#it doesn’t help of course that the writers also seem to be iron man stans | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

ordinaryschmuck · 4 years ago

Text

What I Thought About The Falcon and the Winter Soldier

Salutations to you, random people on the internet who most likely won't read this. I am an Ordinary Schmuck. I write stories and reviews and draw comics and cartoons!

Gonna be honest, I didn't think The Falcon and the Winter Soldier needed to be a full-length TV series. I mean, if Spider-Man can discover that he didn't have to replace Iron Man in a two-hour and nine-minute long movie, then the Falcon can learn he can't replace Steve Rogers in the same amount of time, right? I was excited, don't get me wrong, but I didn't know how they can fit a plot for a movie into a six-hour-long series. Unlike WandaVision, which needed to be a TV show to get those TV homages right for each episode, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier didn’t sound like something that would honestly work better as a film. But, once it started airing, and my excitement increased each week, I can positively say that it would not have worked as successfully if it wasn't a TV series.

Unfortunately, I'll have to get into spoilers to explain why, but trust me when I say that if you haven't checked it out yet, you definitely should. Because I'm about to dive in (or fly in) as I explain why The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is easily in the top tier MCU projects.

WHAT I LIKE

Sam Wilson: If WandaVision was about developing Wanda, then The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is about developing Sam. He might share the spotlight with Bucky, but this is so clearly Sam's story. It's his journey of becoming the new Captain America that gets more of a focus, and it is one of the best aspects of the series. And as I said, it's similar to Spider-Man's journey in Spider-Man: Far From Home. Sure, this time, it's more about stepping up to the mantle, but both Sam and Peter have to learn how to be their own hero rather than replace the one left behind. In Sam's case, it's more than just being the new Captain America, but also being the black Captain America. I'll talk more about the implications of that later, but for now, all I'll say is that it was so engaging seeing Sam accept his role. Plus, even though Sam tries to carry Steve's title, that doesn't mean he's Steve Rogers 2.0. He has his own ardor and personality as Captain America, on top of still representing the aspects of what that title entails. Partial credit for that goes to Anthony Mackie, who does a phenomenal job of portraying a man who's inspirational and charming in all forms of hell. I'd salute him as much as I'd want to have a beer with him...except not really because I refuse to touch a single drop of alcohol. But Sam Wilson would make me consider it! Because he's that good of a character.

Bucky Barnes: Much like Vision in WandaVision, Bucky takes the sidelines as Sam acts as the main face of the series. Unlike Vision, however, Bucky's story seems more like its own thing rather than something that's connected with his co-star. In a way, it's better, but it also seems worse. Because without having it be locked with Sam's story, Bucky's is still compelling as it develops him further in his own way. His journey may not be as engaging as Sam's, but it's still entertaining enough to watch his own narrative get continued in small spurts. Although, the fact that Bucky's story has little to do with Sam's does have the unfortunate side-effect that he doesn't need to be there. His inclusion is very much welcomed, but I feel like Bucky dealing with his own guilt and trauma as the Winter Soldier could be something that can fill up its own series rather than half of one. That being said, Bucky absolutely needs to be in this show. The emotional turmoil that Sabastian Stan portrays so well hits hard, and his dry humor works for some comedic highlights. Bucky's half of the story might be unnecessary for plot reasons, but it is unquestionably necessary for enjoyment.

There’s a lot of talking: This seems like a misstep, especially since most superhero shows are bogged down by characters talking to pad out the run time. Although, the dialogue in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is more like the dialogue in the series Daredevil. There are more words than action, but nearly every line is so incredibly engaging that I do not care. Sam and his sister talking to a banker about getting a loan might not sound as entertaining as Sam being in an air chase against terrorists, but I surprisingly held onto every word being said due to how well-acted it was. Plus, these discussions help make these characters more human on top of making the world feel believable. I understand the argument of show don't tell, but to me, as long as the dialogue is written well enough and said convincingly, I can learn to live with it.

The Flag Smashers: The concept of the Flag Smashers intrigues me. The idea that a group of people believes things were actually better when half the world got turned to dust is a perfect concept for the MCU to explore. In fact, this is the third story in a row that dives deep into the consequences of what happened post-Infinity War and Endgame, and I'm all for it! The universe is forever changed by this one big event, and it's not going to be irrelevant anytime soon. For the Flag Smashers, they offer the most striking glimpse of how the world is forever changed. Now, I'll admit, after seeing doom and gloom in Avengers: Endgame, it would be better to see the benefits of the Blip that characters claim to have existed rather than told about them. But seeing how there were dozens of fans who made the audacious claim that Thanos was right, I don't consider it too far of a stretch to believe that the Flag Smashers could exist. Especially since the arguments that characters present do seem persuasive enough. It's only the actions that the group makes that derail any sense of the discussion. But in a good way...for the most part. But I’ll get into that later too.

The Reveal of the new “Captain America”: This was the dirtiest, sickening punch in the gut that the first episode could have ended on...and I love it!

John Walker: I often find the best antagonists are the ones I'm willing to psychologically analyze. That's John Walker in a nutshell. He is an arrogant ass who deserved to get slapped around when taking things too far. Yet, I always find myself coming back to those scenes where he seems conflicted about becoming the new Captain America. I get a sense that he genuinely wants to do the right thing and those moments when he asks if he is all but confirms it. John's problem is the constant support he's given by his friends. I'd argue that building his ego is the very reason why he gets frustrated so quickly by people denying him, as he often reacts like a toddler who throws a tantrum when a parent makes the "mistake" of saying “no.” This is why it's satisfying seeing people more powerful than John kick the s**t out of him because it results in his ego going through a well-needed deflation. Still, the constant frustrations he has for not being respected as the new Captain America makes his further descent into insanity all the more appealing to watch. Because him taking the super-soldier serum proves Dr. Erskine's theory is true: "Good becomes great. Bad becomes worse."

...And this is why the writers dropped the ball when trying to make John Walker redeemable. It's exceptional if that was the intention. After all, I did say there were glimpses of a man who wanted to become great, not worse. However, given what John does in later episodes, we're going to need more than glimpses to believe his switch from bad to good. Especially since his decision to set his anger aside to suddenly help people is a little too unbelievable for my tastes given how fast it happens. It's not an awful decision. It's just one that needed a bit more polish. I still find John Walker an incredible character regardless, but I don't blame people for being a tad more hesitant given how poorly paced his redemption arc came across as.

Readapting “Star-Spangled Man”: I adore this for two reasons.

Reason #1: It's a solid callback to Captain America: The First Avenger, which I will always stand by as my favorite Captain America movie.

Reason #2: It proves how much John Walker doesn't understand what it means to be Captain America. When Steve did this song and dance routine in his movie, he hated it. Better yet, Steve despised it. Because he wasn't helping anybody. He was just being a dancing monkey to appeal to civilians, and you see how much he regrets doing it with each show. For John, he relishes the whole thing, because of course, he would! John loves having his ego appealed to, and this routine is doing nothing but inflates it. It's a solid case of visual storytelling to prove to the audience just how disconnected John is from being Captain America. Steve or Sam wouldn't have done this, because being a hero is more than respect and adoration. It's about actually doing the right thing. A lesson that John desperately needs to learn.

