Spider-Verse - Cheap Heat

Editor's Note: Today, I'm happy to present a new post from MattComix! For long time readers, you may remember when Matt used to write columns on a regular basis here. Newcomers will recognize his name from the comments sections as he is regular commenter. Today he presents his thoughts on the Spider-Verse event:

---

In professional wrestling there is a term known as "cheap heat". Basically when a wrestler does or says something just to get a cheer, a boo, a chant, or other "pop" from the crowd that has nothing to do with their skills as wrestler or an entertainer, but they know the crowd will react regardless. Probably the most prime example of this is saying the name of the town they're in during an interview. It's a very easy way to make a crowd of wrestling fans pop.

There is an annoying fanfic writing impulse, one which seem to dominate modern superhero comics which is to take something from the readers have familiarized with some degree of positivity or innocence and doing something horrible with it that would never be done in that property's canon due to standards and practices, target audience, or common sense.


Cheap heat.
The latest in a never ending number of convoluted and of course blood-soaked events coming out of the big two, the current Spider-Verse arc involves a vampire-esque family that crosses dimensional barriers to feed off and kill in horrible and usually on-camera ways various versions of Spider-Man and other "Spider Totems". 

These dimensions include everything from comics, cartoons, live-action, to even Spider-Ham and the Spidey from the old Hostess ads. I figure Japanese Spider-Man is safe as long as he can get to his big robot in time but Nicolas Hammond Spidey is probably doomed. Maybe Electric Company Spidey can prevent Morlun's son from having access to vowel sounds and contractions. That would at least trip up his usual threats.

The latest victim in all of this is Mayday Parker aka Spider-Girl. While Spider-Girl and the whole MC2 experiment was by no means perfect, Spider-Girl really feels like where much of everything I ever liked about Spider-Man apparently went to after being fired by Marvel.

For myself, I didn't really get on board when it was first coming out but after finally reading the book I decided that Peter Parker's future in Spider-Girl felt far, far more genuine and enjoyable as any kind of actual extension of what Lee, Ditko, Romita started. Much moreso than any version of his present being shown in the mainline  titles. This is even before One More Day and the so-called "Superior" Spider-Man.

Yeah, it kinda sucks that Peter had to lose a leg and that the Clone Saga basically counts as irremovable backstory (also have mixed feelings about that goatee) but he was happy with his family and helping his daughter who was doing his old mantle very proud standing out as an a great character and hero in her own right.


I felt that just the existence of this continuity at least gave me some sense of closure for the whole Spider-Man thing. Such that if an enjoyable Spider-Man series in any media never actually happened again before I leave this mortal coil I could at least be reasonably satisfied with the idea that Spider-Girl is how the story one of my favorite heroes ended while also leaving another hero I'd enjoyed open for more adventures. I could be content with this being the image I left both Peter and Mayday Parker behind on:


Ron Frenz commented on the story in a recent interview with Swerve magazine:

“Pete learned through the death of Uncle Ben that if he doesn't act, people die; Mayday learned in her first couple of issues that when she does act, people live. That subtle, but significant difference put her in a much more positive and proactive headspace, which was pretty much the whole vibe of the MC2 Universe. MC2 was unabashedly a universe wherein heroes existed and helped make the world a better place, so that a second generation of people who get powers are inspired to do the same thing."

But of course I should have known that the relentless event cycles and the anti-joy stance of modern comicbook writing would not let such a thing pass in to history with its dignity intact. So of course in Spider-Verse no. 8 Peter Parker and Mary Jane are killed and Mayday not only swears vengeance but is also sure to emphasize that she will do so at the total expense of her fathers ideals. Because there is such a huge gaping void of superheroes with dead parents and revenge driven berserkers in comics that Mayday Parker just had to be the one to fill it.


Cheap heat. 
Apparently killing off the Parkers in Spider-Girl is something Marvel editorial has been salivating to do for a long while and something the creators fought against during their run. Again from the Frenz interview at Swerve:

“There was more than one editor in our run of 'Spider-Girl' who thought it would be great to kill Pete because then it gives her the whole tragic origin just like his. The very first annual, Tom DeFalco and Pat Olliffe did that cover with Mary Jane and Pete laying dead, and Spider-Girl's kneeling there mourning them, and they did it deliberately to 1) give the editor's what they wanted in the shocking cover, and 2) stick it to them because it didn't happen in the story. It was a story with Misery and she's showing May her worst fears."

“Our problem with it is, if you take away the family, then you have taken away the core of what Spider-Girl stories are about. The same way Spider-Man stories are about 'With great power, there must also come great responsibility,' Spider-Girl stories are about family and the positive aspects of being a superhero."

Now it's possible all this is will be retconned before the Spider-Verse event is even finished. I'm willing to acknowledge that Spider-Verse is a story that is still in progress even as predictably grimdark and eyerolling as this whole thing is. But I think there's a difference between building drama and having to wade through relentless misery for the big payoff.

A payoff that will likely just lead into yet another event anyway given the track record of these things. A lot of these stunts seem to be made under the pretense that there's nothing that can be done to these characters that can break or ruin them and so often it feels like Marvel is constantly playing chicken with Spider-Man to test that theory.

With few exceptions, character death is cheap heat and like in professional wrestling it will always give you that initial pop to fire up the crowd but it's not sustainable as the entirety of the show. What isn't cheap are monthly comics and I've now been given just one more reason not to go back to buying them on a regular basis.

- MattComix

Romita and Johns on Superman?

Last week, it was discovered that Geoff Johns and John Romita Jr. would be taking over one of the Superman title(s?), an announcement I found a bit synchonous considering my recent posts on the Superman titles and the resulting discussion in the comments section of this blog.


This news raised an eyebrow from me on several levels:

1) John Romita doesn't really strike me as a good fit for Superman. His art style is a bit grittier than one typically associates with Superman. He would be better for a Batman book, wouldn't he?



2) The bit about this being a soft reset sounds like Johns is saying Morrison/Perez botched the DC 52 relaunch of Superman, so he's coming in to save it.

3) Is Johns the right guy for Superman? His previous turns on the title didn't really ignite the internet into a buying frenzy.


