Superman 701

So, I said I was going to review Superman 701, the much ballyhooed start of the John Michael Staczynski era on Superman, scheduled to run 12 issues.

On Friday, I finally made it to Austin Books and picked up the issue.

It's okay. Better than average, I suppose. I quite like Barrow's artwork in the manner of the style that DC seems to have adopted from wholesale from a crew of Brazilian artists.

The issue is a bit complicated to discuss in light of my new solemn vow to not discuss other reviews and what's being said by other fans, but here goes:

JMS is getting as back to basics as possible with Superman, while retaining the current status-quo of Superman. He didn't ask to relaunch the character, drop continuity, depower Superman, insist he never spent time with the Legion... instead, JMS is interested in what it means to have Superman, several years into his career and established as a major figure in the public world, walk among us in full costume.

I say "back to basics", because JMS's take on Superman almost has more in common with Golden and early Silver Age presentations of The Man of Steel. JMS sees Superman as a person taking pleasure in his powers and not hesitating to crack wise or poke fun at others trying to give him a hard time. As Superman is a bit of a Rorschach test for readers, putting any kind of personality on Superman other than earnest farmboy or generic action hero is a bold move on the part of JMS. Many want a Superman who would never have a sarcastic comment or a cutting remark, but Superman is the same guy who used to move the planet around just to keep Lois guessing vis-a-vis the secret identity shtick. He forced arms dealers to fight in their own wars.

For the first few decades of Superman's career, the character also lived and worked among mere mortals. He was truly special in the city of Metropolis, aside from the odd genie Jimmy might accidentally release, or the occasional appearance by a Phantom Zone criminal. In the comics, on the radio, on television, Superman was interacting with us mere mortals, but if we can point to a major change that started even prior to Crisis on Infinite Earths, its that Superman has been less and less likely to spend time during any particular issue face-to-face with anyone not in a spandex suit.

During his run on Action Comics, Geoff Johns did what he could to rehabilitate the almost ghost-like Daily Planet, a structure which, since around 2000 has appeared to exist only to be blown up once or twice a year to kick start a story and to ostensibly give Lois something to do. Too many writers have wanted to leap into the action, and forgotten that the Planet was always the human side of Superman, where the character came to talk with friends and be a part of the world, either as Clark or Superman.

We've seen Superman in space, Superman with the Justice League, Superman hopping between the worlds of the Multi-Verse, Superman fighting New Gods, Coluans and Kryptonians...

Instead, JMS delivers a Superman that walks among people, has a sandwich, talks with them, and helps them in big and small ways.

So... if that's where JMS is starting, I'm not faulting him for that.

Unfortunately, you get the feeling that JMS is so excited by this assignment, so ready to say everything he could possibly say about Superman, that he's not pacing himself.

Its not necessarily wrong to have Superman quote Henry David Thoreau to get the wheels turning, but here, JMS turns Superman into a bit of a lecturer. No better is the well-meaning, but oddly written few lines about how its unfair that notorious personality A gets to live, but beloved personality B had to die. The point JMS was trying to make, and the point of view he seemed to be imparting is a fair and valid one to attribute to the character, but ultimately, its JMS expressing his POV on Superman by telling rather than just showing. In the rush to explain what he's up to, to lay the groundwork for what he has planned, JMS almost talks too much, using Superman as his mouthpiece.

An interesting bit that JMS is bringing to the table is building the groundwork for how Superman interacts with humanity. In small ways, JMS builds a case for how Superman must make decisions about what he does and does not do as a god among mortals. Upon seeing a man in denial about a heart condition and advises the man to see a doctor (and I know has been widely read as a heart attack that Superman walks away from, but which... c'mon, guys... spotting heart trouble and cracking the sound barrier to rush a man to the hospital are two different things), he bows to the knowledge that he can't be everywhere to stop drug dealers but hopes people will stand up for themselves, etc...

And, of course, one can almost guess that JMS didn't read All Star Superman before putting finger to keyboard as he mimics the now famous sequence of Superman talking to a ledge jumper, his scene going on a bit longer than Morrison and Quitely's 1 page word on the subject.

But what the two sequences are presenting are intended to produce two different ideas. Morrison and Quitely elegantly demonstrate that among Superman's greatest powers is his empathy and ability to share strength. JMS (and to a lesser extent, Barrows) seem to be suggesting something about Superman following some sort of inner Prime Directive of allowing humanity to decide for itself.