Sam’s and Bucky’s bromance: You remember how I said that Bucky's dry sense of humor can be a comedic highlight? Well, that's only second rate to the times he and Sam bicker like an old married couple. Whether it's because of the writing, directing, or Makie’s and Stan's natural chemistry, seeing Sam and Bucky interact with each other is always a blast to see. And on top of being funny, there are these well-handled moments of drama shared between both characters that make their relationship convincing. It's why you can't have this series without Bucky, despite it so clearly being Sam's story that gets the more focus. Because without either character, we would miss out on some entertaining interactions that I wouldn't trade for anything else for this series.

Isaiah Bradely: Well, this character was a pleasant surprise. Although, "pleasant" might not be the right word because every scene with Isaiah is absolutely gut-wrenching in all the right ways. Carl Lumbly gives a phenomenal performance for a character that has been beaten down, with very little hope he has for any change that matters for his race. Plus, his backstory may not be as unbelievable as you might think. Between 1932-1972, America performed what is known as the Tuskegee Experiment. Scientists tested the effects of syphilis by injecting it into African Americans, telling them that they were receiving free health care when they didn't. So the idea that scientists tested super-soldier serums on African Americans, not knowing the dangerous effects, is not that far of a stretch. Neither is the knowledge that a black man was disrespected despite fighting hard for his country. If you researched African American history, you'll find that this type of horse s**t happens way more times than it should. It is heartbreaking, and Isaiah Bradley represents all of it. Thus making the little Isaiah exhibit in the Captain America museum all the more tear jerking just because of how sweet it is to see him get some semblance of a win. This level of discussion of what it means to be an African American is something I never expected with The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, but I greatly appreciate it nonetheless. What's even better is that these discussions don't end with Isaiah.

The discussions of racism: Again, this was something I didn't expect, but grateful for it nonetheless. I mean, I should have expected it given that one of the co-stars is black, but given how the story was about Sam being the new Captain America, I didn't think discussion of racism and racial injustice would come into play. Turns out that I was naive to think those things are separate. The burden of being a black Captain America is something that not many white people, including myself, consider a big deal. But looking at America's past and how others react to any African American in power, you realize that, yes, it is a big deal. Isaiah, and several real-life POCs in history, prove that America doesn't respond well to a person of color being better than the average white man. So it is easily reasonable to believe that there would be issues with a black man becoming a symbol of what America should be. Hell, I'm willing to bet that there were issues when this happened in the comics way back when. Not because of some bulls**t about how it doesn't fit with the character or story, but solely because they can't handle a black Captain America. And if you don't believe something like this wouldn't happen to someone like Sam Wilson, look back to that scene with the police who didn't know he was the Falcon. This crap happens every day, and it's The Falcon and the Winter Soldier that shines a light on it. Despite being something I didn't expect, the talks of racism are very much appreciated. And I'm as pale white as an introverted vampire. I can't even begin to comprehend how the African American community must feel about all of this.

Zemo: Who the f**k expected this guy to be one of the best things in the series?!

Seriously, from Captain America: Civil War, I wasn't too into Zemo as a character. I loved the idea that this powerless guy tore apart the world's greatest superheroes through intelligence and coercion. But his needlessly complicated plan and stale personality weren't enough to win me over. So when he returned, I expected to dread every minute of it. Little did I know that Zemo's comeback would skyrocket him into top-tier MCU villain territory!

Zemo is a character that, despite "helping" our heroes, still works on his own agenda. He might put them on the right path and occasionally assist in a fight, but only because he still won't stop at anything to make sure fewer super powered individuals are in the world. Because that's the thing about Zemo: His motivation was fine and understandable to a point, but his personality was flawed in Civil War. Here, I finally see how Zemo can work. Despite having no power, he uses his mind to look for any angle to control the situation, gaining an advantage even if it is for a short time. For instance, while he can't harm Sam or Bucky without risking his own life or jeopardizing his temporary freedom, he can still annoy the hell out of them. Like when he forced Sam into a situation where he had to drink literal snake juice. It's actually a ton of fun to watch, and I'm honestly glad that Zemo gets to live to see tomorrow. It means that he might make another return, and I can't wait to see what's in store for him in the future. Which is something I didn't think I'd say five years ago.

The Dora Milaje: It was actually pretty cool seeing these characters make an appearance, notably when they slapped around John Walker like it was nothing. Although, a part of me wonders that if Chadwick Boseman hadn't died last year, we would get to see T'Challa himself make an appearance. This lines up with the character, as I can see him dropping everything to hunt down the man who killed his father. Which would be just as awesome, if not slightly more so, to see. Still, we work with what life gives us. And what it gave are awesome cameos that make the MCU feel more inclusive about its characters rather than limiting them to their specific sections in the universe.

Walker killing the Flag Smasher: There is something so wrong with seeing that shield stained with blood. 'Cause here's the thing: Captain American can kill. He's a soldier. It's expected for a soldier to take lives for the sake of justice. What John Walker did isn't justice. It was vengeance. Vengeance that is fueled by anger rather than the need to do the right thing. Because when Captain America leads an army to kill the man who whipped out half the universe, that's fighting for a just cause. But when “Captain America” kills a man, the wrong man, for killing his best friend, that is an act of selfishness that no one would see your side on. And it was the final nail in the coffin that proves how John Walker does not deserve that shield.

Sam and Bucky vs. John: This might just be the best fight in the entire series. Not only is it so satisfying to see John Walker get everything that he deserves, but the whole thing was pretty intense to watch. After seeing what John can do with that shield, it makes moments when Sam and Bucky barely dodge his attacks with it all the more blood-rushing to see. Plus, Civil War's motif playing the background is another solid callback that fits well narratively since this is technically two superheroes fighting another superhero. It's an incredible scene that was worth the wait of four hour-long episodes to see.

Setting up Joaquín Torres as the new Falcon: I don't know if Marvel will follow through with this or even if they should. That being said, if they do, I'm all for it. Joaquín already seems like a pretty fun character, and his interactions with Sam show there's enough chemistry there to give Captain America a new wingman. I probably won't lose sleep if he doesn't become the new Falcon, but I'll still be excited regardless.

Madame Hydra: I know that she has an actual name, but I refuse to remember it due to how long and convoluted it is.

Anywho, we get a small glimpse of who Madame Hydra is as a character, but already I'm intrigued. She seems to have a fun personality, added by Julia Louis-Dreyfus' dry energy. Whether this is set up for the next big bad or just introducing a fun character, I'm interested. Madame Hydra was already a blast in the short amount of time she was in the show, and I can't wait to see what future installments have in store for her.