4) The comments on ComicsBeat.com suggest this won't be the slam dunk DC thinks it is going to be.

I emailed my concerns to documented Superman fan and FBU columnist MattComix and he managed to talk me off the ledge a bit. This is what he said:

Jim,

I don't think any artist can save that costume.

1. I agree that JR Jr. is miscast here. Then again, having the art team from 90's Punisher War Zone comics on Superman looks pretty much in line with DC's current modus operandi. Not to say that Superman should always be drawn from the Byrne or Garcia Lopez school of art but I do think he's a character who generally works better with a cleaner look and line. Though I could see someone who had been a fan of Jon Bogdanove being into a JR Jr. Superman.

2) He says "reset" but he may just be talking about setting the stage for whatever it is they're going to do rather than backtracking from stuff that's been established as part of his Nu52 concept and origin. One of the problems New 52 has is that it's the same people doing the same stuff only now with pop collars and visible seams.The same basic philosophy is still driving the line, the reboot just let them apply it to the past as well as the present.

3. If nothing else I think Geoff does have a sincere love of the character. But sadly that is not something that is likely to curb the usual gratuitous aspects of his work. Also, he's had Aquaman leading a z grade super team called The Others hasn't he? Maybe Superman will get his own called Those Guys.

4. I don't think that the reaction on ComicsBeat is a indicator of how the comic will ultimately do. Besides DC's standards for a success don't seem to really extend beyond getting in enough of the direct market fans to make it defensible as one.

I think Matt has a good point in that my reaction to the news was a tad too negative. I still have my doubts about this team, but I'll pick up the first issue.

- Jim

An Unexpected Take on Man Of Steel

Editor's Note: Today, longtime Superman fan and vehement critic of grim and gory storytelling MattComix shares a thorough analysis of the Man of Steel. If you are familiar with Matt's opinion on the New 52 and grimdark storytelling, I think you will find his review quite surprising. It's not what I expected!- Jim

---

Superman is an easy target. In the modern era he gets trashed on for everything from his conscience to his costume. Yet, even in the age of grim and grit Superman still has a place in peoples hearts all around the world that Batman and Wolverine will never know. Because he is everything the superhero is about. You don't have to be a fan but if you hate him I think you have missed the point of superheroes entirely. Granted, Hollywood has often not been the best about presenting that point to the masses.

When it was announced that the Nolan/Goyer machine was behind the latest Superman project I can't say I was enthusiastic about the prospect. Then I saw the second and third trailers which gave me a touch of hope about the thing. Sure there was the now requisite posturings of "realism", but even with all of that there was a core of humanity there that seemed to be sincere. With at once both nagging dread and cautious optimism I went in to see the movie. So where does the Nolan/Goyer/Snyder joint called Man Of Steel ultimately fit?

What I liked:

Henry Cavill as Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman: The casting of this man is the single smartest decision made on this entire project, full stop.



He is the right actor for Superman and if you've seen him interviews you know he's also a good custodian of the part who conducts himself with a kindness and class that befits the role he has inherited. If anything the script does not take enough advantage of the Superman that it is so lucky to have. Between the guys looks and his seemingly natural ability to portray a man of conscience with powers and abilities far beyond mortals I have to say that the role finally has a worthy successor to Christopher Reeve. Remember I said successor, not replacement. There will never be that. Ever.

The rest of the cast: I really like the cast of this movie with one slight exception that I will talk about later.

Michael Shannon is no Terrance Stamp but I think he delivers on the part as written and does a good job of giving this Zod the slightest glimpse of humanity without making him too sympathetic.

Russel Crowe Jor-El has a touch of Maximus to him but it works for a Jor-El who is as much a man of action as he is of science.

Kevin Costner's Johnathan Kent seemed to me almost like a middle ground between the folksiness of Glenn Ford and the protectiveness of John Scheinder.

Diane Lane still seems far to beautiful to be playing the aging mother of Clark Kent but she does very well as both younger and older Martha. I also want to give high compliments to both the actors who played the younger versions of Clark.

Lawerence Fishburne as Perry White may lack the Great Ceaser's Ghost bravado of Jackie Cooper but he is very believable as the hard boss and stern father figure of the Daily Planet who holds all this reporters to a very high standard.

Krypton: This movie really returns Superman to his roots in sci-fi. This is a Krypton that combines liquid metal computers with flying lizards.



That combo of fantasy and science is exactly in the tradition of Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers comic strips Jerry and Joe were geeking on during the era when they created Superman. It does not do literally so much as I think it is in the same spirit. One of the things I look for in any version of Superman's origin is how well they do what I call the "goodbye scene". When Lara pleads with Jor-El to let her hold her baby just one more time, well that got me in the way that just about any incarnation of the goodbye scene always does.

The Suit. This was something I really needed to be sold on because I make zero apologies for being a purist when it comes to Supermans classic costume. With that said however, if there must be a modernizing of Supermans costume I will take MOS suit any day of the week over the Nu52 version. I would only ask that please for the love of god stop de-saturating the damn thing.

I'm quite thankful that it doesn't have that de-saturated look except for a few points in the movie so it seems to mostly be a thing that happens in promo photos and art. When the red and blues of the suit are allowed to pop the overall design really starts to come together into something that looks like Superman! I still love the idea of his coming up with the costume with Ma and Pa Kent as he did in 1986's Man Of Steel no. 1, but the concept of this basically being the way Kryptonian's dress is an interesting one and well executed here even despite having to believe an alien glyph would look at all like our letter S.

Production/Direction/Script. Snyder is really the movie equivalent to an Image artist being put on a DC character. He can provide some great visuals but he really needs someone around who can and will reign him in, make him think about what he is doing, or even just say "no" to him. That seems to be the influence Nolan and Goyer have or maybe they just balance each other out well by giving Zack's visual sensibilities an actual story to build them upon. Yet those same sensibilities also keep Nolan and Goyer from disappearing too far up their own pretentiousness.