Its an interesting germ of an idea, and it addresses one of the central questions that arises when you do put away the Metallo's and Parasite's and start considering how Superman can live in a world with flawed beings and not become a tyrant. What are the jobs for a Superman?

My biggest complaint was probably the "Superman faces the drug dealers" sequence. I don't have any problem with Superman staring down dealers or his plan of action, or the dialog. It does help illustrate Superman's "policy" (for lack of a better term), that he will stop one person from over powering another if he can help it, but that he'd prefer that people find the courage to fight for themselves. Unfortunately, the sequence ends when a bunch of black guys get run off to make things safe for a precocious little white kid... That just plays a little (read: a lot) awkwardly.

First issues are always a rough spot, even in the best of circumstances. I'm curious how this will read as the story progresses and JMS's plots and themes begin to more concretely form. Its an intriguing, if occasionally frustrating, first issue.

But its a lot more interesting to read than the entirety of "War of the Supermen".

(editor's note: the material below was added after initial publication)

I read a lot of superhero comics in any given month. As a hobby, I have read them mostly continuously since sixth grade. As much as I would have liked for the post "War of the Supermen" stories see Superman return to Metropolis and get back to the sort of comic we haven't seen in Superman in over a year, I realized how excited I was for a mainstream comic that was doing something a bit different, and not just for a single issue. And how odd it is that "doing something different" is giving a superhero a few minutes away from maniacs in armored suits, laser guns, fragments of alien homeworlds, alien invaders, etc...

So if I give the comic a little extra space, forgive me. I know I can turn to any of 300 different titles on the shelf and get more superhero action than a man can stand. So don't worry, I'm doing that, too (I read Green Lantern and Flash, so I'm covered, thanks).

I'll likely update you cats as to how its going as new issues arrive.

Movies I watched this weekend: Inception, Black Dynamite, The Narrow Margin

Inception: You know, there's quite a bit of good I can say about this one. But I'm not going to. I'm just going to suggest you set aside some money and some time, and go check this one out.

Black Dynamite: Do kids today even know about the Blaxpoitation genre of the 1970's? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess most of them think the world started with the NES, and the answer is no. And maybe that's why Black Dynamite didn't get better promotion and a wider release.

Blaxploitation is a genre I've only skimmed, and I do not claim any expertise. But I went to college in the 1990's, so, yeah, I'm familiar with the concept and how the movies tended to look and feel.

The genre died out, but every once in a while a spoof has come along, with varying degrees of commercial success, and varying degrees of actually being funny. But Black Dynamite was, in fact, pretty damn hilarious, especially if you also spent evenings in college watching Shaft or Black Belt Jones.

And this movie has the advantage of being the most quotable comedy in a long while. Michael Jai White is simply spot on, and even when the movie takes some bizarre turns in the name of comedy, you can still see where they were going, based on the tropes of the genre.

Unlike the other spoofs, such as Undercover Brother, Black Dynamite LOOKS like a Blaxploitation film, and sounds like one throughout. The color is off, the editing is intentionally choppy, and all without really drawing attention to itself.

Anyhow, recommended.



Dude, I have been walking around the house all day, randomly singing "Di-no-mite! Di-no-mite!".

Narrow Margin: A film noir from 1952, Narrow Margin is a fairly straight thriller taking place mostly during a train ride between Chicago and LA as a tough-as-nails cop escorts an undeserving, quick talking mobster's wife across the country to witness to the DA. Of course, a few folks don't want her to make it there alive.

I'll likely watch this one again just to watch Marie Windsor, who plays the mobster's wife, is totally on in the movie, and is given some awesome dialog. I'd seen Windsor in The Killing, and she's pretty darn good there, too.

There's also a really great fight scene in the movie, just really well handled.

It turns out, someone decided to remake Narrow Margin in 1990, but from everything I can tell, they mostly started from scratch. The movie does star Hackman and Anne Archer, so maybe its worth seeing?

The Signal Watch Watches: Inception

So, I had planned to write a long post on Chris Nolan's Inception. I can't. I just really, really enjoyed this movie. I have no complaints, aside from the fact that I had to take a bathroom break, and there was no point in the movie where that I could do so without missing some information.

I am sure the movie had some flaws I could nitpick, or you could take issue with some of the character motivation because it wasn't to your liking (but, you know, Nolan did establish Cobb's character fairly well). And there's likely someone out there who wants to argue with some epistemological angle Nolan took.

Stick it in your ear.

