Outside of posting my blog, I spent Saturday relaxing and running
errands with Sainted Wife Barb. Our first errand was taking Simba
(our cat) to the Animal and Avian Medical Center for an exam and a
few shots (panieukopenia, feline rhinotracheitis, calici virus, and
rabies). Our previous veterinarian closed last year and this was
a first visit to the veterinarian who had purchased that company’s
records. The visit could have gone better.
Simba is an outdoor cat and does not like riding in a car, even our
extremely comfortable van. She howled and mewled loudly during the
entire 15-minute ride. In the examination room, she turned into a
demon-cat with ears reared back, lots of hissing, and much baring
of fangs. The vet and her assistant looked terrified. Simba let
me hold her tightly, but she was clearly not going to be anything
close to a good kitty. I agreed to let the vet sedate Simba, then
come back for her in a few hours.
In the reception area paying the bill, I learned that Simba’s files
listed her having bitten an assistant at our previous veterinarian.
Poor baby. She’s not even four years old and she has a black mark
on her permanent record.
With a couple hours to kill, I took Barb to lunch at a new Medina
restaurant: Sushi on the Roll. I had a chicken rice bowl and she
had a vegetable rice bowl. Lots of food and very tasty. We shared
a delicious fruit roll, as well. I can see myself getting take-out
from this place on occasion, especially since our favorite Medina
pizza places have exhibited a noticeable decline in the quality of
their wares in recent weeks.
Take-out and fast food will be less frequent at Casa Isabella this
year. It’s a combination of wanting to eat healthier, save money,
and “live off the land.” We have two refrigerators, a freezer, and
a large pantry. When all of those start looking a little emptier,
then we can splurge a bit.
It was a sunnier and warmer-than-usual-for-the-season afternoon, so
we took the van to a do-it-yourself car wash. I went all out and
even bought a new hanging air freshener for the van. Strawberry.
So strawberry that the interior smelled like a strawberry sundae.
I plan to move the thing to the back of the van until it loses some
of its potency.
When we picked up Simba at the vet’s, she was glad to see us, but
very groggy. She never made a sound on the drive home and actually
seemed to enjoy looking at what little she could see from her cage.
When we got home, her bottom half couldn’t do what her top half was
wanting to do. That was both heartbreaking and hilarious.
One of us stayed with Simba the rest of the afternoon and evening.
She was back to her old self by Sunday morning. Very early Sunday
morning. But I had to get up to post my blog anyway.
The rest of the day was spent putting away holiday things, watching
Horrible Bosses (acquired from our library), and reading newspapers
and other things. It was relaxing, which, of course, is what we’d
hoped for from the day.
The “big” question is: what do we do with our Christmas tree?. We
bought a new, less expensive and easier to maintain tree this year.
We still have the old one, but that’s mostly because we’d made the
switch too late to donate it anywhere. Our son Eddie is convinced
our problems with the old tree stem from it being stored all year
long in our unheated storage unit. So I want to keep the new tree
somewhere in Casa Isabella.
Barb has rejected my brilliant idea that we keep the tree in our
upstairs family room - I usually call it “the addition” but, as it
has been there for seven years, I’m trying to break myself of that
habit - and just move it to a different spot. Then, every month,
we would decorate to fit the events of the month. For example, in
February, it would be a combination Valentine’s Day/Black History
Month/Presidents’ Day tree. After carefully considering this for
five seconds, Barb pronounced the idea “stupid.”
I told her I could ask my bursting bevy of blog readers to make and
send us appropriate decorations. This did not sway her. The tree
is still in the upstairs family room, but its remaining days there
are few. Sigh.
As for Horrible Bosses...it’s a okay film. It was sometimes very
funny and sometimes dragged. Good performances by Jason Bateman,
Charlie Day, Jason Sudeikis, Jennifer Aniston, Colin Farrell, Kevin
Spacey, Jamie Foxx, and in a hilarious cameo role, the amazing Bob
Newhart. Biggest surprise was that John Francis Daley, who plays
psychologist Lance Sweets on Bones, was one of the writers of the
movie. Good for him.
We enjoyed Horrible Bosses. It’s not a movie worth paying today’s
high movie theater prices to see, but as a free library rental or
a cheap video rental, it was fine.
Barb’s reading consisted of Saturday’s newspapers and a number of
online articles on her iPad. Mine consisted of newspapers, a good
chunk of Miss Fury: Sensational Sundays 1944-1949 by Tarpe Mills,
and several stories from Showcase Presents Batman Volume 5. I’ll
be reviewing Miss Fury in one of this week’s bloggy things and the
Batman volume in the next “Tony’s Tips” column I write for Comics
Buyer’s Guide. As for the newspapers...
I don’t write as much about current events and politics as some of
my readers would like. I’ll try to make up for that in tomorrow’s
bloggy thing. See you then.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Monday, January 9, 2012
Sunday, January 8, 2012
KEVIN K GOT MARRIED
two alternate universe series, one in which Archie married Veronica
and another in which he married Betty. Conceived by Michael Uslan
and written by Paul Kupperberg, it’s one of the best comics being
published today. It’s a soap opera with a touch of science fiction
and, contrary to my usual habits, I read each new issue the day I
receive my subscription copy.
Issue #16 is a milestone issue in which Kevin Keller, who appears
in the “real” Archie comic books, marries the love of his life, Dr.
Clay Walker. They met after Kevin was wounded in the Middle East
while rescuing one of the soldiers under his command and while he
was undergoing torturous rehabilitation. They met again later and
discovered a mutual attraction that grew into love. It’s not the
first same-sex marriage in comics, but it’s handled so positively
that it deserves all the praise I can muster. That said...I have
three matters to raise which I hope are taken in the constructive
manner intended.