The Score by Hans Zimmer. There is nothing here that will de-throne John Willams score from the Donner films. However the music works every well for the film and I finding myself becoming ever more addict to the track titles "An Ideal Of Hope". I think what I enjoy most about it is that the music evokes the feeling of soaring into the air at super-speed while simultaneously evoking the feeling of coming out a period of sadness and into triumph. This theme also has a memorable hook to it which was something i found lacking both in Zimmers previous work and most modern movie soundtracks in general. "An Ideal Of Hope" is not constructed as a theme quite the way John William's was, but it has a theme inside it. Something that will your ear will connect with as being this Superman's theme.

What I thought Could Have Been Better:

Action Scenes/Disaster Porn. The action in this movie is cool in a comicbooky way that I enjoy but I do think a better effort should have been made to either show us Superman trying very hard to get the fight out of the city or even have a line of dialog about the city being evacuated so that we could in our minds imagine that many of the people got out before the major destruction started. Which is plausible IMO that they had when the terra-forming started well before the big throw down between Superman and Zod.



In classic comicbook superhero action sequences stuff gets broke. A lot. But in that very fantastic, even slightly cartoony context it is something that is usually not meant to be taken with total weighty seriousness. All the streets are usually magically fixed by the time the next issue and the next super brawl rolls around. It's just part of the stylization of the genre. The fight scenes in superhero stories are there for action, something fun that is ideally acting as dramatic punctuation to the conflict rather than a glorification or deep examination of violence. Obviously there are exceptions to this and in modern comics there far, far too many instances of pimping realistic or even horror movie levels of gory on-camera violence like it was standard superhero action.

It's ok to have Superman cut loose sometimes but he can't be looking careless about it. Especially if the level of devastation makes 9/11 look like a toddler knocking over a stack of Legos. I like action and have wanted to see Superman punch stuff as much as the next fan BUT this really needed to be streamlined some, and in general just had more thought about how these action scenes relate to the character and what he's about. They are not bad they just suffer from being a bit careless.

I think though at the end of the day what people are really reacting to (and some sadly blaming Superman for) is the fact that if a super-powered brawl were to actually happen, it would suck. It would not be fun for anyone. They are entertaining in fiction but this is simply not something you ever want to happen in real life.

Lois Lane: Amy Adams is a good actress but I'm still not completely sold on her in the part and I honestly don't know if it's anything do with her performance or if it's more the script. It could be argued that women have very little do to in this movie but look on in awe as a man does something and Amy's Lois suffers from that a bit. It's not a deal breaker so much as a missed opportunity.

What I Did Not Like:

Super Jesus/Moses Man. While there is some parallel between Moses and Christ in the story of Superman I think it's time for a moratorium on gratuitous messiah imagery and references in Superman stories. The Donner movies pushed that about as far as it can or should go. Besides religious allegory is not strictly required to convey the idea of Superman as an inspiring figure that people will rally behind. Let me be clear though that this is not a anti-religious stance, it is about a metaphor attached to the character that I think has been overly used, handled with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the head, and has totally worn out its welcome as a result.


However in this movie we mainly have two instances of imagery and then just the overall idea that Superman can potentially change the world. This is still a fair distance from Donner film and especially the overwrought Passion Of The Kal-El stuff in Superman Returns.

Things I will miss:

Lois Knows: I freely admit that I enjoy the love triangle.



I don't give any damns that it's not realistic because it's fun and can when done right have some real drama to it. It seems though that in this series of films Lois is someone who is in Superman's corner and looking out for him from a very early point. I'd sooner have this than getting rid of the secret identity entirely which I totally though this film was going to do. With all the talk about realism I though it was going to be the first thing on the chopping block. But I think this is at least a compromise I can live with.

Johnathan Kent: I would have preferred that character had lived so that we could see his point of view evolve from his fear to encouraging his sons heroic efforts.



Also just to have both Kents around as they were in the Post-Crisis comics and to distinguish the dynamic from Peter Parker and Aunt May.

The Thing I Am Undecided About:

Killing Zod: The world of this movie is one where the presence of Superman and the attack by Zod are very likely to be the first super powered things that have ever happened to it. There are no metahuman prisons, no inhibitor collars, no kryptonite, and Zod managed to elude the one shot humanity had at putting the villains back in the Phantom Zone.

This is the creators way of establishing a dramatic, narrative reason of where Supermans code against killing comes from and why he will strive to find a better way. Even though it is not spoken I think Supermans tears in the scene are essentially his saying to himself and to Lois "I have to be better than this."

Now personally I do not think the character necessarily requires a dramatic event to green-light his no killing stance because the idea of someone not wanting to kill for any reason isn't a fantasy construct in need of explaining. It is something many people can and do actually feel. Plus really, Superman only has to kill when the writer says so.



But to be fair, in real life a superhero might have to function a bit more like a police officer. Not in the sense of being a servant of authority but in the sense of a police officer as someone who is there to protect. Ideally they will do everything they can to defuse a situation so they do not have to fight, draw their weapon or fire it. However it is sadly inevitable that such a situation may occur and they have to be prepared to take a life if it means saving others and even themselves. Zods entire character arc in this film is his degeneration from a man who is a military leader to a monster that would kill innocent bystanders just out of spite.

Final Thought:

I never came to comics or superheroes for realism. That was never the point. To me the emotional reality of the characters is the only reality that matters in a superhero story. I go into it ready, willing, and wanting to use my imagination for everything else. Be it laser eyes or glasses as a mask.

I went into this film with a lot of fears that basically the obsession with darkness and realism would basically swallow up everything I ever loved about the character leaving just a brooding protagonist in a grimdark world setting with an "S" slapped on him for marketing purposes and fan recognition.

I was pleasantly surprised to find that instead of darkness the focus was more on giving the film a sense of humanity to contrast how inhuman Krypton had become by the time of its destruction. We see Clark very much as a person, just a guy really. But we go with him on that journey of discovery of himself and his purpose.

I think the films ending line is very appropriate. "Clark Kent, welcome to the Planet". This wordplay sums it up very well. Clark Kent was a guy who did not know who he was or where he fit in. This movie is about Clark finding out who he is. ..and who is Clark Kent?

Clark Kent is Superman.