“Louisiana Hero”: Or as I like to call it, "Sam's Hero Theme." Because while this is the track that plays for the intro, it still shows up when Sam is training as the new Captain America. Not only is it insanely catchy, but I love that you hear a hint of the theme of Captain America: The First Avenger, yet "Louisiana Hero" is still very much its own thing. And that's another reason why I consider it Sam's motif because it fits precisely with the character. Sam is a person who has a hint of the good man that Steve was but still does his own thing when wearing the stars and stripes. Not a copy, but still heavily influenced by the original. So kudos to Henry Jackman for creating a musical piece that fits so well with a character far better than any other themes or motifs prevalent in the MCU. Because, let's be honest, there aren't that many.

Sam’s new suit: ...I mean, it looks cool. Kinda corny at times, sure, but points for comic accuracy.

Sam Carrying Karli: I mean, look at it.

This looks like something that should be painted and hung up on a wall due to how beautiful it looks.

Sam’s Speech: Two meaningful things are going on with this speech.

First, it proves once and for all that Sam Wilson is Captain America. He doesn't just fight for his country. He also believes the government that runs it should take accountability for any missteps before dealing with something worse than a person who took the term "rebellious teenager" into an extreme.

Second, it is so satisfying seeing Captain America tell government officials off about unjust treatment. Even if it does diddly-squat about anything in the real world, it's still a big moment that's effective because of the bulls**t that happens every day. It's far from an actual win, but it still feels good (I hope). And that still counts for something, right?

“We’ll need a U.S. Agent”: Credit to Louis-Dreyfus for saying a stupid cornball of a name and making it sound...not that.

WHAT I DISLIKE

Still running that Marvel Studios logo in every episode: It's still a nitpick, but its still annoying. It's alright if you want to use the full fanfare for the first episode, but at least shorten it for the rest of the season. Please? For the love of all that is holy?

The CGI: The Falcon and the Winter Soldier has some pretty...not great CGI. It's not as awful as the CG in the DC shows on the CW, but it is way too easy to tell what looks real and what doesn't. Failing to make CGI convincing has been a problem in the MCU for a while, as most of the time, characters barely look like they really exist in the scene. To me, I compare it to when Red vs. Blue switches between actual animation and Machinima. The CG models stick out like a sore thumb to the in-game models, but at least it looks cool. Because while I don't believe that I'm seeing an actual man with bird wings flying through a canyon while chasing helicopters...it still looks cool. Still, not many people would be as forgiving as I am to this type of thing, so it's onto the dislikes it goes.

The direction of the action: Now I want to clarify that I have no problems with the action itself. Some fight scenes are pretty cool while also added with some exciting set-pieces that kept me engaged the whole way through. It's just the direction of the action that I have issues with. The camera is always shaky with so many cuts that it's hard to follow half the time. It's an understandable technique to hide the stunt double's faces or to make it look like it really is the actual actor who's doing the fighting. The issue is that once you know a show like Daredevil exists, with its plethora of well-directed action, the cracks in the armor become much more noticeable for a series like The Falcon and the Winter Soldier.

Karli Morgenthau: Karli...frustrates me. Because on the one hand, Erin Kellyman does an impeccable job at portraying the heartbreak, frustrations, and determination that Karli has when fighting for her cause. On the other hand, Karli's cause is so layered with hypocrisy that it's hard to understand her position. She wants to prove how the world was better during the Blip, saying that everyone was happier then. So why do things like blow people up and kill “Captain America?” I get the latter. The guy's a d**k. But to prove to people how better things were, is death and destruction really the best choice to get that point across? I get the mentality of how people respond better to a harmful fist rather than a tranquil hand, but really, has that mentality ever worked out either?

However, you could argue that her hypocrisy is fueled by the super-soldier serum, with the "good becomes great and bad becomes worse" theory that John all but confirms. Although, unlike John, we never got to see Karli pre-serum, so we don't know how much it really had affected her. With John, it's easy as many scenes indicate how close he was to snapping and murdering someone who disrespects him. We don't get that for Karli and are left to assume she was already crazy about thinking how intense violence can show the world how great things were during the Blip.

Then again, that could be the plan. Show how a person with the best intentions is ultimately wrong, given the lengths they go through to accomplish them. It worked for Thanos, so it should work here. And it would have...if not for Sam saying that Karli has a point. Because for the main hero to say that the villain is correct, you have to show them doing more good than bad. I understand the mentality Karli, and the Flag Smashers, have. But by doing nothing but committing crimes and violence, any point they have is discredited. Take note of the fact that nobody but nutcases on the internet says that Thanos has a point. Because he doesn't. He's a maniacal supervillain who does something so intense that nobody should be on his side. It's similar with Karli, but because we're apparently supposed to agree with her, she doesn't work as well.

...DO YOU SEE WHY SHE'S FRUSTRATING?! Because while I can see how she can be an incredible character, there are so many holes in how she works that I fail to appreciate any of it. And seeing how she's the main antagonist, a character who takes up a good chunk of the screen time, it's not a good thing that she tends to flounder more times than she should. I want to like Karli, but given everything that's wrong with her, I just can't.

Rewriting Sharon as the Power Broker: This is an intriguing idea met with a mixed execution. You see, I like the idea of a character who was once an ally becoming a villain, yet the heroes have no clue about it whatsoever. It creates solid dramatic irony, but only if done well. With Sharon, it's not really done well. It genuinely feels like her character was changed radically to give her this personality. A fun personality, I'll add, but one that comes across as really jarring when looking back at her previous appearance. Don't get me wrong, a character's current personality feeling so radically different from their previous one can work a treat, but only when we see them go through point A to point B. We're told about the s**t that went down with Sharon, but unlike understanding the mentality of the Flag Smashers, her personality change would have been more effective if we saw it. So while I like the idea of Sharon becoming another big bad in the future, I would have liked it more if we saw her decline into possible villainy.

------------

By using my usual scoring system for MCU shows and movies, I'd give this season of The Falcon and the Winter Soldier a solid 8/10. There are problems. Quite a lot of problems. Hell, even the stuff I like comes with a fair share of issues. It's just a matter of asking yourself, "Do I like some parts more than I dislike them?" For me, I find myself enjoying much more than I didn't. It's not perfect by any means, but while it definitely falters at times, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is a series that soars to great heights. You might not be in love with it, but you’ll have a helluva good time regardless.

Now if you don't excuse me, it's time I swap from one superhero series to another as I share my more in-depth thoughts on--

#marvel cinematic universe #the falcon and the winter soldier #mcu reviews #what i thought about

9 notes · View notes

killian-whump · 5 years ago

Note

Sometimes I think Colin's career would've been a lot better if he hadn't been stuck on OUAT for what? Six years? I wish he had made more movies, he had a great chance with The Rite and I think he had the potential to became a great movie star and sometimes I think he lost that chance. I mean, I know he can still be a movie/TV star but he's not "Hollywood-young anymore" and I'm scared that he'll never be the star he deserves to be and that makes me feel sad and kinda angry at OUAT for wasting him

Nonny, Nonny, Nonny... You’re worrying too much and, most importantly, you’re expecting too much. And that’s all on you, NOT on Colin.

