.

The new Thor... does not take this approach.
Contrasting between
Morales and Thor, one subject is treated with a great deal of respect, where the other is not. Where Parker got a hero's death, and a supporting cast that transfers into the new character's life to both keep him grounded and teach him how to be Spider-Man, Thor gets none of these benefits. Where Morales is both well-established and likeable, the new Thor is flippant (in her own mind) and arrogant (in addressing other characters). Morales's book shows minority characters interacting naturally with one another as well as established characters while Thor's book turns a pair of established villains into a strawman anti-feminist critic and a pushover girl-power cheerleader. We get to know Morales as a human being and as a budding hero, where Thor just plops a stranger in front of us and says “We're not going to tell you who this is, but you're going to like her whether you like it or not!”

And finally, Parker is treated with respect. Given a hero's death and a lasting legacy. Thor is turned into a drunken layabout with a deified case of depression. Ultimate Spider-Man is how you go about replacing a hero. Thor is how you go about disrespecting your own property and alienating fans for clickbait attention.  

Hipster Batgirl hurts me. Deeply.

(if you thought Female Thor bothered me, just wait..)

Gail Simone is one of my favorite comics writers. She's always found a way to work in interesting, complex characters (some of whom just happen to be female) into interesting and complex stories without ever being preachy about any beliefs she might hold in the real world. She's done some fantastic work on Deadpool (very hard to write for Deadpool without straying into lolsorandom territory) and fleshed out the Birds of Prey title, giving a lot of extra life and backstory to one of my personal favorite comics characters, Barbara Gordon. When the New 52 event happened in DC and all the books relaunched, Batgirl was relaunched as well, with Gail Simone at the head.

Not pictured: Stilettos, spandex

I was in a bit of an outrage at the time, as since Alan Moore's “The Killing Joke” ended with Barbara being shot in the spine by Joker resulted in Barbara's growth from Batgirl to Oracle, tech support and girl genius for the Justice League. She was the one the heroes turned to when they couldn't figure something out or couldn't get the job done on their own. She even proved herself still physically capable, sparring regularly with Nightwing and Black Canary, and defending herself from Prometheus when her clocktower base was compromised. The news that Barbara would be back on her feet and resuming her role as Batgirl, I was less than pleased. Like throwing things less than pleased. Gail Simone's writing was my one ray of hope and it just so turned out that not only was the series not bad, but was actually pretty damn good.

Simone took Barbara through hell and back, introducing new villains and teaming her up with some familiar faces, dragging her into the Death of the Family with the gruesome new Joker and squaring her off against (and finally redeeming) one of the Talons of the Court of Owls before bringing her face to face with her disturbed brother, James Gordon Jr.

And then Cameron Stewart and Brendan Fletcher took over. The last few panels of Simone's final issue have Barbara deciding that she's got to 'get away from it all' and resume in Fletcher and Stewart's first issue with her moving to a trendy, hipster borough of Gotham called Burnside (think Williamsburg) and returning to college(despite having already earned several degrees). Leaving, bafflingly, the storyline with Batgirl wanted for murder and being a fugitive of the police unresolved, her brother still at large, and unresolved issues with both her father and her boyfriend.

What follows is an unprecedented tonal shift which left me with such a case of whiplash that I genuinely thought I'd picked up the wrong comic. This feels like an alternate universe or Young Adult title, and not at all like the issues that logically follow on from Simone's run. The art is simplistic and flat, not unlike a middling web-comic. The characterization is completely out of place. Barbara is overly awkward. Black Canary shows up and is so glum and grumbling that the artist might as well have just drawn a permanent storm cloud over her head. Simone's trans character(who is a good character on her own without straying near tokenism), Barbara's roomie Alysia is left behind. And in every goddamn panel is somebody wearing skinny jeans or horn-rimmed glasses. The complaints people have about this book being too hipster? Totally valid. There's Starbucks mocha half-caf skinny soy vegan latte and ironic disinterest dripping from the pages. There's hashtags and tinder references every other page. I think I know where they got their photo references from.

And the costume..