My friend Paul Kupperberg is doing the best writing of his career
on this title. As I finish each issue, I’m eager to see what will
happen next. But one element is somewhat lacking in these stories
and it’s an element that’s always been a key part of the foundation
of Archie and his universe.
Humor. While the soap opera and mystery are driving these series,
there should be room for some laughs. Humor is part of life, even
at the most trying of times and, knowing how well Kupperberg writes
comedy, I’d like to see life's humor reflected in Life With Archie.
Gay rights. I love that Kevin’s family, friends, and, seemingly,
most of Riverdale believes in equal rights and follows through on
that belief. But, given the more serious tone of Life With Archie
and the divisiveness of this issue - some Republican candidates have
made bigotry against gays part of their campaign strategy - I think
it’s unrealistic for there to be no evidence of the very real hate
that’s out there.
The wedding scene. Kevin and Clay didn’t kiss. Archie Comics are
already far ahead of mainstream comics publishers in including gay
characters in their stories. However, since there’s no shortage of
lips-on-lips action in their boy-girl couples, the gay characters
need to be able to express their affection just as openly as those
other characters.
I am in awe of the courage shown by Archie Comics. It’s not easy
for such an American institution to stand so forcefully against the
shrill voices of bigotry and hate. But, and I say this with every
bit of conviction in my brain, heart, and soul, their young readers
are not those bigots and haters. I know this from my own children
and their friends. They accept and approve of the inevitable day
when gays enjoy the same rights as straights without consequence or
question. The bigots and haters will be consigned to the dustbin
of history...which is where they belong.
Thanks for spending a part of your day with me. I'll be back
tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Saturday, January 7, 2012
PILGRIMAGE TO TOKYO
friend of mine. Yet I am close to being insanely jealous of Martin
and his lovely wife Pam. I’ll get back to that in a bit.
Mad Scientist #24 [$5] sports a monster-rific cover and new logo by
Mark Maddox. Its 44 interior pages contain five equally terrific
articles. Arlt is the author of three of them: a history and spot-
on analysis of Godzilla vs. Hedorah (Godzilla vs. the Smog Monster)
and the latest installment of his ongoing series discussing Doctor
Who. He’s up to the seventh season of the latter. That’s two and
I’ll tell you about the third in a bit. You can feel the suspense
building, can’t you?
The learned Allen A. Debus contributes “Lovecraft’s Paleontological
Time Travels,” an intriguing study of the ancient history of those
who walked the Earth before man. Comics writer John Rozum adds a
fond remembrance of Movie Monsters: Monster Make-Up & Monster Shows
to put on, a 1975 Scholastic Book Club offering. Two more reasons
to recommend Mad Scientist #24.
Then there’s the third Arlt article, the one that has me insanely
jealousy: “Mad Scientist Meets the Oxygen Destroyer.” It’s a trip
report of Martin and Pam’s experiences with G-Tour 2, a journey to
Japan with other Godzilla devotees. Even though, as pastor of the
First Church of Godzilla (Reform), I should be above jealousy and
other negative emotions, I lost it when I saw this:
dispatched my Lord and Master in the first Godzilla movie. Also in
the article is a photo of Martin holding the diving helmet worn by
the tragic Serizawa in that legendary film.
I’m monster-green with envy of Martin and Pam’s Japanese adventure.
The article only covers the Godzilla-centric portion of their trip,
but I would love to read more (as in “all”) about it. If my dream
of visiting Japan remains unrealized, maybe I can vicariously enjoy
it through my friends.
Mad Scientist remains one of my favorite magazines. For ordering
information, visit the website.
******************************
I just started reading Showcase Presents Batman Volume 5 [$19.99],
but, one story in and I already wanted to gush about it. The book
reprints Batman stories from Batman #216-228 and Detective Comics
#391-407 from 1969-1971.
The story I read was “The Gal Most Likely to be Batman’s - Widow”
by Frank Robbins with art by Bob Brown and Joe Giella. The cover
for that issue - Detective Comics #391 - is by Neal Adams.
Let’s talk about the cover first. Under a “1963 Class Predictions”
header, we have “photos” of Ginny Jenkins, her marrying Batman, and
her standing at his grave. Even in black-and-white, the design and
content of this cover is intriguing and inviting. Today’s pin-up
covers can’t hold a candle to it.
The story? What a pleasure to read a Batman story in which he isn’t
a psychotic douche bag. I like this Batman. He’s both smart and
compassionate...and he’s pretty much a supporting character in his
own story as Robbins skillfully makes Ginny and her would-be beau
the focus of the tale. Brilliant.
Bob Brown? I have loved his art since he followed Jack Kirby in
took over Challengers of the Unknown. He drew a muscular
and rugged Batman that worked well with Robbins’ more realistic
scripts. The Denny O’Neil/Neal Adams team did outstanding work
during this time, but guys like Robbins, Brown, and Irv Novick also
did some first-rate comic books.
Showcase Presents Batman Volume 5 is definitely recommended. I’m
looking forward to revisiting these great stories.
******************************
Bloggy thing reader Mike Chary asked:
“What about the moral rights of Ditko and the others who created
the characters Watchmen was based on?”
That’s a good question and one I had not given a lot of thought to.
Now that I have...
While those Charlton characters were admittedly the starting point
for Watchmen, there were only superficial similarities remaining by
the time Watchmen was published. Doctor Manhattan’s origin is more
like Gold Key’s Doctor Solar than Captain Atom’s and, beyond the
origin, there’s simply no comparison.