OUAT is still Colin’s most well-known role. Had he not been on the show, um, he’d be even less known and have far fewer opportunities than he has now. So no, his career definitely wouldn’t have been better without OUAT. Granted, if he’d done something different instead of Once that happened to be more popular, sure, he might be in a better spot right now. But that’s assuming he would’ve gotten as big of a role elsewhere and that this other project would’ve surpassed Once in popularity and renown. That, my friend, is a HUGE assumption to make, and statistically, not very likely.

As for wasting him... I mean, they didn’t? They used him to the best of their abilities, even overused him at times if you asked me, and Colin willingly signed the contract to commit himself to the project for 6 years or the end of the project (whichever came first). And I think, given the chance to redo it all, he’d probably do the same all over again. Once was a great opportunity for him, was a happy and successful work experience, and is his best known work. Why are you so down on it and so resentful of its place in his CV?

Also... The Rite was not really a great chance. Hear me out here. The Rite was a B-project with a B-writer and a B-director and a B-cast...that got automagically promoted to an A-movie because Anthony Hopkins took a personal interest in the subject matter and essentially went slumming in B-ville for kicks. The movie itself, the writing, the direction, the other actors (even including Colin, bless his heart) were not ready for A-level criticism and didn’t hold their own in that harsh light. What could’ve been a GREAT little indie film ended up being regarded as a flop prime time film... and Colin, who was being labeled as “Hollywood’s New Leading Man” took most of the fall for that. Which wasn’t fair. And it wasn’t right. But it was what it was, and I think THAT has damaged his career far more than anything else, because studios don’t want to take a chance on a guy who failed at carrying a major Hollywood motion picture starring opposite Anthony Hopkins. An unfair assessment, as it was the B-level writing/directing that failed to carry their parts, but no one wants to SAY that, because in doing so, they’d have to admit that Anthony Hopkins was totally slumming it, and the media were too dumb to realize it.

But at the same time... The Rite got Colin the most exposure he’d had up to that point on American shores, which likely had a hand in getting him Once. So it’s a double-edged sword. I think it damaged his career opportunities (and maybe even his own confidence) in some avenues, but helped him immensely in other avenues, so it’s kind of a toss-up, really. But Once? Once was all good, friend. I don’t think Once damaged his career at all - aside from possibly hanging on too long and delaying him striking while the iron was still warm right out of S6′s finale.

As for “not Hollywood young” - Well, he’s still plenty Hollywood young? I mean, how old do you think most leading men in Hollywood ARE? O_o He’s the same age or younger than most of today’s leading men, so...? I don’t know what you’re talking about, honestly. Plus, he’s aging like a fine wine, getting better looking with each year, and clean-shaven and smoothed-up as he is in The Right Stuff, the guy looks almost pre-pubescent. Like, I literally feel like some kind of cougar eyeing him up these days, and I’m only 2 years older than him D: Yeah, antis seem to be pushing the “he’s aging badly” bullshit these days, but literally no one who doesn’t have a hate boner agenda actually thinks that :P

Lastly, and maybe most importantly... The assumption that Colin wants to be a huge movie star is yours, and yours alone. Only Colin himself knows what he actually wants for his career and for his life. We can only go by what he’s shown us and told us publicly - and, honestly, all of that points to him not being in this game for fame and fortune. He’s in it for the love of the craft, for the fun HE has playing make-believe and pretending to be people he’s not. And, of course, to provide for his family as best he can whilst doing so. In fact, given Colin’s evident discomfort with fame at times, I’d say he may even be the type to purposely aim to stay OUT of the brightest glare of Hollywood’s lights. And it’s not like the heightened fame he experienced with Once turned out all that well for his wife and family. My guess would be that he’s probably a bit leery of inviting that level of fame (let alone a higher one) into his life again, especially now with two growing kids.

The reality of the situation is that Colin already is a successful, working television actor. Yes, he’s done some movies, but he keeps coming back to television, and maybe that’s because that’s where the more interesting offers happen to be, or maybe it’s because he prefers that medium. We don’t know. Only he knows that. But it doesn’t matter. He’s doing his thing, and doing it well, and is respected for the talent he's displayed in doing it.

You can’t just make up your own career aspirations for the guy and then act like he’s failing at meeting them. If you want to stan a big Hollywood actor, then there are plenty to choose from. If you want to stan Colin, then you gotta follow his lead, respect his choices, and assume he knows what he’s doing and doing what he wants to with his life and career.

#colin meta #not whxmp #anonymous #kw ask box

20 notes · View notes

vaguely-concerned · 5 years ago

Text

Mass Effect Initiation thoughts

In short: this book is actually really good, N.K. Jemisin is, as we all know, an excellent writer! It’s the story of how Cora met Alec Ryder and joined the Initiative, and it has SO much good good SAM content and I am full of emotions.

- poor cora is so continually out of her depth, I want to give her a hug. the points made about her in the main game are true though -- she is not ready for leadership yet. (and that’s fine! she does much better with something or someone to belong to and that is so Valid. she’s an honorable Loyal Knight!!! one of the sexiest things to be, as we all know)

I think I’ll actually like her a lot more on this new playthrough now -- she must have been quite hard to write compellingly in the game because at the end of the day she’s really very straightforward and honest and loyal, it’s quite hard to uh ‘hide’ things in her character

- alec ryder deadass installed an unspeakably illegal (and did I mention experimental?) AI in cora’s head with no informed consent whatsoever. d A D

(when cora is like ‘are you actually going to another galaxy because they don’t have laws to stop you from committing fully to your craziness in public’ and alec is like *...maybe so meme* fadsfhkj he does literally say ‘this is why I’m going to another galaxy’ out loud at a later point of the book)

- this book is giving me the good good SAM content ;________; I love SAM so much, the scene where cora thinks she’s dying and SAM talks to her? when cora asks SAM if he’s okay being connected to her because if he’s sentient that matters to her (cora is a Good)? SAM explicitly having inherited alec ryder’s sense of humour and sarcasm and alec a) doesn’t know how it happened, b) distantly thinks he should probably track that process down and turn it off (and never does) and c) regrets all his life choices when his robot kid mercilessly snarks at him and questions his life choices? please bioware give me an me:a sequel with more of this stuff I’ll eat it up with a spoon

- body diverse asari! HUGE BUFF ASARI! Short stocky beautiful matriarch asari with one krogan and one turian trophy husband fast asleep in her bed in the background of a vidcall fkdjshfkjsdlhfkjsdah god I love mass effect with my entire heart

- OLD LADY INFORMATION BROKER VOLUS WORKING OUT OF ILLIUM!!!! this is not a drill what the fUCK this is the coolest shit