I'm fine with the costume. Honestly, in another context, it would be fine. A Young Adult version of Batgirl would be fine in this costume. But Barbara Gordon, in the last three years since regaining her complete physicality, has faced some serious threats, and a single layer of leather is not sufficient for someone who regularly punches out of her weight class. And it's almost like the author knows it, and is embarrassed, as in one of the first few issues of the new team, Barbara's nearly taken out by a cosplayer on a motorcycle with a sword when the costume gives way with one slash. And I've seen people say “Oh at least it's not spandex and stilettos.” **Batgirl did not wear spandex and stilettos**. Read the book. Read. The. Book. Batgirl had proper boots with armored knee covers. Teflon armor with impact resistant plates. Shock plates in her cowl. All those little lines on her New 52 costume? Those aren't sewing seams. Those are armor plates. Batgirl had some serious gear that took a budget to maintain, so don't tell me “oh the van caught fire so I have to make a new costume out of thrift store finds.” Fuck right off with that. Barbara Gordon is damned resourceful and smart, and fully capable of restocking her arsenal with or without Wayne funding.

Better yet, we know Misfit's in the New 52. Give that costume to her. It'll fit. Or have Stephanie Brown move into Burnside and have her be Batgirl of Burnside in that costume. It fits either of those two characters far better than Barbara Gordon, who is a professional crime-fighting vigilante. 

Most damning of all, Gail Simone gave us a very mature, very adult Barbara Gordon. One who faced hardships, betrayal, and devestation and still managed to pick herself up and keep going. Cameron Stewart's batgirl is two giggles and a hair toss from being just another god damn manic pixie dream girl, and that just does not sit right with me.

Oh, Salem, surely you're just overreacting..

I'm tickled that a cross-dressing villain (think Warhol with a Batgirl fixation) garnered him accusations of Transphobia from the SJW crowd after tweeting this. If that's what you think of Barbara Gordon, sir, you don't deserve to clean her highly-functional armored boots.  

The Thor Question

A few months ago, I spoke at some length about how I wasn't terribly pleased with the news that Marvel had decided to 'make Thor a woman' and my reasons for feeling this way. I think I was rather rational about it, and it turns out that some of my concerns may have been alleviated, but some may still remain.

I encourage the reader to look back on that article, as it's relevant today when we take a look at the major factor that I could not, at the time, cover: Will it be any good?

Three months or so have passed since the book launched, and three issues have been released that I've been able to obtain and read. To summarize what's happened, during a battle on the moon, Nick Fury (who'd recently stolen the secrets of Uatu the Watcher) whispered something in Thor's ear that stopped him in his tracks and made him drop his hammer. Thor had been on the moon , basically sulking and trying to lift Mjolnir unsuccessfully. Becoming broody and unresponsive, his mother Frigga (filling in for Odin) is naturally concerned for him, and Odin himself returns and attempts to lift the hammer, failing in this as well.

The Asgardians finally leave the moon at the end of the first issue, and an unidentified woman approaches the hammer, says to herself that there must always be a Thor, and lifts it easily, empowering her with Thor's abilities and covering her in Thor-esque armour. About this time, Malekith (disappointingly looking nothing like Christopher Eccleston) launches an attack on an undersea research base owned by Marvel corporation Roxxon with a legion of Frost Giants after beating up a Mjolnir-less Thor, chopping his arm off, and wearing it as a scarf for the next few issues. The woman now wielding the hammer returns to Earth and attacks the Frost Giants as they make their way up from the ocean floor to a floating Roxxon base. 

Sir Not Appearing In This Book

 So the questions are: Have my concerns been laid to rest and, more importantly, is it any good?

To the first: Not completely. I will say that in three issues so far, she has not once referred to herself as Thor, and no one has positively identified her AS Thor. As I explained previously, I'm perfectly OK with Thor being somehow deemed not worthy to hold the hammer, and if anyone could convince him that he's not it's Nick Fury (with or without Watcher knowledge). I'm still not sure why Odin of all people can't lift it, and that had better be explained as well, as he's the one that enchanted Mjolnir to begin with. What I wouldn't be ok with is literally calling this woman Thor, as she's clearly not. Thor is the man's (god's?) name. It's not a title or an office like “Captain America” or “Iron Man.” You don't put James Rhodes in an Iron Man suit and call him Tony Stark, you call him War Machine. You don't give Bucky Barnes the Red/White/Blue and call him Steve Rogers, you call him Captain America. I'm perfectly ok with either a) turning Thor into a woman or b) giving the status of God(dess) of Thunder to another person, but you don't just give someone's name away. It's a bit disrespectful, and so far that hasn't happened, but I hear in a future issue it might. As an addendum to the points I've made previously, I'm perfectly fine with a woman taking over a traditionally male character, if it's done right. Renee Montoya's been one of my favorite supporting Batman characters, and when she took over the role of The Question, I was thrilled. DC did not disappoint there. But we didn't start calling her Vic Sage. She was still Renee Montoya, just in The Question's mask/suit. 