- Matt

Robin The Dead

Editor's Note: This guest post by Matt contains commentary which might Spoil Batman Incorporated 8 which came out last week. You have been warned. - Jim

---

The killing, maiming, or torturing of sidekicks and supporting cast just might be the single cheapest route to drama in superhero fiction, second only to killing the hero's significant other in order to have him/her go into a beserker rage on the villain responsible.


... and of course, it's still happening.

I haven't been keeping up with the Grant Morrison run on Batman, but it's hard for me to imagine any context where this death works, simpy because DC has gone to the "kill Robin" well so many times.



Now there is the age old argument that Batman should not have sidekicks at all, because it is not a logical choice for him. Well, Batman may be the worlds greatest detective and/or the dark avenger of the night, but he's not a Vulcan. Making Dick Grayson Robin is not a logical response, but it makes sense emotionally for the character within the fantasy context of a superhero story. (Just like becoming Batman is not a logical response, but makes sense emotionally within the fantasy context of a superhero story.)

If the death of Bruce Wayne's parents impacted him enough to become the Batman, it's easy to imagine that on the night at the circus when the Flying Graysons fell to their deaths Bruce seeing Dick suddenly alone was like an out of body experience for him. He was watching his parents deaths happen all over again, seeing himself in that moment, and still could do nothing to stop it.

With that in mind, the concept of Robin already begins stretching credibility when it is something that happens more than once (let alone 5 times). Batman should not be turning every troubled teen he encounters into Robin. Especially not after any of them have been killed! However, at least in going from the death of Jason Todd to Tim Drake, they made a solid case for the very existance of Robin with a solid character to replace him for that reason. So much so it made you wish DC had just thought of Tim in the first place, and we had been able to skip the whole Jason Todd debacle all together.


While I was no fan of Jason myself, the 1-800 number campaign was revolting. This is not power that should have ever been handed to the audience, especially not upon the assumption that the fans would definitey want to save the character. The very nature of that promotion brought out the absolute worst instincts of the fandom, the desire to see someone die simply because it's dramatic. The event might not have been aimed at the lowest common denominator, but that's how it ended up hitting. The only saving grace of the entire thing was that we got Tim out of it.

While I'm at it I'm just gonna say that the Neal Adams redesign of the Robin costume for Tim is simply one of the best. Robin still looked like Robin but Neal fixed exactly what needed fixing which was basically the bottom half of the costume. Adding black to the cape was a slick touch that allowed Robin the ability to hide until it was time for the laughing daredevil to spring into action.


... and that's the thing. Robin is supposed to be fun, which I know is a four letter word in modern comics. By fun I don't even mean that I am advocating a return to the Dick Sprang era of Batman. I just mean that fun is an essential part of the point. Robin was jumping around and using wisecracks to infuriate criminals long before Spidey made it hip. If Batman's whole schtick is to strike fear and terror, Robin's thing is to humiliate them. Because let's face it, if you're a tough guy and you get your ass kicked by a mouthy kid in a yellow cape, that's a bad day.

How come it never occurs to any of these writers that if you go the "torture/kill the sidekick " route with Robin or the others, you're just hanging a needlessly huge lampshade on the impracticality of sidekicks ? It honestly makes Batman look stupid for having them. To some extent, it makes Batman look stupid for doing what he does at all. Not because he IS stupid, but because the creators have so carelessly broken the fantasy context of the genre, to such an extreme degree.

In this respect, comics have never been more predictable than they are right now. Just take whatever the crappiest scenario is that you can think of to happen to your favorite character, the sort of thing that really ought to be in the last story ever told about that character, and have it happen in-continuity in the most sensationalistic and stupid way possible. Then make sure you leave a back door open for a convoluted resurrection story down the road (not that it'll matter if you don't).

There ya go. Next year's big event or "evolutionary" step. They're pretty much all the same at this point.
- Matt

Spinning the Web of Tedium

Editor's Note: Last Week, Dan Slott raised the ire of many long time Spider-man fans by seemingly killing off Peter Parker. Matt Linkous today explains why fans got mad for the wrong reason. - Jim

---

You know even as much as we love the Bronze and the Golden ages here at FBU we like to think that we're not entirely opposed to what modern comics do so much as expressing some disatisfaction with the overall direction the industry and the genre has moved in over the years. We often point out what we feel are some of the inherent problems with it. I guess you could say we at least TRY to keep an open mind. Not always easy for us we admit, but we try.

Then something like Amazing Spider-Man 700 happens.

..yeah.

So, Spidey fans are currently getting Deathjerked. Again. Here we go round and round with same cheapheat gimmicks and grimdark that is turning this genre into an ongoing exercise in joylessness. Now Spider-Man's nemesis is wearing his body like a cheap suit so he can go around being the asshole version. You gotta love how the “everyman” thing always gets trotted out as the defense for this kind of stuff no matter how outlandish it is. Peter Parker is "us" therefore it makes it complete sense that Norman Osborn had sex with Gwen Stacy or Peter makes a deal with the devil. The everyman experience! In other words, it really seems like the everyman thing is Marvel's coded excuse to crap on the characters head in whatever way they feel like it no matter the long term consequences. So long as there's the short-term sales fluff.

There's also something else, it's a body swap plot! This is something that would be tepid for even a single issue story let alone as the next multi-part event gimmick meant to be drawn out for god knows how long (probably the next movie I would imagine). Also on a very basic level why would anyone reading Spidey's book want to spend a year reading about Doc Ock in Peter's body? Where does this even come from? It's only function is to service the death and return gimmick without having to do a replacement characterlike Azbats or Bucky Cap. How do we take Spidey out for a year without taking him out of a year? Ah hah! But it still boils down to the same thing.

Seriously how many more times do people who enjoy a time-honored hero like Spider-Man have to endure this long, tedious cycle? If every single popular superhero gets the big bloated death/return event it cheapens the very concept of death itself. In the process it makes that characters back story convoluted to a degree that is ridiculous even by the fantastic standards of comics and the dream logic superheroes ideally work on. "Oh, then there was the time he was dead. No the other time. But that was long after the time he became a giant spider and gave birth to himself."