- fasdklhfsjkdalfhsdjk okay in Alec Ryder POV: “I don’t think [Cora] likes me very much.” Which probably meant she had good judgement. AFLSKJDHGJSDKF ALEC

he has a weird flip-flopping sense of self -- he is uncompromisingly (one might even say... astoundingly arrogantly) secure in his own intellectual superiority and that most other people are idiots not to be trusted and that he needs to do things himself because others would mess it up, and yet there’s this clear seam of self loathing around basically everything else about himself too. (You know who he reminds me of, in a more military and less visibly anxious way? Rodney McKay. Alec Ryder is like a slightly unfortunate outcome for a McShep lovechild. I think we just figured out why I have sort of a soft spot for him even though he’s a certifiable dick lol)

- this book really makes it hit home that cora grew up incredibly isolated and dirt poor. I’ve seen some people say her backstory is all sunshine and daisies compared to kaidan and especially jack’s, but honestly her background is complicated and fucked up enough that I’m just like ‘shit baby :(’ all the time

- well I have successfully solved the puzzle about whether alec ryder is an idealist or not; he absolutely is. a grouchy, bad-tempered one with no people skills, but an idealist nonetheless. alec ryder is in fact a storm of 150000 emotions in a trenchcoat, barely held in check by a thin fragile outer shell of iron lol, SAM was absolutely right to say that he was mostly governed by his feelings. (and I mean if anyone would know it’d be SAM I guess). I found some of it sort of sweet actually: he reflects in passing that one of the biggest reliefs of no longer being in the alliance is that he’ll never have to risk other people’s lives again. he fundamentally wants to build something good to help people live and be happy instead of destroying things. (he also is quite bad at predicting how other people could corrupt and use his innovations precisely to be destructive b/c he doesn’t think that’s the ~*logical*~ thing to do, so... y’know haha, maybe it’s good he went to another galaxy, the milky way could not contain his chaos)

also he thinks a lot about his wife, even though she’s been dead for years at this point. o u c h (she truly does seem to have been a tether for him in so many ways though -- like a tie to the real world/normalcy/possibly sanity, and that’s a bit how he still evokes her)

additionally: alec ryder did fistfight at the very least one dude in the line of bureaucratic duty, and perhaps more, enough for SAM to have a list of warning signs ready and at hand jdfsklfhasdjf. he did, very much, throw a dude through a table. (at least it’s implied said dude was an asshole) I LOVE that alec’s SAM is the snarkiest iteration we’ve seen and that he’s perfectly willing to call the old man out on his bullshit (alec stresses that SAM is supposed to do what he says at the end of the day, but his SAM is also less subservient and more willing to argue and discuss things than any other we get to see -- and this is of course the SAM Ryder inherits, but I don’t think SAM is as confident in being able to read the PC correctly until a bit further into the game and the twin is of course a different person who’ll respond to different things so he’s not quite as... blunt? I guess? in confronting them about things. (the whole concept is just! so! interesting!!) anyway I feel like all of this says something about alec’s parenting style, for better or for worse haha. he sort of tries to be authoritarian but his children (well canonically at least Sara, she references having yelled at him a lot over the years) aren’t afraid to fight back or scared of the consequences of disagreeing, so I get the distinct feeling his temper never flared violently like that with his family at all, I think he’s more prone to just pulling away in disapproval.)

- I enjoy how casually diverse this book is -- Jemisin has done such a good job making sure especially the human characters are from different backgrounds and places, as they would be lore-wise in the Mass Effect universe, though the games often skew unfortunately white. (andromeda much less so than the trilogy, though)

- my heart. is so so soft for the fact that a huge reason for cora to join the initiative is how much she bonds with SAM-E. and I am so sad for her because she just wants someone or something who’ll stay, something that won’t disappear on her without closure like her parents; she’s so insecure and scared under her competence (and WHY THE FUCK WOULDN’T SHE BE holy shit her parents just. weren’t there one day after she left home so she wouldn’t accidentally crush their ship with her untrained biotics and kill them all). and she chooses alec and his dream. and then alec goes and FUCKING DIES at the first opportunity Y____________Y alternate universe alec please drink your victor sullivan juice and survive, all these dumb children need you

- I am so surprised about how much fond respect alec seems to have for cora and how quickly he developed it. I suppose he has a harder time with his own children because it’s closer to home? he is a complicated man lol, this last part of the book where he shows her the ark and everything is weirdly sweet. again I think he has the potential to be a good dad somewhere in there and that just makes it so much worse that he wasn’t. (also he staunchly considers himself still a married man. god help me)

they’ve both grown to honestly love their sams T________T fml. (well alec has sort of bound up all of himself, the things he loves and their future in SAM, so it’s a bit more complicated but my point still stands) alec advocating for a consensual synthesis is very heartfelt and convincing; you really want to believe him.

cora seen through someone else’s eyes is also SO AMAZING!!! after this whole book in her head and she feels so flailing and uncertain and adrift and other people naturally view her completely differently. I especially like alec picking up on her not talking a lot. (I think this is why she responds so well to SAM, who’ll be there always and can be in her head. I wish this part of cora was more evident in the game, the fact that she has this sibling-like connection to SAM seems very important. sequel where both SAM and Ryder grow closer to becoming her actual family? please? I keep begging for ME:A2 into an empty aching void haha)

- alec ‘I don’t have time to die’ ryder still talking about everyone else being idiots as he’s slowly catching fire while saving SAM fhdjfhsdlfhasdhlfsjd he is an asshole but it is hard not to stan

- nO SAM-E D:D:D: oh well at least he’s still alive within SAM, in a way?

- hey. hey you know what’s fun. alec tries to use his last words and last thoughts to ask cora to tell the kids about ellen being alive this time too. haha. ha. fuck

he consistently goes out thinking of his family despite all his bullshit and I’m not okay

- CORA IS A PERFECT BODYGUARD/SECOND IN COMMAND AND I’M EMOTIONAL

- alec is. surprisingly afraid to hurt people emotionally? he keeps putting off telling cora the bad news about SAM-E, to SAM’s stated disapproval lol (I must repeat again: I love SAM so so much). this supports my thesis that in his personal life he’s avoidant rather than confrontational/aggressive. (professionally... again, he did very much throw a man through a table)

- man I hope we some day get SAM being this comfortably close and sarcastic with Ryder too. thinking about SAM-E and the small differences between him and uh SAM ‘prime’ it really must have been a huge thing for him too to become someone else, especially after the last person died like that. and he kind of has no choice but to experience that loss and death intimately. (now that I think about it that’s. fucked up, man. he literally felt alec go like it happened to himself.)