Seriously, go read Crime Bible: Five Lessons In Blood. DC can do diversity well.

As for the Goddess of Thunder's identity.. that's still not been revealed. I can tell, through dialogue, that it's not one of my top three picks for female replacements for Thor, though. There's an internal monologue portrayed through thought bubbles that this woman is clearly not used to having superpowers, which rules out Valkyrie, Carol Danvers (Ms/Captain Marvel), and Angela, and a scene in which she's isolated from the hammer briefly and starts to lose her powers confirms this. And as for that dialogue.. it's very cringey. It honestly feels like they're half-assing Spider-man's insecure internal monologueing for whoever this is, and it makes the character feel a little unlikeable.

In short, the book's a bit dull, and it feels like it's riding off the mystery and controversy of a female Thor without actually bringing a good story, and that's kind of disappointing. As much as I was dead-set against what Marvel seemed to be doing, I was still holding out hope they'd surprise me. So far, I haven't been. So far I've been kinda bored, but I'm going to stick around and see how it turns out. Avengers: Age of Ultron is only a few months out now, and I'm going to be very cross if they dump this and go back to Thor Thor after such a lackluster performance.

Besides, we've already had a proper female Thor. And she was a goddess to begin with.

I think it's telling that, for a review of this book, I've spent so little time actually talking about what happens in this book. I'm hoping it picks up soon, because it's got a lot of ground to cover before AoU comes out.

Flash Flashback

So, tonight the CW aired the pilot episode of The Flash, and it was pretty good. This ought to come as no surprise to anyone who watches Arrow, as they're cut from the same cloth (and have more or less the same executive producers). Marvel might rule the cinema, but DC owns television -- at least until ABC picks up that "Agent Carter" series I've been hearing about.

Also, I was really quite impressed with the nod to TV history by the casting of John Wesley Shipp -- the star of the 1990 version of The Flash -- as Barry Allen's father. I might have even let out a fangirl squeal at that.

Equally nifty were little visual references that might pay off (a broken animal cage with the word "Grodd" on a nameplate) and might not (testing at a Ferris Aircraft runway).  Oh, and a throwaway bit at the very end about a future merger between Queen Industries and Wayne Technologies, which gladdens my heart because it's a reference, however oblique, to Batman existing in the CWiverse.

And then there's Barry's traumatic past, which likely ties in with a certain character we've already seen -- who fans will have recognized by name alone, and who casual fans probably won't have even noticed.

I also have a sneaking suspicion that the head of STAR Labs, Harrison Wells, has a middle name that starts with the letter "G"...

All in all, a good show:  good acting, fun writing ("Lighting gave me abs?"), great special effects, and a more lighthearted feel than the (deliberately) gloomy Arrow.


But you know the real reason I'm writing about this?  Because it's all about me. Me me me me me. Back in 2008, I wrote a post about the Flash that I felt didn't get the traction (hurr hurr) it deserved, and now I have an amazing opportunity to re-use it!

Some of you folks may have heard of Goldentusk, a YouTubie who writes lyrics to well known theme songs (Superman, Batman, and James Bond, to note a few). But I've noticed that, well, he missed one. Notably, a certain scarlet speedster who had his own short-lived series in 1990.

Naturally, I have corrected this glaring oversight. Do feel free to sing along!
(PS: Wait until the 7 second mark.) 

A flash of light
-ning!

Is very fright
-ning!

This is how I
sing!

As I go fly
-ing!

And hit my own logo...
(ow ow ow ow ow ow ow ow ow ow my ego)

Bolt from the blue
Now I see you
Justice is swift
D'you catch my drift?

Demon in red
Cannot be shed
I will pursue
You have no clue

I am the Flash, the monarch of motion
I'll knock you on your ass!
I am the Flash, the fastest man alive
And I run really fast!

This is my love interest
Tina McGee
She's replaced Iris
(Obviously)

Then there's this guy
What is his name?

He's Julio
(was never canon)
I gotta go
(get my run on)
Bust some heads!

And you'd!
Never!
Think that!
I am seeee-
cretly police scientist Barry Allen!

And just in case you didn't find that amusing, I leave you with this:

"If you're not confused, you're not paying attention."