Nite Owl bears the closest resemblance to Blue Beetle, his Charlton
counterpart, but I don’t see anything of Nightshade in Watchmen’s
Silk Spectre.
The Peacemaker and Thunderbolt are starting points for the Comedian
and Ozymandias, but the personalities and histories of the Charlton
heroes aren’t remotely like those of the Watchmen characters.
As much as I might disagree with much of Ditko’s political twaddle,
Rorschach is not the Question. Rorschach is a social misfit unable
to interact with the normal world around him. The Question is able
to function very comfortably in the normal world.
Now, if you’re talking my sense of morality, I think DC should give
a taste of the Watchmen financial action to the creators of those
Charlton characters whose creators are known to us. But if you’re
talking Ditko’s sense of morality, I just don’t know. Some of his
past statements seem to indicate that he doesn’t believe work-for-
hire creators are entitled to any further compensation beyond their
original paychecks. But, without seeing any recent Ditko statement
of creator rights, I’m not really sure where he stands.
I’d love to hear how other comics professionals and readers would
answer Mike’s question.
Thanks for spending a part of your day with me. I'll be back
tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Friday, January 6, 2012
I’M WATCHING THE WATCHMEN?
The following first appeared on February 10, 2010, in a previous
incarnation of this bloggy thing.
Gosh darn my obsessive imagination. After writing yesterday's
comments about any possible sequels to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons'
Watchmen, and after eating too much of the pizza and turkey Sainted
Wife Barb prepared for our neighbors and us to enjoy while watching
the Super Bowl, scenes from one such sequel simply materialized in
my brain during my post-Super Bowl nap. Knowing full well probably
dozens of bloggers and columnists are doing the same darn thing, I
am, nonetheless, compelled to share these scenes with you. So, with
great trepidation, I present...
WATCHMEN 2:
RORSCHACH'S REVENGE
Interior shot. Laurie is in the shower room of the rec center where
she works out. Her crossed arms cover her breasts, but not her
obvious "baby bump." Around her other women are wide-eyes with fear
as a likewise nude Doctor Manhattan has his conversation with his
former lover.
LAURIE: Rorschach's alive?
JON: I believe so.
Cut to a baseball field. Standing in the bright green grass of the
outfield, Rorschach touches himself to confirm that he is, indeed,
alive while Dr. Manhattan speaks to him. Rorschach's mask disguises
his facial expressions, but Jon is clearly experiencing a great
many emotions as they speak.
RORSCHACH: I'm...not dead.
JON: I...remade you. With some improvements.
RORSCHACH: Am I really me, Jon? Or am I just some tiny part of you
still capable of feeling guilt?
JON: I believe you are you. However, I am not so certain that I am
precisely who I was.
RORSCHACH: I'm going to take down Veidt.
JON: I know.
Rorschach shimmers like a living ink blot; it's as if his mask has
flowed over his entire body. He vanishes.
Interior shot of the rec center locker room. Laurie now has a towel
wrapped around her as she sits on a bench. Jon also sits with a
towel draped across his privates.
LAURIE: Is it really him?
JON: As I said, I believe it is.
LAURIE: What will he do?
JON: He will try to bring Veidt to justice. I do not know if he
will succeed. Since my experience with Veidt's machine, I seem to
be more here and now than everywhere and everywhen.
LAURIE: Do you think he will try to find Daniel and me?
JON: I remade him...more aware of the dangers around him. He will
not seek allies in his quest. He will need friends.
LAURIE: And you?
JON: Those I would wish to be my friends are those I would not
expose to the consequences of such friendship.
Jon places his hand tenderly on Laurie's belly.
JON: I believe I am happy for you and Daniel.
LAURIE: Is it a boy or a girl?
JON: It is the future. Omniscient as I once believed I was, I never
realized that before.
Cut to a wide establishing shot of one of Rorschach's secret lairs.
It is dimly-lit but much neater and more organized than we would
expect. There's a large free-standing mirror in one corner of the
place.
Rorschach shimmers into existence. He looks around, but, of course,
we can't see the expression on his masked face. However, his body
language should suggest mild surprise.
Rorschach walks over to the mirror.
Close in on Rorschach looking into the mirror. His mask does that
shimmer thing again and we now see the face of Walter Joseph
Kovacs, his true identity. It shimmers again and, while it's the
same face, it's noticeably more handsome than previously. Masked or
not, Rorschach's face still shows no emotion.
Rorschach's face/mask shimmers again and now the face seen in the
mirror is that of Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias. The face still does not
show any emotion.
The face/mask shimmers one more time and now we see Rorschach has
become Edward Morgan Blake, the Comedian...and the face in the
mirror is smiling.
RORSCHACH: Hurm.
NOTES
The above is first draft with no embellishments. I didn't check
Watchmen to make sure I had the speech patterns right. But I did
check the spelling of character names and of Rorschach's "Hurm" at
the end of his solo scene.
Much to my surprise, I have a good idea where this would go if I
were actually writing the sequel to Watchmen. Which isn't at all
likely and which I'm not pursuing. I just thought my nap-spawned
scenes were kind of cool and decided to share them with my bloggy
thing readers. I hope you enjoyed them.
Thanks for spending a part of your day with me. I'll be back
tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
incarnation of this bloggy thing.