Besides, if the creators working on Spider-Man are that tired of writing Peter Parker then maybe it’s time to change the creative team instead of the protagonist? Or even create a new hero entirely?

Amazing Spider-Man 700 is really the kind of insulting thing that makes a reader feel like  
Well, clearly Marvel doesn't respect or give a damn what they do with Spidey in his book so really why should I?"

..and why should you? When you don't like a storyline, do not buy it. I cannot stress that enough. Except the hard part about that is even when you decide not to buy the book the love for the character remains. I also realize that in the era of advanced ordering it's hard to predict when even something that seems stupid on the surface is going to actually be stupid or might be great. Yet it's so vitally important that you do it.

Why?

It's the one and only way you have to influence anything that Marvel or DC does. Or any comics company for that matter. They could care less about your opinion no matter where you comment or blog especially when the numbers are telling them the something else. Don't buy just to keep up or to complete your collection or because you've been doing it every Wednesday of your life and can't conceive of being without it. I love Spider-Man but it is exactly *because* I love Spider-Man I will not spend one single dime of my hard earned money on a book that treats the character like crap. Do I miss reading Spidey comics on a monthly basis, yes. God yes! Of course I do! But I'm not going to let Marvel or DC use my love of the characters as means to abuse my loyality by doing whatever insulting stunt they want. Yes, stories need to create drama and conflict but there is also a very basic trust that both companies have repeatedly violated and continue violate knowing that fans will show up anyway.

This Deathjerk is a prime example of that.

- Matt

Flashback Five on: Transformations

Editor's Note: While I'm traveling during the holidays, Matt Linkous is lending a hand with a new Flashback Five. Today, Matt shares some of his memories of his favorite superhero transformation scenes. Thank you Matt! - Jim

---

In superhero stories I have always had a tremendous affection towards secret identities for one very important reason: the idea of transformation. As a kid I lived for that moment in a comic book where an ordinary person summons, becomes, or reveals their super powered form. There is just something kinetic about that moment of transition from the mortal to the extraordinary. Besides, having that contrast simply makes the idea of being a superhero that much more special. This can happen very literally with a burst of magic, such as Diana Prince spinning into her glamorously heroic form as Wonder Woman. But it can also be the hero getting suited up for the battle ahead. This is something I touched on briefly in my review of the New 52 Flash comic.

Continuing in that vein, Today's FB5 is five of my favorite superhero transformations.

5. Dr. Banner to The Incredible Hulk. 

The Hulk has undergone a lot of versions over the past 20-30 years, most really focused on the "Jekyl/Hyde" aspect.  Personally, I always found the Frankenstein aspect more interesting, the man who created his own monster and is literally stuck with it. The character I really think of as the Hulk is the 70's green, shaggy haired, childlike brute who was gentle at heart because deep down Banner's own conscience is the tether between the man and the beast. Next to the eye-effect from the Bill Bixby TV show I also love it when the change when it's portrayed as a rush of adrenalin. Like the sensation that goes through you when you get frustrated enough to slam your fist onto your desk. Only in Banners case it's one million times that and he can't put the breaks on it once it starts. As in this page from the Batman/Hulk crossover drawn by the incomperable Jose Garcia Lopez.


4.  Bruce Wayne to The Batman. 

Now Of course Bruce cannot instantly or magically transform. However a well done gearing-up sequence conveys that same trans-formative sense. After all the mantle of the bat is a disguise Bruce created to "strike fear and terror into the hearts of criminals". It helps re-enforce the power of this concept when comics show the moment that he makes that transition from billionaire playboy to the The Dark Knight Detective (remember when the "detective" part actually counted?) I think an excellent example of this comes from this page by the great Marshall Rogers.



3. Peter Parker into Spidey.  

Now at certain times it works to give Peter a very cool gearing-up type of sequence to indicate he's really going kick some butt. However most of the time there is the indication that Peter putting on his Spidey suit is a hurried and occasionally humorous affair. Being first exposed to Spidey's comics in the 70's one of my favorite reoccurring shots was of Peter skittering up the side of an alleyway with his shoes in his hand trying to get to the roof so he can quick change. A variation on this idea comes from an issue of Marvel Team-Up. Peter is just trying to have a night out  with Mary Jane but of course he has to dash off to become Spider-Man ...and almost bungles the whole secret identity thing in front of a live studio audience by nearly dropping his shoe on the hosts head while trying to change in the rafters.





2. Billy Batson transforming into Captain Marvel.

Growing up as one of those kids dreaming about how cool it would be to become a superhero, the appeal of Captain Marvel was only natural. You didn't even need radiation or an alien physiology, you could just say the word and off you go! I was first exposed to the good Captain via the 70's Filmation tv series with Michael Gray. For all the shows requisite lessons of the week and under budgeted flaws, Filmation knew how to get a kid amped up with a transformation sequence. Artist Alex Ross is a bit of a kindred spirit to me in this respect since he has gone on record many times sighting his love for the show. So I guess it's fitting that one of my favorite portrayls of Billy's transformations is from his work. While this one is from a collectors item rather than something that was used in a story it is still a favorite of mine because I think it perfectly captures the power and the joy of what happens when Billy utters that one magic word.


1. Clark Kent into Superman. 

Clark Kent revealing that bold red \S/ on his chest is the single most iconic and imitated superhero transformation of all time. It is known the world over just like the character himself. There many ways of showing Clark Kent going from his street clothes to his hero mode but nothing captures and evokes the idea with as much effectiveness. You don't even need to see him move at super-speed or have a panel showing him slipping on his boots. You just see that shirt-rip and you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is a job..for Superman! You can immediately cut away to a cool shot of him flying or have him zooming out of the sky and right into the action. It's exactly the kind of "hell yeah!" moment good superhero comics are made of. A great example of this comes from artist Ivan Reis. The page is so simple, yet so awesome. You can practically hear the John Williams theme cue up as your eyes go down the panels.


These are only a few of my favorite transformations. We'd love to hear some of yours!
Have a great weekend and be sure to be back here live for the next FB5!