     Hellblazer is a series that has always been held dear to my heart. I've got the first 5 or 6 trade collections of the comic, and a few later volumes. One day, I'll get around to picking up all the collections, but it has been a rather long-running series. It'll take a while. In the meantime, there's been the occasional adaptation that's cropped up. There was a film about a dark-haired and dark-coated American man named John Constantine that had some rather good points to it (save the presence of Shia LeBouf, whom I maintain there has not yet been built a bus large enough to properly run over), but was certainly no Hellblazer film. I even made a valiant effort to play through the terrible licensed game that was made said film. Rumour has it Castiel from Supernatural was originally supposed to be John Constantine, but licensing fell through, and we got Misha's charming rogue Angel instead.

     Now in the interests of plausible deniability, I'd like to say that while I am aware of the leaked pilot floating around the internet, I certainly haven't seen it, as that would imply some less-than-legal and certainly immoral ways and means, and I would never ever ever partake in such activities. Just so we're clear. Officially, anything I discuss here has been gleaned from various publicly available video clips and discussions. Honest. If you get my drift.

Walked right off the pages, he has.

     Let's get the giant demonic elephant in the room out of the way. Unlike Keanu, Matt Ryan nails the character of John Constantine. The new John is an asshole. He's selfish, lazy, reluctant to get involved, dripping with gallows humor, and prone to answering questions with truths so audaciously unlikely that people assume he's lying. But he's charming, charismatic, trouble that you just can't say no to, and knows that he's probably the only person equipped to deal with the things that he sees. It's a perfect reflection of the way John's been written in the books for decades now. One of the most important details is covered in the very beginning of the pilot episode, that being Newcastle. Years and years ago, John and some of his more irresponsible and experimental occultist friends accidentally damned a young girl's soul to hell, and he's dealt with crippling guilt since. Everything he's done since Newcastle has been motivated by a conflict between his instinct to avoid responsibility and his desire to redeem himself.

      The other characters are a mixed bag. Chas returns, Constantines hapless but faithful friend. He's American now, like he was in the film, but is portrayed by a gruff, bearded Charles Halford instead of the aforementioned (and afore-cursed) Shia. Visually and performance-wise, he hits the mark so well you don't even miss the original nationality. His omnipresent taxi cab is back, but this time it's a classic 50s Chevy instead of the London Black. Again, much more suitable than a 90s Caprice. The cast is rounded out by the angel Manny, played with a menacing charm by Harold Perrineau, and Lucy Griffiths as Liv. Manny's a fantastic character, but I was sadly disappointed by Liv. I have fond memories of Lucy Griffiths in the BBC's cheesy Robin Hood series, but she just falls flat here. Fortunately, I hear there's recasting afoot, and someone will be taking her place, but playing existing character Zed instead, opening up the possibility of an adaptation of the Damnation Army arc from the books.

     The show has a very interesting feel, a mix between more modern exorcism/possession films and higher-quality horror/adventure shows. The special effects are low-key but believable, with what appear to be a lot of practical effects. Lots of shouting in cod-Latin, as you'd expect from pulp horror. The setting was in interesting choice, being not New York or Los Angeles as you'd expect, but Atlanta of all places. Always knew there was something weird about Atlanta. Due to this (and I mean this in nicest possible way) I half expected to see a Winchester brother wander past in the background. The pacing was a bit odd, and the story didn't flow terribly well, but that's something you'd expect from a pilot episode, and doesn't worry me. Sherlock, for example, has a frankly amateurish pilot episode compared to its premiere.

     Overall, I have high hopes for this adaptation, based on the very limited materials I've seen of it so far, having totally not seen the actual leaked pilot episode. It's certainly better than previous adaptations of Hellblazer that I've seen, and I'm encouraged that Matt Ryan really feels like he understands the character. I honestly thing even my pick, Marc Warren, wouldn't have been better for the role. I've got a feeling this could, if properly handled, be at least as good as DC's other successful television property, Arrow.

     And yes, that was Dr Fate's helmet. I have to go squee now.

OH LAWDY THOR'S A WOMAN

Have a new Salem

*Here, and I was worried a topic would not present itself for me to write upon this week..*

     So the other day it was announced the Marvel's Thor was now going to be a woman. Well, that was the announcement, but as you'll see in the linked press release, it's actually a bit more of a complicated situation than that.