If I were to summarize the differences between the SAMs we have seen, cora’s SAM-E seems younger, more exuberant, shyer and more -- what’s a non-shitty word for needy haha? it’s very firmly established that cora longs to feel needed, so this makes perfect sense. alec’s SAM is blunter, snarkier and more prone to questioning things, and hilariously is sort of alec’s emotional intelligence. (probably serves a similar role to what ellen used to, actually. ow) scott/sara’s SAM feels more worried/focused -- which also makes sense; he’s just experienced losing his person/pathfinder, in a real way he’s also recently orphaned and must be Extremely aware that he now has an enormous responsibility, not only what he was built for but for what remains of alec’s family. ...poor SAM

(come to think of it I guess one vibe I get from in-game SAM is a little bit of ’harried and anxious yet loving and responsible uncle’ hahaha)

- so at this point alec knew cora could never be pathfinder after him, and he never told her. *accumulation of asshole points continues, though I suspect this might have come from a place of not wanting to hurt her again (b/c he’s the only one who has a right to know these important things amirite)* but I’m also strangely touched that the reason he’s hesitant to involve his children in the whole thing isn’t that he doesn’t have faith in them, it’s that he doesn’t want to burden their lives with something so heavy, a burden he created. can you just imagine... if this man had managed to take the time to explain himself, his motivations and his feelings to his children just once. just one fUCKING time. am I laughing am I crying I honestly don’t know

- this book makes me ache all over for the potential of Andromeda. and I don’t think it’s too late to salvage it either. I know a sequel probably won’t happen, at least not any time soon, but... *sits by rainy window like a wife wistfully wondering if her husband will return from sea*

#mass effect #mass effect andromeda #meta #man I wish they could have gotten *this* cora across more in the game - it's recognizably the same person but she's shown better here #and also yes I am just a one person 'bring alec ryder back and give us some closure' cheerleading squad right now lol

15 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 5 years ago

Text

Dracula vs. The Marvel Universe! 14 Times The Lord of The Undead Fought Superheroes!

https://ift.tt/31rfcKg

Hey, remember that time Dracula fought the Hulk? Or the X-Men? Or Spider-Man? No? Well, you're in luck, because we do!

facebook

twitter

tumblr

Dracula. The very name conjures images of sexuality, corruption, and decadence. From the original novel written by Bram Stoker in 1897 to the moment Bela Lugosi donned the famed opera cloak in 1931, the character of Dracula has been an iconic horror staple.

In fact, Dracula has been the subject of over 200 films, second only to the number of films starring Sherlock Holmes. But films, novels, and television aren't the only genres that have contained Dracula’s bloodlust. Comic books have been a compelling source for new Dracula material. Marvel Comics in particular have been a happy hunting ground for the Lord of the Vampires.

After the easing of Comic Code restrictions in the early seventies, Stan Lee and Marvel were eager to explore classic monsters in the pages of their books. When the code loosened its grip, Lee and company were able to resurrect the four color boogiemen that lay forgotten for so long. In 1972, writer Gerry Conway and artist Gene Colan introduced Tomb of Dracula and a legend was born. Now there was a version of Dracula that borrowed from Stoker and Lugosi stalking the same fictional universe as Spider-Man and the Avengers.

Soon, writer Marv Wolfman would take over the writing chores on Tomb of Dracula and create one of the greatest continuing horror sagas in comic book history. Within the pages of Tomb of Dracula, Wolfman introduced the vampiric detective Hannibal King, Lilith (Dracula’s Daughter), and most importantly, Blade, the Vampire Hunter, who later helped kick off the current superhero movie boom.

Amazon has all your Marvel Dracula needs

Dracula existed within the Marvel Universe, but other than rare occasions not many Marvel heroes appeared in Dracula’s book, giving the title a sense of isolation from the rest of the Marvel Universe. That is not to say that Dracula has not stalked the titles of the mainstream Marvel heroes. Oh no, dear reader, the Prince of Darkness has cast his shadow on many Marvel heroes, making him one of the greatest, if often overlooked villains in Marvel history. Here is a look at times Dracula, the greatest monster of them all, has stalked the Marvel Universe.

Dracula Meets Spider-Man

Giant Sized Spider-Man #1 (1974)

In this tale, Aunt May is suffering from a rare blood disease because she’s Aunt May. Spidey learns that the only man that has the cure is an eccentric doctor that refuses to travel by plane. Spider-Man learns from Reed Richards that the scientist is traveling by ship, so Spidey gets his webbed ass to the ship to find the doctor.

Also on board the ship are members of the Maggia who want the formula, and of course, Dracula himself who is also after it. Hilarity ensues as Dracula dispatches the crooks one by one, and throws the Maggia leader overboard.

read more: 13 Essential Horror Comics

The book is a send up of the classic death at sea sequence of Stoker’s Dracula, as Dracula feeds off the Maggia onboard. While never featuring a direct confrontation between hero and vampire, this issue served as a warning...Dracula is out there.

Buy it on Amazon

Allied with the Avengers (1973)

Avengers #118

Ironically, one of the first times Dracula was drawn into the events of the Marvel Universe, he did so to defend humanity! In the Avengers/Defenders war, often considered to be the first true crossover in comics history, the Dread Dormammu opened a dimensional gateway to Earth. The Avengers and Defenders were stuck in Dormammu’s dimension so could not defend the Earth from an incursion by the savage Mindless Ones, headless beings that thrive on destruction. A group of super-powered champions on Earth, not knowing where the Mindless Ones were pouring on from, took up arms to protect their home.

read more: The Weird History of Marvel Superheroes vs Monsters

One of these beings was none other than Dracula, who along with such heroes as Power Man, the Fantastic Four, and Ka-Zar, fought back against the Mindless Ones. But don’t think Dracula was acting magnanimously true believers; imagine if a horde of beasts was smashing your favorite eatery. That’s what Earth is to Dracula, a theme restaurant with an all you can eat buffet of jugulars.

Yes, Dracula fought the Mindless Ones, but in doing so he made sure his food supply remained strong and proved to Marvel readers just how badass he was by taking on the Mindless Ones...creatures capable of going toe to toe with the Hulk!

The Creation of Baron Blood (1976)

Invaders #7

One of Captain America’s most enduring foes was created by none other than Dracula. What’s more evil than a Nazi vampire? Pretty much nothing, which makes Baron Blood one of the most vile creatures in the Marvel Universe. In the dark days of World War II, John Farnsworth was an English aristocrat obsessed with vampire lore. When he travels to Transylvania, he encounters Dracula, who transforms Farnsworth into the living dead.

Dracula sends blood to England to punish the country for the actions of Dracula’s nemesis Jonathan Harker. As Baron Blood, Farnsworth fought the Invaders, Captain America, and even his own brother who adopted the heroic persona of the first Union Jack.

read more: The Best Modern Horror Movies

Blood’s days of fighting for the Axis were cut short when the Sub-Mariner staked the bejesus out of him. Blood was resurrected in the modern day by a minion of Dracula and fought a legendary battle with his old foe, Captain America. Now, a Nazi vampire is pretty badass, but a Nazi vampire created by Dracula himself? That’s some legendary bloodsucker right there!