- Matt

Flashback Five on The Aquaman Relaunch

Welcome back to FB5! Last time Matt broke away from the usual "flashback" part of FB5 to bring you a review of The Flash no. 1 from the nu 52 line-up. Now we're going to dive right in to part 2 with a look at Aquaman no. 1!

---

You know, while I never considered Aquaman to be the coolest of superheroes, I never thought he was this ultimate example lame that everybody seems to really get off on making him out to be. Nor did he really need a lot things to compensate for that in order to make him more "bad ass". Honestly, I prefer him to a jerk like Namor and when Aquaman dropped a whale on the head of "Imprerius Rex", I laughed out loud. If Aquaman had been in his classic costume when it happened, it would have been a perfect moment. Anyway, let's dive into 5 things I liked about Aquaman no.1!

1. The opening sequence. 



Aquaman flipping a truck with crooks making a get-away over his head using his trident is an idea for an action moment so simple yet so cool I really have to wonder why nobody else on an Aquaman book ever attempted it.

2. Ivan Reis. You know, I think Reis might be a better fit for Aquaman than Green Lantern. Something about Reis's style just really brings out the character and his costume. Speaking of his costume out all the pop-collar brigade I think Aquaman is the only hero it really even works for.



Perhaps because aside from the pop-collar no other elements of his look have been screwed with. Just continuing the gold scales up to his neck actually kind of works.

3. The restaurant scene.
 


I usually do not enjoy a lot of aggressive "meta" going on in comics. One of the many reasons that doesn't appeal to me at all is because it leads to characters in the story world reacting to the fantastic things they encounter like fans sitting around talking on a message board about comics instead of people who are living these events. However, in the instance of this issue I can forgive it because I actually found myself enjoying how it directly tackles all the various pre-conceived notions about Aquaman and lets the character himself answer them. I even liked the biology babble explanation of how the whole "talking to fish" thing actually works. (Hint: Fish can't talk.)

4. The good Geoff Johns is in attendance. The bad Geoff Johns isn't...yet. I'm not a fan of Johns and the reason why is that I've often felt there are two Geoff Johns. One who is a sincere DC superhero fan that has a lot of genuine love for those characters. Then there's this other Geoff Johns who seems like a 14 year-old hyperactive horror movie fan that has decided he wants everything to be blood and gore like a Hellraiser movie regardless of genre or context. Sometimes you get one or the other, or you get both even within the span of a single issue. This time out though, it seems like the good Geoff sent bad Geoff to go get coffee while he wrote the script for the issue. My only quibble is Aquaman having angst about being king and not wanting to go back to Atlantis but I have to wonder if that has something to do with events that will be revealed later on that would have it make a bit more sense.



The issue ends with a shot of an evil humanoid shark creature emerging out of the water and the more skeptical part of me has the sneaking feel that issue 2 is where bad Geoff will show up and the opening page will be an on-camera spread of the creature gnawing on entrails or something.

5. Cover logo. 



Okay, it's just a logo. But We were talking in the comments to another article about how bland a lot of the new 52 logos looked, but I thought this was one of the better ones. Not as good as Aquaman's classic title logo I like that this still has his A symbol and it's not just letters floating sideways looking like they are being sucked up by the top right hand corner of the book.


I think the thing that really strikes me about both of this and The Flash no.1 is that neither of them are making apologies for the character and I can't help but feel so many other books in the 52 line-up basically are on one level or another. Both of these books without gratuity or gimmicks are doing their best to showcase why these characters are cool, making them look good in process with some really appealing superhero artwork. I really wish more of this relaunch was akin to these two issues.

- Matt

Flasback Five on the Relaunched Flash

Today Matt gives his thoughts on why he likes the relaunched Flash!

---

Anyone who knows my writing on the blog has a pretty good idea that I do not have a lot of love left for what currently passes for DC Comics, which I usually refer to as Didio Comics. For all the hype and praises of the relaunch I have remained unimpressed. However, now I'm actually glad to say that I have found at least two notable exceptions to what has so far seemed to be for the most part little more than yet another round of eye-rolling attempts at being "edgy". These comics have stood out to me because these first issues did NOT do that. What I feel they did instead was to present a cool superhero character doing awesome things with some good looking art held together with a solid story to make you curious what happens next issue. Unlike so many others in the line they feel more like superhero comics. Not horror movies. Not thinly veiled porn. Not "reality" TV. Not a storyboard pitch for the movie.

So I'm breaking the actual "flashback" part of FB5 just this once to give you five things I liked about The Flash no.1!


I have to admit that when it comes to the Flash I'm more of a Wally West guy. But that is not at the expense of Barry Allen or any kind of real disdain for him. But I did enjoy that he got to die a hero in an ultimate heroic act and that we were following a character who was inheriting that mantle from him, both living the promise and shouldering the burden of what it meant to bear the name. But I think I can say that with the new Flash no.1 even if you don't consider yourself a Barry Allen fan this is just might be a good time to give the guy another chance even if you miss Wally.

1. Francis Manapul. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Manapul might be one of the best artists to fit the character since the late Mike Weringo.



That might seem like an odd choice given the watercolor look to his art but there's an energy to his pages that I feel captures the feel of speed and draws you into the Flash's world. I think he even manages to make the Jim Lee redesign of the costume work. Granted the bulk of the changes are basically the requisite gratuitous seams, raised emblem, and chinder-wear (you MST3K fans know what I mean by that). Kind of makes me wonder how the rest of the heroes would have looked if the changes had been reeled in to just touch ups and tweaks. I do like that Manapul makes the seams glow and become one with the speed effects coming off his lighting bolt and trim.

2. The title page. There's a cool retro vibe to this that I really love.

The Flash's running pose is awesome and I love how the text and images are bursting out around him. A really nice piece of graphic design that kicks the issue off well. I think it would make a great poster!
3. The suiting-up page. You know, I've never actually enjoyed the whole thing of the Flash costume coming out of a ring.