Gosh darn my obsessive imagination. After writing yesterday's
comments about any possible sequels to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons'
Watchmen, and after eating too much of the pizza and turkey Sainted
Wife Barb prepared for our neighbors and us to enjoy while watching
the Super Bowl, scenes from one such sequel simply materialized in
my brain during my post-Super Bowl nap. Knowing full well probably
dozens of bloggers and columnists are doing the same darn thing, I
am, nonetheless, compelled to share these scenes with you. So, with
great trepidation, I present...
WATCHMEN 2:
RORSCHACH'S REVENGE
Interior shot. Laurie is in the shower room of the rec center where
she works out. Her crossed arms cover her breasts, but not her
obvious "baby bump." Around her other women are wide-eyes with fear
as a likewise nude Doctor Manhattan has his conversation with his
former lover.
LAURIE: Rorschach's alive?
JON: I believe so.
Cut to a baseball field. Standing in the bright green grass of the
outfield, Rorschach touches himself to confirm that he is, indeed,
alive while Dr. Manhattan speaks to him. Rorschach's mask disguises
his facial expressions, but Jon is clearly experiencing a great
many emotions as they speak.
RORSCHACH: I'm...not dead.
JON: I...remade you. With some improvements.
RORSCHACH: Am I really me, Jon? Or am I just some tiny part of you
still capable of feeling guilt?
JON: I believe you are you. However, I am not so certain that I am
precisely who I was.
RORSCHACH: I'm going to take down Veidt.
JON: I know.
Rorschach shimmers like a living ink blot; it's as if his mask has
flowed over his entire body. He vanishes.
Interior shot of the rec center locker room. Laurie now has a towel
wrapped around her as she sits on a bench. Jon also sits with a
towel draped across his privates.
LAURIE: Is it really him?
JON: As I said, I believe it is.
LAURIE: What will he do?
JON: He will try to bring Veidt to justice. I do not know if he
will succeed. Since my experience with Veidt's machine, I seem to
be more here and now than everywhere and everywhen.
LAURIE: Do you think he will try to find Daniel and me?
JON: I remade him...more aware of the dangers around him. He will
not seek allies in his quest. He will need friends.
LAURIE: And you?
JON: Those I would wish to be my friends are those I would not
expose to the consequences of such friendship.
Jon places his hand tenderly on Laurie's belly.
JON: I believe I am happy for you and Daniel.
LAURIE: Is it a boy or a girl?
JON: It is the future. Omniscient as I once believed I was, I never
realized that before.
Cut to a wide establishing shot of one of Rorschach's secret lairs.
It is dimly-lit but much neater and more organized than we would
expect. There's a large free-standing mirror in one corner of the
place.
Rorschach shimmers into existence. He looks around, but, of course,
we can't see the expression on his masked face. However, his body
language should suggest mild surprise.
Rorschach walks over to the mirror.
Close in on Rorschach looking into the mirror. His mask does that
shimmer thing again and we now see the face of Walter Joseph
Kovacs, his true identity. It shimmers again and, while it's the
same face, it's noticeably more handsome than previously. Masked or
not, Rorschach's face still shows no emotion.
Rorschach's face/mask shimmers again and now the face seen in the
mirror is that of Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias. The face still does not
show any emotion.
The face/mask shimmers one more time and now we see Rorschach has
become Edward Morgan Blake, the Comedian...and the face in the
mirror is smiling.
RORSCHACH: Hurm.
NOTES
The above is first draft with no embellishments. I didn't check
Watchmen to make sure I had the speech patterns right. But I did
check the spelling of character names and of Rorschach's "Hurm" at
the end of his solo scene.
Much to my surprise, I have a good idea where this would go if I
were actually writing the sequel to Watchmen. Which isn't at all
likely and which I'm not pursuing. I just thought my nap-spawned
scenes were kind of cool and decided to share them with my bloggy
thing readers. I hope you enjoyed them.
Thanks for spending a part of your day with me. I'll be back
tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Thursday, January 5, 2012
WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN?
My friend Alan David Doane isn’t the slightest bit pleased with DC
Comics’ plans to publish prequels to Watchmen, the legendary series
by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. Here’s an e-mail he sent to me and
other friends:
Friends,
I just created a petition entitled DC Comics: End plans for sequels
to Watchmen, because I care deeply about this very important issue
pertaining to creator rights.
I'm trying to collect 100 signatures, and I could really use your
help.
To read more about what I'm trying to do and to sign my petition,
click here.
It'll just take a minute!
Once you're done, please ask your friends to sign the petition as
well. Grassroots movements succeed because people like you are
willing to spread the word!
I won’t be signing Alan's petition at the present time, but it’s not
because I expect DC to ignore it and any other similar entreaties.
There’s another issue here.
Moore, to the best of my knowledge, has never once denied/refuted
Gibbons’ status as co-creator of Watchmen. I gather Moore doesn’t
approve of DC’s plans, but, as far as I know, Gibbons is on board
or at least okay with the prequels.
Do the creator rights of Alan Moore trump those of Dave Gibbons?
Not at this time. Watchmen is still owned by DC and that’s a shame
on many levels. If Moore and Gibbons owned it, either one of them
could likely put the kibosh on prequels or sequels. Depending on
whatever agreement existed between them.
I don’t have much interest in DC’s plans. I don’t have a whole lot
of confidence that their new Watchmen comics will be worthy of the
source material. But, since DC does own Watchmen at this time, I
think Gibbons has every right to benefit from their plans. Moore
made his decision on this and related matters and I applaud him for
his strong convictions. But, if Gibbons is okay with DC’s plans,
I’m okay with them as well.