For the first time since, oh... Dark Knight (and, for different reasons, Birdemic) this is the first movie I've been sure I would want to see in the theater a second time. This movie was pretty much exactly up my alley, so... thanks, Mr. Nolan!

No long post on Inception for you people. I'm sure many of you saw the movie over the weekend. Please feel free to sound off.

My Solemn Pledge

I'm going to start making an effort to talk directly about a comic, comic news, etc... and less about fan reaction. Its sort of tedious, and not good for any of us, I think.

And with that: I have no idea what the point of this blog might be anymore.

Ha.

Batman and Robin is good

One day I am going to make a deal with Jamie, and its going to go like this:

I am going to take some vacation days. I am going to lock myself in the bedroom and ask her to bring me a steady supply of coffee and food, and I am going to read every bit of Grant Morrison's Batman from the past four years, including Final Crisis.

I am not sure that even then I will get everything Morrison tried to do, but... you know, reading this thing in installments over multiple years has dulled my ability to keep every last detail at the front of my mind, and for this story, I kind of think that's required. For me at least.

Anyway, I finally read Batman and Robin #13 today, and... man.



Also, I know someone out there must be annotating the series. I need to find that link.

Tactical Superiority

Superman #701 was released this week. Written by J. Michael Straczynski and drawn by Eddie Barrows, it's the first issue of what readers have already been told will be a 12-part saga of Superman walking from one coast to the next, crossing the US of A.

The reaction from comic fans, including many Superman fans, was abject horror. Of course, these days, if DC promised a $100 bill tucked into every $3 issue of Superman, comic geeks would rush to the message boards to insure that the world was on notice regarding how irrelevant and outlandish one MUST find Superman (while promoting the realism of a guy in a bat costume who swings from the sides of skyscrapers and can do anything the story dictates. Or, of course, Wolverine, the Punisher, Dr. Strange...).

As of this writing, I haven't picked up my copy of issue #701. So I can't comment much more on the issue other than to say that: while I like my superhero battles, and can totally get behind something that's non-stop action like Blackest Night, I always appreciate even semi-botched attempts to try to better define character through actions taken and intention in the story itself, and not just "look at Superman proving his mettle in the heat of battle".

Admittedly, these days I'm also becoming more and more aware that the definition of "hero" in comics and, I guess, cinema has been so shaped by the paramilitary fantasies of the late 1980's and 1990's that many of the ideals upon which the characters of DC Comics were founded might not make sense to a modern audience. Very simply, the same mindset that can't understand why Superman didn't use his heat vision to melt lex Luthor from orbit in secret isn't going to be very open to "what does it mean for a superman to walk the earth, reminding himself of the people he's supposedly helping with all of these usual fisticuffs with aliens and super scientists?"

On a slightly different tangent, this post started a few days back.

I found this quote at Robot 6, but read the interview at The Quietus

Have you turned your back on superheroes now?

AM: I'm interested in the superhero in real life, but not the comic book version. I've had some distancing thoughts about them recently. I've come to the conclusion that what superheroes might be — in their current incarnation, at least — is a symbol of American reluctance to involve themselves in any kind of conflict without massive tactical superiority. I think this is the same whether you have the advantage of carpet bombing from altitude or if you come from the planet Krypton as a baby and have increased powers in Earth's lower gravity. That's not what superheroes meant to me when I was a kid. To me, they represented a wellspring of the imagination. Superman had a dog in a cape! He had a city in a bottle! It was wonderful stuff for a seven-year-old boy to think about. But I suspect that a lot of superheroes now are basically about the unfair fight. You know: people wouldn't bully me if I could turn into the Hulk.

Leave it to Alan Moore to soundly express an idea I've had churning in my head for, oh... about five years now.

So its interesting to me that when DC Comics decides that Superman (who people barely read, anyway) is going to take part in a story that isn't about beating some threatening bad guy until he quits trying to kill Superman and/ or other people... the reaction from the interwebs has been nothing short of openly hostile in many cases. And, of course, the geeks trying to point out that a character in some other story in a comic they once read did something similar (apparently missing the fact that in the pages of Batman, Tony Daniel just redid every Batman story from the mid-1990's to 2006).

And, yes, Superman is the example of tactical superiority, but that was always the point, back to 1938. He has the power, and its all about how you choose to use it. What wrong would you right? And how do you recognize a true wrong? And just because you can punch a hole in the side of a tank, is that the best way to help?