Available in - Invaders Classic: The Complete Collection Vol. 1

Dracula vs. Doctor Strange (1976)

Tomb of Dracula #44

The Lord of Darkness fed off Doctor Strange (he probably tasted like sage, cinnamon, and quickly forgotten dreams), in the pages of Tomb of Dracula #44. In Strange’s own book, Dracula locks the Sorcerer Supreme in a dungeon so he can watch the embraced Doctor arise as a vampire. That’s quite a sense of irony Marvel’s Dracula possesses, huh?

read more: Doctor Strange Comics Reading Order

Little did Dracula know that Strange astral projected out of his body before Dracula could finish the fateful bite. Strange uses his astral form to mess with Dracula who furiously arrives at the dungeon after days of being mocked and prodded by the wizard.

An awesome fight ensues between a vampiric Doctor Strange and Dracula which Strange wins by conjuring a blazing crucifix. The edge in the battle went to Strange who seemed to be one step ahead of Dracula, but let us not forget that during their first encounter Dracula easily dispatched Strange with one bite. Dracula’s mistake was letting Strange have time to plot, but the first struggle would foreshadow a climatic future encounter between the magician and vampire.

You can read it here.

Dracula vs. Howard the Duck? (1980)

Howard the Duck Magazine #5

Not all Dracula appearances in the Marvel Universe are legendary but that doesn’t make them any less cool. The following is a treatise on why comics are awesome.

While visiting Cleveland, Dracula spots Howard the Duck. Thinking Howard to be a midget in a duck suit, the Lord of the Undead bites Howard (did I just type that?) but is disgusted by the non-human blood flowing in Howard’s veins. However, Howard is transformed into Drakula (not Duckula or Quakula?) and preys on other ducks.

read more: Upcoming Horror Movies Heading Your Way

Howard is restored to his normal self and is actually able to stake Dracula before the vampire can feed off Howard’s girlfriend, Beverly Switzer.

Dracula Joins The Defenders (1981)

Defenders #95

Ah, the Defenders. Long before they were edgy TV stars, they were the parking place for awesomely odd Bronze Age characters.

In one of the non-team’s most memorable storylines, the Defenders were being beleaguered by the Six Fingered Hand. With newer members Hellcat, Gargoyle, and Son of Satan in tow, the Defenders arrive back to Doctor Strange’s mansion only to be attacked by a possessed Dracula. It seems the Six Fingered Hand had gained control over all vampires.

Proving his awesomeness, the Son of Satan breaks the Hand’s control of Dracula, and agrees to help the Vampire Lord take back Transylvania from the Hand. The team with powerhouses like Strange and the Asgardian Valkyrie are just window dressing as the Son of Satan kicks the Hands' collective butts, destroys a metric ton of vampires by summoning sunlight, and saves Dracula’s undead bacon.

read more: 13 Essential Dracula Performances

This was the first time Marvel used Dracula as an anti-hero in a super-hero title, an honorable villain who was as comfortable in the role of defender of his people as he was bloodsucking fiend. It was a brief union, but among his many roles in the Marvel Universe, Dracula will always be recognized as a Defender.

Dracula vs. The X-Men (1982)

Uncanny X-Men #159

Monster mash-ups are a staple of the genre. While not traditional monsters at all, mutants meeting Dracula have the same cache as Dracula versus Frankenstein or the Wolfman, it’s just a match made, erm...not in heaven.

Structured like a classic horror film, Uncanny X-Men #159 sees Storm the victim in a very odd mugging. When someone overpowered the weather goddess and cut her throat, Storm suddenly finds herself wanting to die, inviting a stranger through her window at night, drawing back from Kitty Pryde’s Star of David, and shunning sunlight. You don’t have to be Bram Stoker to see where this is going and an epic confrontation between vampire and mutant takes place. The X-Men take out Dracula’s monstrous rat and canine minions, but fall before Dracula, all except Nightcrawler who has the faith to drive the vampire off with a makeshift cross.

When Storm arrives, Dracula finds that he cannot control the primal Storm, who stands tall and proud. In an awesome moment, Dracula tells Storm it was her inner strength that compelled him and after a standoff, Dracula retreats. This was Claremont at his finest, giving each X-Man a moment to shine and writing a classic and pretty damn scary Dracula in the process. The issue created an indelible bond between the X-Men and Dracula, one that stands till this day.

read more: Frankenstein - Comics' Greatest Monster

In the 1982 Uncanny X-Men Annual #6, the battle between the X-Men and Dracula continues as Kitty Pryde is possessed by Dracula’s daughter and one of his most enduring foes, Lilith. It was another compelling confrontation that deepens the threat Dracula had on mutantkind.

Dracula vs. Thor (1983)

Thor #332

Not satisfied with feeding off ducks, mutants, and wizards, Dracula sets his sights on embracing Lady Sif. In Thor #332, Dracula succeeds in feeding and turning Sif. In issue 333, Thor must face a Dracula empowered by god blood (comics = awesome), and an embraced Sif.

read more: The Best Horror Movies on Netflix

This story was significant in showing what a powerhouse Dracula was and established the idea that if Dracula fed off a non-human being, he would be fueled by their powerful blood. Thor managed to free Sif, but not before fans realized that Dracula was a threat to everyone, god, mutant, or human.

The Death of a Legend (1983)

Doctor Strange #59-62

In Doctor Strange #59-62, Strange and a group of companions including Dracula hunters Blade and the vampiric detective Hannibal King close all the plot threads left over from Tomb of Dracula and close the door on Marvel’s vampires for a quite a while. Aided by Avengers Captain Marvel (then Monica Rambeau) and the Scarlet Witch, Strange and company race to secure the Darkhold, a book which contains the Montessi Formula, a spell that will rid the Earth of Dracula and the curse of vampirism. Keep in mind that the Darkhold is an ancient magical book that created vampires in the first place.

read more: The Bleeding Heart of Dracula

These issues are the type of storytelling that made Stern a legend, taking elements from Dracula’s appearance in X-Men (the first mention of the Formula) and Thor (whom Dracula is reluctant in facing when he sees the other Avengers by Strange’s side). By the end of the story, Strange does recite the formula and Dracula is finally destroyed.

Like all good vampires, Dracula would eventually return, but the storyline has an epic sense of finality to it. After years of being plagued by Dracula, the Marvel heroes fight back destroying all vampires. For now…

Dracula vs. The Fantastic Four (2000-2001)

Before the Fantastic Four: The Storms

Dracula’s shadow is cast far and wide across the history of the Marvel Universe. Before they were legends, Sue Storm and Johnny Storm find a mysterious amulet. The young siblings are attacked by zombies seeking the amulet for its power, zombies controlled by none other than Dracula, who lays inert, staked and comatose, using his mind to control the zombies so they may deliver the amulet to the vampire.

read more: The Best Horror Movies on HBO

The Storms, before they were Fantastic, must stop the zombies from taking the amulet to Transylvania to resurrect their puppet master. Even immobile, Dracula proves to be one of the most evil and capable beings in the Marvel Universe.