     Thor is being judged unworthy (which has happened before) and the hammer is going to be wielded by someone else (which has also happened before). For a while, a horse alien held Mjolnir. Captain America, Storm, a few artificial life forms, and others have held the hammer in regular continuity. Outside of regular continuity, Superman, Rogue, Wonder Woman, and one of the various Spider-men have held it. Magneto even used it for a while (relying on his magnetic powers rather than being worthy of it). So I want to make it perfectly clear that I'm OK with someone else holding the hammer. I'm even OK with someone else headlining the Thor books. Some of the best stories were told when Hercules was headlining Hulk while he was off-planet being a gladiatorial emperor, and I can't think of something that would be more awesome than Valkyrie carrying around Mjolnir and headlining Thor for a while.

     Marvel's made a lot of (gasp) progressive changes that have resulted in some interesting outcomes. Hispanic Spider-Man over in the Ultimate U. The Fearless Defenders book. Ms Marvel being promoted to Captain Marvel, along with the flightsuit/mohawk look. Countless other little changes and seeds that show they've been playing a long game to make their worlds more diverse and interesting, and I applaud them for it. They've managed to make a lot of little changes that don't feel like “tokens,” telling good stories and making changes in the world that feel natural, all the while DC Comics has been trying to play catch-up and falling flat on their faces. Just like the real world, change is slow, painful, and gradual, but it feels natural when done that way. You can't change a world overnight without the entire thing collapsing.

     So with all of this in mind, I do actually have a problem with Thor being a woman, the way they've framed it. As I understand it, and these are from the words of the creative team, Thor is not turning into a woman. If Thor were turning into a woman, I'd be more OK with this, as he's a demigod. The rules are, always have been, and always should be, unclear on what limitations that can be placed on a demigod's physiology. No, this is a character that is in Thor's life, idolizes him, looks up to him, and when Thor is judged unworthy, he is stripped of his power, his hammer, and his name, and it is given to her instead. In my eyes, this is a total disrespect to both characters. You're taking a character's very birth name from him, the name given him by his mother and father (coincidentally, demigods themselves), and you're giving it to someone else. Not even Loki, who slept with a horse, gave birth to a baby horse, and brought about Ragnarok, ever had his own name taken from him. You're literally taking his identity away.

     And here's the part where I don't understand why more people concerned with diversity are upset. Why Joss Whedon and TheMarySue and all the other female-centric-viewpoint-friendly outlets aren't rioting. You're taking a woman, erasing her previous identity, and giving her a new one, based on an existing character. There was speculation for a bit that a previously existing female character, likely one of Marvel's super-powered blondes, would take over. Honestly, being a fan of both Valkyrie and Ms/Captain Marvel (likely candidates to stand in for Thor, based on appearance and power levels), I am certainly hoping that is not the case. Both of these characters have a pretty rich history and stand on their own merits, and to have all of that taken away from them and just have “THOR” pasted over it would be pretty insulting. There's a lot of really awesome pre-existing female characters in the Marvel U that I'm now worried about, because I want them to keep existing as who they are, and not having the identity of Thor pasted over theirs.

     Of course, this is all speculation. It could be a cynical publicity stunt. It could all be reset to status quo inside of 2 years. It could turn out to be a fantastic story that all makes sense once its taken in context with the events surrounding it. But from the information they've given so far, it's just.. kinda worrying. From some of my previous posts, I've made it clear that I enjoy stories with female protagonists. I've been reading some of Marvel's female characters for close to 20 years now. I want to see more and better things done with them, but one thing I don't want to see is a characterized game of matroyska dolls where someone like Carol Danvers or Emma Frost is swallowed up by another character.

    

Also, why was this announced on The View? Since when was The View considered a source of comic book news?

I can't believe this actually happened

(Trigger Warning:  Captain America: The Winter Soldier spoilers to follow)

This weekend, something remarkable happened: Hollywood grew a spine.

I don't know it happened. Perhaps it is a sign of things to come; perhaps it is just temporary cartilage that will buckle as soon as any real weight is placed upon it.  But still, for 2 hrs and 30 minutes, something glorious occurred.

In a big-budget blockbuster that is, incidentally, only one of two Marvel Studios movies this year, and the only one with any real "name-brand" recognition, I heard and saw the following:

• The bad guys, who have a direct moral and historical link to the Nazis, said that people were too stupid to be allowed to have freedom, but if you try to take that freedom away they will fight; therefore, the trick is to scare the people enough into giving up their freedom voluntarily. 

• The bad guys also said that to serve the "greater good", millions would have to be killed (troublemakers, free thinkers, and those who would oppose the new order) in order to save billions. Ah, the moral "justification" of genocide. 