Certainly part of my fascination with Superman has extended to the bizarre world developed around the character during the 1950's and 1960's, and the wild ideas the creative teams worked with. Sure, some of its lifted from elsewhere, and if you want to believe that the coolest superheroes are the ones with lots of pockets and guns the size of a Smart Car, then you're going to likely not see the appeal.

Still, it was an interesting bit of food for thought from Mr. Moore once again.

As I mentioned, I haven't actually read that issue #701 as of yet. I truly hope JMS does okay with the issue. I've heard mixed reviews, and seen some pretty darn nitpicky complaints online already, to the point where you wonder exactly what the creative team could have possibly done that wouldn't have drawn this kind of ire. No matter what, I'll likely forgive them for any flaws, and be happy they tried something a bit out of step with the standard villain set up. But I'll review the book, I guess, and try to be as honest as possible.

Vive La France! Happy Bastille Day, Mes Amis!

Some Americans like to take potshots at France. And while I find the phrase "Surrender Monkey" totally hilarious, it totally ignores how bad ass the French Resistance was during WWII.

It's Bastille Day, which... you know, the French had an odd time of it deciding how things would run after they figured out how to get out from under the boot heel of their oppressors, but today we're celebrating a day in the move toward freedom for a people.

And the French were never more awesome than when played by Hollywood actors sticking it to the Nazis. In song.


La Marseillaise via Casablanca

Thanks to Bully for the inspiration.

The Amazing World of Jimmy Olsen

I went and saw Sunset Boulevard tonight and then watched an hour of Louis on FX (it's okay. A bit different.).

Anyway, no post as my plans now include reading some Batman comics and then going to sleep.

So I leave you to ponder at what point this party got out of control:


This is exactly why you want to leave before Superman tears the roof off the joint.

Super Pets: Books for Kids!

DC Comics and Capstone books will soon release a line of kids' chapter books starring the DC Super Pets! I know! I'm using exclamation points! (...because I'm excited!)

For those of you not in the know, back in the day Superman editor and controversial figure (aka: well-known jerk), Mort Weisinger was all about adding new characters and accouterments to the Superman titles. Thus, you got everything from Kandor to Beppo, the super monkey. Some stuff stuck, some stuff didn't.

Superman wound up with a whole line of buddies, the most famous of which is Krypto the Superdog.

The really great news isn't just that these books are coming, but that they'll be drawn by Tiny Titans wunderkind cartoonist Art Baltazar.









Sadly, I can't really justify buying these books. I think. We'll see. I'm a bit of an impulse purchaser. But those of you with kids should totally check these things out. It's a book with Beppo and Titano! How can you go wrong?

I think I'm lying. I'm totally buying that book with Krypto and Ace the Bathound on the cover.

Harvey Pekar Merges with the Infinite

I was telling some folks earlier today that I was surprised that I had a moment when I read the headline.

Comics great Harvey Pekar has passed.

But, then, it kind of makes sense that, even as casual a reader as myself, might feel they knew Pekar little. To read Harvey's comics (most of which existed under the title American Splendor) was to get to know at least some version of the man. The comics were vastly autobiographical, honest, and unflinching. Sometimes funny, sometimes not, sometimes tough to read when Pekar shared his day-to-day, especially in Our Cancer Year.

If you haven't read American Splendor comics, pick up a collection or two, and if you aren't going to do that, then, for the love of God, rent the movie. The movie is actually just really, really good and stars Paul Giammti in most scenes, but it includes interview footage with Pekar, his family and the folks around him.

For a guy who outwardly seemed gruff and likely a little tough to deal with, its a bit surprising that the man more or less pioneered autobiographical comics, something that's become a huge staple of the indie comics and web comics scene. And, not to bag on anyone's efforts, Pekar is still largely unmatched. He wasn't enamored with making himself seem clever, or his life seem hip (good Lord, no), but he did like to catch the details of the everyday in a way authors, documentarians and Pekar's fellow cartoonists could only dream about.

That's a tough thing to do, and to keep it as honest as Harvey did, even through chemo and all the rest... kind of amazing.



Oddly, Harvey was never the artist of his own comics, but to work with Harvey who had started his work with R. Crumb, became a sort of thing. And to capture what Harvey was trying to put into his comics seemed to be a challenge artists wanted to rise to.

In his last few years I think Harvey enjoyed a little boost in personal fame and popularity. I'm not sure how much it helped with what seemed to be his anxiety over finances, etc... but I hope he came to see that there was a large audience out there that loved his work.

So long, Harvey. Thanks for changing comics.

I can only hope that you've got access to your record collection wherever you are.