Having it be a ring just played a little too close to Green Lantern for me plus I just kind of thought the wrinkly suit wobbling out of it looked a bit too silly. However, one of the things that I love in superheroes is the idea of transformation. Whether it's something as simple as Clark Kent's shirt-rip or the awesome henshin effects of Japanese superheroes like Kamen Rider, I love those moments where the seemingly ordinary person summons, puts-on, or reveals their extraordinary form. Their hero form. The series of panels where Barry suits-up is that kind of moment and it rocks!

4. The story. While the story is not the Earth-shattering event of the century I thought it was a solid start that does a great job of establishing who Barry Allen is without even losing the pace of the book. You're brought into Barry's everyday life and then he's thrown in into his latest case all the while the issue showcases The Flash in action and ending on a cliffhanger that makes you want to find out what happens next but at the same time the issue is a solid unit unto itself. It doesn't feel like the first ten minutes of a movie that you're being told you have to come back next month to see the next 10 minutes of.

5. The colors. One of the many things that puts me off a lot of current books is the constant use of muted color schemes. Whether it's toning the costume colors way down or having the story exist in this endless sea of greys and browns, or every daytime scene feeling like it's happening at sunset. In other words, I like seeing superhero comic books that aren't ashamed of vibrant colors. I feel the coloring for this issue conveyed the intent of the story being told while still having enough pop to them to fit a superhero comic.




Next Time: Grab your scuba gear because we're diving into the second part of this 52 review: Aquaman no.1!

- Matt

Flashback Five on Brave and the Bold 158

 Matt brings us a new Flashback Five to show us five cool things about Brave and the Bold 158

---

Today's FB5 is itself is not a particularly Earth-shattering chapter for either the characters or for the Brave and The Bold series but it is an old favorite from my childhood. Much to my surprise looking back Wonder Woman was a rather frequent guest-star in the original Brave and The Bold. This particular issue would mark her last appearance in the series before it was eventually canceled in 1983. This issue stood out to me when going through the Brave and the Bold series for two reasons. One it was actually one of the earliest appearances of Wonder Woman I ever saw with the other one being an earlier issue of her own series where she fought Angle Man and the tabloid sized Superman vs. Wonder Woman special. Up to that point I mostly knew her from the Lynda Carter TV series. This issue was also the first time I ever saw artwork by the legendary Jim Aparo. So here we go with 5 things I liked about The Brave and The Bold #158 starring Batman and Wonder Woman!

1 - The cover. This cover really struck me as a kid. The expressions are great, and the overall effect leaves you wondering what could so inspire fear in our heroes.



Now in comics it is so common to have the cover simply be a somber pose or a painted pin-up but I think the strength of this cover is a case-in-point about why your cover should be reflective of the story inside. What are they afraid of? The cover makes you want to pick it up to find out. That's a covers job! Ideally and with few exceptions, every cover should be telling the reader why they should give enough of a damn to spend their money on it!

2 - Hero interaction. Bruce and Diana really feel like old friends with a genuine affection for each other.



It's subtle enough your mind could take it the romantic route or you can just take as two veteran heroes who have been through a lot of battles together who are friends and respect each other greatly. Going back to it now, it is such a nice change of pace from the constant stream of clashing egos and pre-teen level snark between heroes in modern comics. Batman is as much of a creature of the night as he needs to be without being required to be a miserable grimdark jerk.

3 - Jim Aparo artwork If Neal Adams defined (or perhaps refined) the most iconic look for Batman, Jim Aparo set it in stone.



Aparo's art is easily the strongest thing about the issue. Batman and Wonder Woman look excellent as does his take on them as Bruce Wayne and Diana Prince. His panel composition moves the story along well and his action scenes are packed with dynamic energy. Plus I just like the look of his figures in this. Aparo's Bruce Wayne is handsome but he has a certain angular quality to his features that makes him look readily distinct from Clark Kent despite being a square-jawed fellow with black hair.

4 - Flashback or Deja-Vu (oddly he seems to be referred to by both names in the comic) is a lame villain BUT at least he had an interesting weapon.



I don't mind having one shot or d-list villains around because they help contrast your Lex Luthors and Jokers to show why they are the heroes greatest adversaries. Plus think about a police officer. Not every criminal they encounter is a master criminal, gun wielding psycho, or even a capable thief. If every super villain that shows up is an all powerful bruiser or shadowy master manipulator it has less impact. However, given his basic gimmick I really have to wonder why they didn't just have Scarecrow be the villain of the issue or perhaps even having Johnathan Crane being Deja-Vu's supplier.

5 - James Bond vibe. I enjoy it when there are adventures for Batman that takes him out of his usual Gotham City environment so long as it's not happening all the time.



A vehicle like the Brave the Bold series is actually quite perfect that as is Batman being in the Justice League or having to battle Ras Al Ghul. Also given the level of wealth and influence Bruce Wayne has it makes sense that he would be involved in the kind of scenario depicted in the comics involving a co-operation between U.S. and French business interests.

The issue has some other problems. For example Deja Vu being able to sneak up on Batman and Wonder Woman *in a helicopter*.



Also as much as I enjoy Aparo's art on the book there doesn't seem to be a lot of thought actually put in to the design of Deja Vu. I think at the very least they could have gotten a decent low tier villain out of him was just a touch more work. As is though I still the think it was a fun read with some outstanding artwork and proof that you really don't need a big bloated multi-part crossover event or an excuse to get two heroes to be at each other's throats in order to make it feel to the reader like these characters exist together in the same world.

Have a great day!

- Matt

Flashback Five On: Post Crisis Superman

Today Matt introduces a new series here to the FBU, the Flashback Five. In these articles, we will cover 5 cool (or uncool) things about a comic or run of comics. Matt starts this series with 5 things he liked about the Post Crisis Superman Reboot!

---

I've never at any point found Superman to be an unrelatable character. Seriously.

Why? Because I related to Clark Kent. Clark was awkward, clumsy, and hid certain aspects of his true self from others. Deep down, he just wanted to tell a girl he liked how he really felt about her. Clark Kent is who we are in our everyday lives. People might judge us by our looks or underestimate our abilites. Superman is the truth of our potential and the dream of how cool it would be if, just as easily as Clark rips open his shirt to reveal the \S/, we could peel away our everyday selves to reveal the very best of who we really are. Even if Superman is the "real" person it's not about a god making fun of humans, but rather a seemingly ordinary person casting off the mundane to reveal extraordinary truth within.