******************************
Rumors of Watchmen prequels or sequels picked up steam a few years
ago. On February 9, 2010, in a previous incarnation of this bloggy
thing: I wrote:
Giving credit where it is most certainly due, I first learned about
DC Comics Senior VP/Executive Editor Dan DiDio's plan to produce a
sequel or sequels to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' Watchmen from
Rich Johnston's Bleeding Cool website:
While it's "fashionable" in some comics professional circles to
dismiss Johnston as a gossip monger or worse, there's not a day in
the week when I wouldn't rather read his reports those on websites
that act as virtual arms of the comics industry's PR departments.
But I digress.
Thinking about Watchmen isn't a high priority of mine, but several
readers have asked for my thoughts on the matter and I figure I'll
put them out there today before moving on to things in which I have
a much greater interest.
My thoughts...
1. I see no creative rational for a sequel to a work that was
complete unto itself. It's a commercial decision. Not that there is
anything inherently wrong with commercial decisions, but I bet DC
tries to spin it as something other than that.
2. I see even less creative rational in tying Watchmen to the DC
Universe. It's another commercial decision which counts on the
loyal DCU fan base creaming its jeans over the prospect of Batman
fighting Rorschach.
3. Is DC screwing Moore and Gibbons on this? That's for them to
say. But, in any case, it's far from the first time DC or other
comics publishers have screwed creators. The main difference here
might be somewhat greater sympathy - but not much greater - for the
creators being screwed.
4. Many fans who think doing a sequel to Watchmen is a bad
idea...for whatever reasons...will still buy as many sequels as DC
is able to publish.
5. Comics news sites, even those who will moan piteously over this
defilement of a comics classic or the disregard for the great
talents who created said classic, will still slavishly promote the
books for DC Comics.
6. DiDio will have no trouble hiring writers and artists to work on
his Watchmen sequels. Oh, a few of them might turn down the work
for principled reasons, but there will be many eager for the
challenge or the paycheck. I have some sympathy with both sorts,
especially for creators who have not earned decent paychecks in
months and sometimes years.
7. I'm sure many writers and artists have already sent query
letters or even pitches to DiDio.
8. In the extremely unlikely event that I was asked to write
Watchmen 2 or any of its spin-offs...and it's as unlikely as winged
glowing pigs flying out of my ass, singing show tunes, and pooping
gold and silver coins...I would see if the old phone number I had
for Alan Moore still works, ask him if he would object to my taking
the gig, and then ask the same of Dave Gibbons.
9. Re-read thoughts #1, #2, and #6. The challenge part would be
there for me, I could really use the paycheck, and, despite my
knowing the rationale for doing such work is purely commercial, I'm
confident I could deliver comic books that would be entertaining on
their own. You don't necessarily have to swing for the fences to
give your audience a comic book worth reading.
******************************
I wrote about “Watchmen 2" the following day as well. I’ll be back
tomorrow with that little bit of non-history.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Comics’ plans to publish prequels to Watchmen, the legendary series
by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. Here’s an e-mail he sent to me and
other friends:
Friends,
I just created a petition entitled DC Comics: End plans for sequels
to Watchmen, because I care deeply about this very important issue
pertaining to creator rights.
I'm trying to collect 100 signatures, and I could really use your
help.
To read more about what I'm trying to do and to sign my petition,
click here.
It'll just take a minute!
Once you're done, please ask your friends to sign the petition as
well. Grassroots movements succeed because people like you are
willing to spread the word!
I won’t be signing Alan's petition at the present time, but it’s not
because I expect DC to ignore it and any other similar entreaties.
There’s another issue here.
Moore, to the best of my knowledge, has never once denied/refuted
Gibbons’ status as co-creator of Watchmen. I gather Moore doesn’t
approve of DC’s plans, but, as far as I know, Gibbons is on board
or at least okay with the prequels.
Do the creator rights of Alan Moore trump those of Dave Gibbons?
Not at this time. Watchmen is still owned by DC and that’s a shame
on many levels. If Moore and Gibbons owned it, either one of them
could likely put the kibosh on prequels or sequels. Depending on
whatever agreement existed between them.
I don’t have much interest in DC’s plans. I don’t have a whole lot
of confidence that their new Watchmen comics will be worthy of the
source material. But, since DC does own Watchmen at this time, I
think Gibbons has every right to benefit from their plans. Moore
made his decision on this and related matters and I applaud him for
his strong convictions. But, if Gibbons is okay with DC’s plans,
I’m okay with them as well.
******************************
Rumors of Watchmen prequels or sequels picked up steam a few years
ago. On February 9, 2010, in a previous incarnation of this bloggy
thing: I wrote:
Giving credit where it is most certainly due, I first learned about
DC Comics Senior VP/Executive Editor Dan DiDio's plan to produce a
sequel or sequels to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' Watchmen from
Rich Johnston's Bleeding Cool website:
While it's "fashionable" in some comics professional circles to
dismiss Johnston as a gossip monger or worse, there's not a day in
the week when I wouldn't rather read his reports those on websites
that act as virtual arms of the comics industry's PR departments.
But I digress.
Thinking about Watchmen isn't a high priority of mine, but several
readers have asked for my thoughts on the matter and I figure I'll
put them out there today before moving on to things in which I have
a much greater interest.
My thoughts...
1. I see no creative rational for a sequel to a work that was
complete unto itself. It's a commercial decision. Not that there is
anything inherently wrong with commercial decisions, but I bet DC
tries to spin it as something other than that.
2. I see even less creative rational in tying Watchmen to the DC
Universe. It's another commercial decision which counts on the
loyal DCU fan base creaming its jeans over the prospect of Batman
fighting Rorschach.