• And finally, these bad guys, these Nazi inheritors, said that they needed to do this through Big Brother tactics and the surveillance state... which they acquired through step 1, "scare the people into giving up their liberty."

• And then -- AND THEN -- no less a symbol than Captain America* his own bad self stated that no, this is wrong, that it goes against everything he believes in, everything he stands for, and everything he and his generation fought for in World War 2. Then they try to murder him, of course. 

I'll say that again:  the proponents of the surveillance state try to murder the living symbol of liberty.

• And then this living symbol, allied with other trouble-making, free-thinking, liberty-loving "undesirables", goes and beats the snot out of the bad guys. They get the mobile death camps to destroy each other, they expose the spy network by leaking all their secrets onto the Internet**, and they dismantle the surveillance organization so that citizens are no longer spied upon by their own government -- all while the audience is going "Go Cap!  Kick their butts!"

I can't believe I just watched Hollywood make a movie where they

1. Equated the modern surveillance state with Nazi Germany;
2. Stated we were but one step away from genocide;
3. Had a figurehead for American Ideals say "No, that's wrong";
4. Endorsed the destruction of said surveillance state in the name of freedom. 

I feel like I dimension-shifted while I was sleeping and awoke in a glorious new world. 

Pray tell me, good sirs and ladies, what color is the Emperor Norton bridge in this reality?

* Fuck Yeah!
**  This was done by Black Widow, aka Natasha Romanova. Who is Russian. The Snowden parallel is obvious.

WNW: Wolverine - The Musical

No explanation need be given, honestly. Just watch this.

While I'm Ranting...

.. I figured I ought to share with you this wonderful quote that came to me on Facebook via a friend:

"Doctor Doom is beloved in Latveria even though the rest of the world views him as a horrible super villain and he pulls it off because his people live idyllic, sheltered lives. If I made $80k a year working in a Doombot factory and spent all my weekends drinking lagers with dirndl-clad frauleins I wouldn't give a shit either."

Damn. I need to get me a piece of that sweet, sweet Doombot action.

Also: "Sweet Doombot Action" is totally going to be my 70s Blaxsploitation name.

You're welcome, boys (and gals so inclined).  Have a great weekend!

Dirty Laundry

This is making the rounds on the intertubez, and due to family aggro I haven't been able to accomplish anything today. So watch and enjoy. 

WNW: The Avengers '78

The Avengers together for the first time in this 1978 made for TV movie.. They face off with their greatest foe yet... KISS, under the power of Loki, played by Paul Lynde.

May I just add that 1) the casting of Paul Lynde is BRILLIANT, and 2) I totally dig that Claremont Grip that Gene Simmons is using.

Super Best Friends Forever

In case you missed it last week, the cartoon short I mentioned last week can now be seen in its entirety here.

Hello, DC Comics...

Look at your Superman, then back to Thor. Now back to Superman. Now back to Thor. Sadly, Superman isn't Thor, but if you took a lesson from Marvel and gave him interesting villains, he could do as well as Thor.

Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're at a hugely successful movie premiere with the man your Superman could be if you'd only give him good writers.

What's in your hand? Back at Thor, he has it. It's a movie with drama and pathos. Look again. The movie is now worth its weight in gold!

Anything is possible when your Superman is actually super and not an emo boy fighting a real estate plot.

I'm beating a dead horse.

(Link) View more Old Spice Sound Clips and Bruce Campbell Sound Clips

WNW: Deconstructing Dr. Doom

Since everyone and their stuffed bull is jumping on this one, I might as well put the final nail in its coffin:


Hmm. A bit too ghetto, methinks. Perhaps a pinch of Pirates of Penzance will perk up the place:

I am the very model of a modern Marvel mastermind,
You heroes are like Laura Bush's children who've been left behind,
My plans they are quite devious with multiple contingencies,
So kindly do not bore me with your tedious soliloquies!

I'm very well acquainted with your profiles psychological,
Your powers and your gadgets and your incantations magical,
I've run the simulations and in ev'ry single one I find
I thrash you all quite handily so to defeat please be resigned!

I have all matters well in hand so do not further prattle on,
My plotting is perfection, I am preparation's paragon,
And when it comes to evil I am terrifying yet refined
I am the very model of a modern Marvel mastermind!


Ah yes. Much better.


(Apologies for not fitting this into the picture; I couldn't shrink the text enough to fit and still remain legible)