So while I was a fan of Superman before the first issue of John Byrne's Man Of Steel hit the stands, I can still appreciate the dramatic value of Byrne's "Clark Kent is the reality" approach. The Post-Crisis version presents a Superman who in addition to his battle for truth and justice must also constantly defend his own humanity from forces that seek to control or corrupt him, including the ghosts of his own alien heritage. Byrne also scaled his powers back to a considerable degree from what they had become, both in the more humor-oriented stories of the Silver Age and in the Bronze Age where Supermans god-like power levels were readily embraced.

So as we are about to embark upon (or endure) the current DC Relaunch, this is a perfect time for a Flashback Five on the last Superman reboot!

1. THE LOOK: While I would later gain a better appreciation for the artwork of Curt Swan, as a kid I found myself wishing Superman could just be more dynamic-looking. Part of this was influenced by seeing the work of greats like Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez or Neal Adams on covers and Superman merchandise. Often I wondered why art this cool was not in the actual Superman comic book. Garcia-Lopez, for example, drew DC Comics Presents. That book was a blast, but why would you not bring a talent like that to the big show for a regular gig?

I think this is part of why John Byrne getting Superman was as huge as it was. Byrne had just come off his popular stints on X-Men and The Fantastic Four. What he brought to Superman in visual terms was, in my opinion an interesting way of giving Superman all the handsomeness and genuine sincerity of Christopher Reeve while simultaneously giving him a physique that put him on par with 80s action movie icons. In fact, his Superman looked like he could snap Rambo and The Terminator in half like twigs even without his cells acting as solar batteries. Rather than changing Superman's costume, Byrne enhanced what was already there. He redesigned the shield in a subtle but noticeable way and made the emblem a larger element of Superman's chest. Superman's hair fell naturally into that signature curl rather than it looking spit-shined into place. He drew the way the cape lays from his collar to his shoulders in a fuller, more regal way. Many of the artists who followed Byrne (among them George Perez, Kerry Gammil, Bob McLeod, Dan Jurgens, and Tom Grummett) preserved this new look.

2. CLARK KENT: As previously stated I enjoy and even relate to the nerdy version of Clark and I have no real issue with Superman being "real person". However mild-mannered doesn't necessarily mean nerdy. Byrne inspired by George Reeves created a more extroverted and assertive Clark Kent who uses his wits in his investigative reporting. Byrne balanced this by wisely having Superman never mention that he has a secret identity at all. Nobody has any real reason to think of Clark as anything but a regular joe.



Indeed, in a later "post-Crisis" issue where the reader is made privy to a bit of the average person's view of Superman, the idea that he would have a day job doesn't seem to occur to them at all. Why would it? One cab driver even theorizes that Superman just chills out in some secret hideaway with a poker table and a giant bowling alley, playing against other heroes until duty calls. The only part about this that doesn't work as well for me is when Clark begins to become a more public figure after having published a bestselling novel and winning a Pulitzer. Clark doesn't necessarily have to act like a klutz for the secret identity to be plausible (within the fantasy context), but at least one of the two identities needs to be relatively low-key and out of the spotlight.

3. MA AND PA KENT: While it was very counter to the first comics I read and my memories of the Kents, especially in the first Superman movie, I find the idea of keeping the Kents alive to be a benefit to the character.



Superman having aging parents exists as a reminder to Clark of how short and fragile human life is, just in a much more subtle way than his original "double orphan" back story. Plus I think many people can relate to having a life in the big city, while going back and forth to the old quiet hometown to visit their folks. Ultimately it goes back to the whole thing of Superman needing to protect his humanity. The Kents act as an anchor not only for the threats coming from aliens and Kryptonian artifacts, but also from the often dehumanizing grind of everyday life.

4. AS THE DAILY PLANET TURNS: After Byrne leaves the three (eventually four) Superman titles begin to run interconnected stories that feel almost like a weekly tv series. This helped to build a lot of momentum and let the audience feel like something was always happening.



The writers were also pretty good about picking up old plot threads or referencing plot elements from the very beginning of the reboot. In that respect, the eventual Death of Superman story seems almost like a season finale while the Return story feels like a season opener, like Star Trek TNG's Best of Both Worlds. This has the downside that always occurs when a superhero comic emphasizes narrative instead of done-in-one issues for an ongoing monthly: the story can't end. You can only ever have a beginning and an increasingly-complicated middle.

5. CEO LEX: Early on, this version of Lex was frequently compared to the Kingpin, especially since Bryne initially drew a heftier Luthor. Later, the character cloned his way to a better physique after having slowly poisoned his original body by wearing a Kryptonite ring. Luthor is always the dark side of the American Dream that Superman represents, even the Gene Hackman Luthor of the Donner films. The new Lex Luthor personified a new take on that and the fundamental idea of Lex as a man who abused his own genius. Instead of the pursuit of evil for its own sake, or out of being mortified about losing his hair the new Lex used his genius in endless pursuit of personal gain.

The post-Crisis Lex became a symbol of unremorseful lust for power and Lexcorp became an icon of corporate greed. Having Superman's opposite be someone concerned with status, money, and power as well as someone who was cynically jealous of Superman really works. It also meant Luthor could appear more regularly in the books, since his money could make him completely above the law. The only drawback to this is that I think it has a shelf life. It's a great way to bring Luthor into the story but after awhile it gets old seeing Superman losing out to a bald dude in a business suit.

While there is much I think did not work with the post-Crisis reboot of Superman, even aspects of it that I'm still on the fence about after all these years there was also a lot that I did enjoy and I wish this version had gotten some sort of proper send off that would have been a satisfying conclusion to what Byrne started. For me though I kind of like to think of Clark and Lois being married as a good place to end. Afterall what better way to conclude a version of Superman whose humanity was so central to the stories than by letting him have the only thing he ever asked for himself, to be with the woman he loved.

Have a great weekend!

- Matt