3. Is DC screwing Moore and Gibbons on this? That's for them to
say. But, in any case, it's far from the first time DC or other
comics publishers have screwed creators. The main difference here
might be somewhat greater sympathy - but not much greater - for the
creators being screwed.
4. Many fans who think doing a sequel to Watchmen is a bad
idea...for whatever reasons...will still buy as many sequels as DC
is able to publish.
5. Comics news sites, even those who will moan piteously over this
defilement of a comics classic or the disregard for the great
talents who created said classic, will still slavishly promote the
books for DC Comics.
6. DiDio will have no trouble hiring writers and artists to work on
his Watchmen sequels. Oh, a few of them might turn down the work
for principled reasons, but there will be many eager for the
challenge or the paycheck. I have some sympathy with both sorts,
especially for creators who have not earned decent paychecks in
months and sometimes years.
7. I'm sure many writers and artists have already sent query
letters or even pitches to DiDio.
8. In the extremely unlikely event that I was asked to write
Watchmen 2 or any of its spin-offs...and it's as unlikely as winged
glowing pigs flying out of my ass, singing show tunes, and pooping
gold and silver coins...I would see if the old phone number I had
for Alan Moore still works, ask him if he would object to my taking
the gig, and then ask the same of Dave Gibbons.
9. Re-read thoughts #1, #2, and #6. The challenge part would be
there for me, I could really use the paycheck, and, despite my
knowing the rationale for doing such work is purely commercial, I'm
confident I could deliver comic books that would be entertaining on
their own. You don't necessarily have to swing for the fences to
give your audience a comic book worth reading.
******************************
I wrote about “Watchmen 2" the following day as well. I’ll be back
tomorrow with that little bit of non-history.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
JOURNEY TO THE CORE OF THE SUPER-HERO GENRE
Why do I think Mark Waid’s Daredevil is one of the best superhero
comics series being published today? It’s partly, but only partly,
because, for the past 13 years, the character has been brutalized
in most sadistic fashion by a gang of writers and editors behaving
as if Matt Murdock once kicked their mothers. It’s like they all
hated the guy.
I don’t deny there have been some awfully good Daredevil stories in
those 13 years. But the overwhelming theme of the series seemed to
be “let’s pile on Daredevil.” By the end of the pre-Waid issues,
Daredevil wasn’t recognizable. They gave his series and numbering
book to the Black Panther, who’d also been rendered unrecognizable
by the same misguided editorial direction of “we have to break the
characters.” Never let these guys play with your toys.
When I discussed superhero comics yesterday, I wrote: “...the genre
isn’t about nostalgia. It’s about using the superhero as a way to
examine humanity and all the issues humanity faces.”
While it’s true humanity faces darkness on a regular basis, I also
believe that optimism is the core of the superhero genre. It’s a
genre that says good men and women and beings from other planes of
existence can devote their extraordinary abilities to the good of
all. That even those of us without extraordinary abilities can be
inspired to extraordinary acts of courage. It’s a genre that, to
truly resonate, must go forward with an unwavering belief that good
can triumph over evil.
This doesn’t eliminate the possibility of evil sometimes triumphing
over good. This does not eliminate the shades of grey that color
humanity. But the eternal goal, the very essence of the superhero
concept is that the triumph of good over evil is the natural state
of existence, even if the real world seldom lives up to that ideal.
Do readers actually enjoy seeing their favorite superheroes suffer
indignity and loss and sadism month after month? Don’t they yearn
for stories that end, at least occasionally, with a clear win for
those heroes? Don’t they want to feel good at the conclusion of a
superhero story? After decades of despair in superhero comics, is
it not well past due time to reclaim the genre in the name of its
better angels?
Which brings us back to Mark Waid’s Daredevil...
Waid is one of my favorite comic-book writers. Even so, I wasn’t
sure he or anyone could turn Daredevil into a comic book I’d enjoy
and Matt Murdock into a character I could root for. There was just
so much baggage from the sadists who had been breaking DD over and
over again. How could Waid deal with that in a convincing manner?
It comes down to this. Matt Murdock wants to live. In the second
story of Daredevil #1 [Marvel; $3.99], he explains his optimistic
and even cheerful demeanor to best friend and partner Foggy Nelson:
“I know I’ve been acting a little...uncharacteristically since I
returned, Foggy. But here’s what I need you to appreciate, okay?
It’s been a miserable last few years. And every time I thought I’d
finally hit bottom, God somehow found me a bigger shovel.
“All this pain and all this loss and...and I just can’t bear the
weight of it anymore and stay sane. I know that.
“So this is the way I’ve decided to be. You can say I’m in denial.
You can decide I’m not dealing or that I’m a jerk...that’s up to
you. No offense, but I don’t care. This is how I choose to cope.
Is that acceptable to you?”
Foggy’s not sure. I am.
Many years ago, when both Waid and I were much younger, he asked me
how he should handle editorial demands that the Flash be more grim
and gritty. My advice...let the world around the Flash become more
grim and gritty, but keep the character himself optimistic. Give
the readers someone and something to root for.
The world of Daredevil and Matt Murdock is still a very dark place.
Like the current Marvel Universe. But Matt has chosen to become an
angel of light in that darkness. I find this Matt, this Daredevil,
smiling against all comers and beating them, a far more interesting
character than he had been. And Waid has accomplished this without
ignoring what has gone before.
Much of the world believes Matt Murdock is Daredevil, even if they
can’t actually prove it. This has destroyed Matt’s ability to be
an effective lawyer. So he and Foggy now teach and coach and train
clients to defend themselves. I am in awe of the sheer brilliance
of this development.
The writing and the storytelling in the series - I’ve now read the
first six issues - is of equal luster. Working with artists Paolo
Rivera and Marcos Martin, Waid has found new ways to visualize the
world of Daredevil and Matt Murdock. Their stunning visuals serve
Waid’s stories very well.
Adding to my enjoyment of Daredevil, Waid has introduced intriguing
supporting characters to the series. He’s been tossing a wild mix
of super-villains at Daredevil. He’s emphasized the brotherly love
between Matt and Foggy. He’s made me chuckle with Matt’s nagging
Foggy about the latter’s diet and health, a recurring conversation
that resonates with me because I’ve had those conversations with my
daughter. In case you can’t figure out the obvious, I’m Foggy in
those conversations.
The bottom line...Daredevil is a great comic book. It hasn’t been
this good since Frank Miller at his prime. When the comics awards
come around, Waid, Rivera, and Martin all deserved to be recognized
for what they’re doing on this title.
Daredevil is what superhero comics can and should be.
I’ll be back tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
comics series being published today? It’s partly, but only partly,
because, for the past 13 years, the character has been brutalized
in most sadistic fashion by a gang of writers and editors behaving
as if Matt Murdock once kicked their mothers. It’s like they all
hated the guy.
I don’t deny there have been some awfully good Daredevil stories in
those 13 years. But the overwhelming theme of the series seemed to
be “let’s pile on Daredevil.” By the end of the pre-Waid issues,
Daredevil wasn’t recognizable. They gave his series and numbering
book to the Black Panther, who’d also been rendered unrecognizable
by the same misguided editorial direction of “we have to break the
characters.” Never let these guys play with your toys.
When I discussed superhero comics yesterday, I wrote: “...the genre
isn’t about nostalgia. It’s about using the superhero as a way to
examine humanity and all the issues humanity faces.”
While it’s true humanity faces darkness on a regular basis, I also
believe that optimism is the core of the superhero genre. It’s a
genre that says good men and women and beings from other planes of
existence can devote their extraordinary abilities to the good of
all. That even those of us without extraordinary abilities can be
inspired to extraordinary acts of courage. It’s a genre that, to
truly resonate, must go forward with an unwavering belief that good
can triumph over evil.
This doesn’t eliminate the possibility of evil sometimes triumphing
over good. This does not eliminate the shades of grey that color
humanity. But the eternal goal, the very essence of the superhero
concept is that the triumph of good over evil is the natural state
of existence, even if the real world seldom lives up to that ideal.
Do readers actually enjoy seeing their favorite superheroes suffer
indignity and loss and sadism month after month? Don’t they yearn
for stories that end, at least occasionally, with a clear win for
those heroes? Don’t they want to feel good at the conclusion of a
superhero story? After decades of despair in superhero comics, is
it not well past due time to reclaim the genre in the name of its
better angels?
Which brings us back to Mark Waid’s Daredevil...
Waid is one of my favorite comic-book writers. Even so, I wasn’t
sure he or anyone could turn Daredevil into a comic book I’d enjoy
and Matt Murdock into a character I could root for. There was just
so much baggage from the sadists who had been breaking DD over and
over again. How could Waid deal with that in a convincing manner?
It comes down to this. Matt Murdock wants to live. In the second
story of Daredevil #1 [Marvel; $3.99], he explains his optimistic
and even cheerful demeanor to best friend and partner Foggy Nelson:
“I know I’ve been acting a little...uncharacteristically since I
returned, Foggy. But here’s what I need you to appreciate, okay?
It’s been a miserable last few years. And every time I thought I’d
finally hit bottom, God somehow found me a bigger shovel.
“All this pain and all this loss and...and I just can’t bear the
weight of it anymore and stay sane. I know that.
“So this is the way I’ve decided to be. You can say I’m in denial.
You can decide I’m not dealing or that I’m a jerk...that’s up to
you. No offense, but I don’t care. This is how I choose to cope.
Is that acceptable to you?”
Foggy’s not sure. I am.
Many years ago, when both Waid and I were much younger, he asked me
how he should handle editorial demands that the Flash be more grim
and gritty. My advice...let the world around the Flash become more
grim and gritty, but keep the character himself optimistic. Give
the readers someone and something to root for.
The world of Daredevil and Matt Murdock is still a very dark place.
Like the current Marvel Universe. But Matt has chosen to become an
angel of light in that darkness. I find this Matt, this Daredevil,
smiling against all comers and beating them, a far more interesting
character than he had been. And Waid has accomplished this without
ignoring what has gone before.
Much of the world believes Matt Murdock is Daredevil, even if they
can’t actually prove it. This has destroyed Matt’s ability to be
an effective lawyer. So he and Foggy now teach and coach and train
clients to defend themselves. I am in awe of the sheer brilliance
of this development.
The writing and the storytelling in the series - I’ve now read the
first six issues - is of equal luster. Working with artists Paolo
Rivera and Marcos Martin, Waid has found new ways to visualize the
world of Daredevil and Matt Murdock. Their stunning visuals serve
Waid’s stories very well.
Adding to my enjoyment of Daredevil, Waid has introduced intriguing
supporting characters to the series. He’s been tossing a wild mix
of super-villains at Daredevil. He’s emphasized the brotherly love
between Matt and Foggy. He’s made me chuckle with Matt’s nagging
Foggy about the latter’s diet and health, a recurring conversation
that resonates with me because I’ve had those conversations with my
daughter. In case you can’t figure out the obvious, I’m Foggy in
those conversations.
The bottom line...Daredevil is a great comic book. It hasn’t been
this good since Frank Miller at his prime. When the comics awards
come around, Waid, Rivera, and Martin all deserved to be recognized
for what they’re doing on this title.
Daredevil is what superhero comics can and should be.
I’ll be back tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
LIST-LESS
best of 2011 list, a worst of 2011 list, or even a “What the hell
happened in 2011?” list. Because someone has to stand up to this
blog epidemic and just say, “Hell, no!”
******************************
Somewhere above this paragraph is a drawing of Black Lightning and
Thom Zahler’s Darkblade from Thom’s Love and Capes. Having made a
few bucks selling original art last year, I used a portion of those
funds to commission the first two in what I hope will be a series
of drawings teaming my creation with my favorite comics characters.
This was the first of those and, in the fullness of time, it will
be framed and hung on my office wall.
I have received the second of the two drawings I commissioned last
year and will be sharing that one with you in the next day or so.
It’s a different artist and character, but it’s every bit as cool
as the one Thom did for me.
How quickly I’ll be adding to this Black Lightning gallery depends
on whether or not I actually have any income in 2012. My life is
an adventure.
******************************
This blog is moderated because it allows me to keep the douche bags
from ruining my fun and yours. I approve legitimate comments four
or five times a day. Your comments may not appear immediately, but
they are appreciated.
I don’t respond to most comments because I figure this bloggy thing
is me having my say and the comments are you having your say. From
time to time, I’ll respond to them here. Like today.
Several readers expressed their belief that DC and Marvel will not
allow any comics stories they publish to run in The Best American
Comics. That may be so. I think if the annual collection weren’t
so insular and were more willing to include comics from traditional
comics publishers, they could make a case to those publishers that
it’s a good thing to be included in the volume. At the very least,
such material could be included in the “Notable Comics” section of
each year’s volume.
Johanna Draper Carlson wanted to know which superhero comics I’d
have include in this year’s volume. That’s a tough question for me
to answer because I don’t read comics as Johanna and other bloggers
read comics. They read them quickly and write about them quickly.
I feel no need to do so. So I may not have read the best superhero
comic book of 2010 yet, Indeed, since my statement also implied the
volume’s bias against traditional material from leading publishers
and other publishers of comics, I may not have read those terrific
comics yet either.
But, to name one title from Johanna’s own best list, some issues of
Love and Capes should be included in “best of year” volumes. There
have also been issues of Chew and The Unwritten that should’ve been
include in such volumes. And how about Jimmy Gownley’s wonderful
Amelia Rules!? Any number of stories from that series of graphic
novels could and should be included. Those are examples that leapt
immediately to my mind. Thinking about it further would doubtless
result in something akin to a “list” and that’s a path I will not
go down unless someone’s paying me to do so.
There were several comments about superhero writing. Most of them
struck me as “superhero comics aren’t as good as they were when I
used to read them.” For me, the genre isn’t about nostalgia. It’s
about using the superhero as a way to examine humanity and all the
issues humanity faces. I have loved superhero comics from each and
every decade. Because there have always been at least some really
great superhero comics in every decade. Maybe not from DC. Maybe
not from Marvel, though Christos Gage’s Avengers Academy and Mark
Waid’s Daredevil are pretty damn spiffy. But there are some great
superhero books out there and I see no reason why there can’t be a
lot more. Well, actually I can see some reasons when it comes to
DC and Marvel, but I’m being nice today.
I wish I could tell reader “John” that I am getting paid for all of
those free copies of 1000 Comic Books You Must Read that are being
given away without my permission on Kindle, but I won’t know that
for sure until I get my next royalty statement from the publisher.
I’ll let you know.
My buddy Mark Dooley (and several others) have lauded DC’s Showcase
Presents Batman Vol. 5 here and elsewhere. I have a copy and will
probably read it in my usual slow but steady fashion over the next
couple weeks.
******************************
DC has apparently bounced me from its comp/review list, which does
not come as any great surprise. I can borrow most of their super-
hero and adventure titles and a smattering of Vertigo titles from
a good friend. Ironically, the stuff I’ll miss most are things I
usually reviewed favorably: the Showcase Presents collections; the
Jack Kirby omnibus books; collections of series like Starman, DMZ,
Ex Machina, Fables, and the like; and some of the original graphic
novels from Vertigo.
Just before Christmas, my friend loaned me another couple boxes of
comics from DC and others. As expected, he dropped several of “The
New 52" titles after their first issues. Here are the titles that
didn’t make his cut:
Blackhawks
Deathstroke
Demon Knights*
Frankenstein, Agent of S.H.A.D.E.*
Grifter
I, Vampire
Justice League Dark*
Men of War*
Omac
Red Hood and the Outlaws
Red Lanterns
Suicide Squad
The titles marked with an asterisk (*) are the ones I’ll try to get
from my library system if/when they’re collected in trade editions.
I’m surprised he only dropped a dozen titles.
You know what else I’m going to miss from those big boxes of free
DC stuff? Those 100-page Super Spectaculars. Not every issue was
worth reading, but I love the idea of big fat comic books. Maybe
I’ll start looking through bargain boxes and conventions and comics
shops. Could be some gems in them.
No reader should construe the above as my pleading for free comic
books, though such are always welcome. I always find stuff to read
and write about. But I do appreciate those creators and publishers
who send me books and comic books and DVDs and more. I’ll try to
review more of them in this new year.
I’ll be back tomorrow with more stuff.
© 2012 Tony Isabella
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)