X-Men: Apocalypse vs. Dracula (2006)

The cool thing about this series is that it gave added weight to the idea that Dracula has had an impact on the history of the Marvel universe and that his ties to the world of mutants did not begin the day he tried to embrace Storm. Dracula begins embracing members of Apocalypse’s cult which wakes the legendary mutant to defend his followers. The book ties the history of the Van Helsing family into the war between mutant despot and vampire lord.

You can read it here.

Dracula on the Moon (2009)

Captain Britain and MI:13 #10

The so-called end of vampires arc in Doctor Strange was a large scale storyline bringing in many mainstream Marvel mainstays, but it had nothing on the grand tapestry of cool that was the Dracula arc in the late, lamented Captain Britain and MI:13 title. So, Dracula gathers a sect of vampires on the moon to set up a front for his attack on Earth. Just typing that sentence was awesome. Dracula forms a non-aggression pact with Dr. Doom and only the magic of MI:13 led by Captain Britain and Pete Wisdom has a hope of stopping Dracula.

read more: The Best Horror Movies on Hulu

During the course of the arc, fans find out how brilliant Pete Wisdom is, that Dracula still holds a grudge against Muslims stemming back from his Vlad the Impaler days, that seeing Black Knight duel Dracula is pretty much better than anything else in the world, and that the legendary sword Excalibur wielded by a Muslim woman is more effective against Dracula than any crucifix.

Seriously, stop reading this and track down this storyline, we’ll wait.

Hulk vs. Dracula

Part of the Fear Itself mega-event, this battle between two legendary monsters took a form fans did not expect. During the course of Fear Itself, the Hulk was transformed into Nul, the Breaker of Worlds. When Thor knocked Nul into the Carpathian Mountains, the Hulk became a threat to Dracula’s sovereignty. Once again taking up the mantle of reluctant defender, Dracula most take on Nul with a group of vampires, the Forgotten at his side. The event book was another step into the modern evolution of Dracula and was the first time he appeared alongside the Hulk.

An X feud renewed (2011)

X-Men: Curse of the Mutants

Dracula’s return to the X Universe also served as the introduction of the modern interpretation of the Lord of the Undead. Gone is his rocking ‘stache and suave opera cape, arriving is the white hair and Coppola-esque armor. The story is pretty cool, if needlessly complex at times, and introduces Dracula’s son, Xarus. Xarus goes to war with dear old dad with the X-Men and a group of Atlanteans caught in the middle. The whole thing ends with a fierce reminder, family or not, do not mess with Dracula.

It's available on Amazon.

The new look for Dracula would stay consistent across all Marvel media as it was this look that appeared in an episode of Avengers Assemble on Disney XD. The story arc also brings vampirism closer to the X-Men as never before as Jubilee, once the most innocent of the X-Men, is transformed into a vampire. What Claremont and company began in the early '80s continues today as Dracula’s influence on the X-Men looms like a constant shadow over the heroes!

read more: 31 Best Streaming Horror Movies

Read and download the Den of Geek NYCC 2019 Special Edition Magazine right here!

facebook

twitter

tumblr

Feature Marc Buxton

Oct 20, 2019

Dracula

Doctor Strange

Marvel

31 Days of Horror

from Books https://ift.tt/2pzZdMQ

#aion-rsa #Books

5 notes · View notes

obsidianarchives · 6 years ago

Text

Game of Thrones Recap: S8E4 - "The Last of the Starks"

Didn’t we almost have it all? At the moment I’m not sure I’m talking about the episode, this season, or (if you really want to get spicy) the first four seasons of the series, but this show started off SO WELL and then devolved into an unfounded attack on everything I love and believe in. We’re back to split locations this week so let’s get into it, and trust we’ll be discussing that ending. TW: There is brief discussion about the use of rape as a narrative tactic in the “Winterfell” section.

Winterfell

The episode picks up right where we left off last week as the survivors of the Great War bid farewell to those who paid the ultimate sacrifice for loss. As much as I’ve never seen it for either of them, Daenerys’s sadness over Jorah — her first friend and a man (for all his MANY faults) who was a constant throughout her adult life — and Sansa tearfully placing a Stark pin on Theon’s corpse were touching and earned conclusions of their character journeys. But there’s still no country for slave traders and child murderers so, bye!

Leading the ceremony, Jon puts some bass in his voice, does his best Captain America impression, and delivers the most impassioned and leaderly speech we’ve heard from him yet as he modifies the Night’s Watch farewell to begin lighting the pyres of fallen heroes outside the castle. Ramin Djawadi put his foot all the way in the score on this scene as we see just how much the fight took out of the survivors. All of our main characters are bruised and bloody, poor Ghost lost an ear, and Rhaegal has holes in his wings and is still too weak to fly without a bit of a hook. Everyone needs a drink.

And what an after party it is! Gendry suffers through awkward dinner conversations with his girlfriend’s father (we’ll get there) the Hound while he awaits Arya who’s a no-show at the feast. Daenerys sees him and takes the opportunity to note that he’s the unknown bastard son of a King. For a moment, I thought she was trying to make a point to Jon about the validity or lack thereof about his claim to the throne, but she instead legitimizes Gendry and proclaims him Lord of the Baratheon’s old seat of Storm’s End. By raising up the former blacksmith she not only installs a Lord Paramount of the Stormlands forever loyal to her, creating allies she desperately needs, she also buries another potential claimant against her crown.

For some reason Sansa is confused and disgusted by this and Tyrion clocks it but says nothing. As the drinking continues, Dany realizes how isolated she truly is as she listens to Jon be toasted by Tormund, a Kobe stan during a LeBron James championship parade. Instead of being a proud aunt towards her baby dragon riding nephew, Queen Daenerys sees how little she is loved by the Westorosi, an awakening that began with her witnessing Lord Royce and Theon’s admiration for Sansa earlier this season. Lurking dramatically behind her and observing all of this is, of course, Varys because he stays in the mess.

Ser Brienne, Podrick, and the Lannister brothers are playing Tyrion’s drinking game where they guess facts about each other, which is fun until the lord imp surmises that the newest knight from Tarth is a virgin. Brienne leaves in anger and shame while Jaime follows after her, leaving Tormund to finally realize where he stands as the third wheel, crying to the Hound. After Clegane chases him off into the arms of a willing Northern girl, Sansa and the Hound share their first conversation since season two and the Battle of Blackwater. When he acknowledges that the “little bird” has grown and changed as much as Arya, she tells him that without the horrors she’s had to endure she wouldn’t be the person she is today. There’s been a great deal of frustration with that line, as the notion that rape can be a tool to make a woman stronger, or that she owes her growth to the men in her life, is demonstrably false. I didn’t initially read the scene that way simply because the theme of terrible things and regrets forming people into who they are has been a repeated one this season (with Jaime, Bran, Theon, etc.), but it is a mark of poor and male-centric writing to not recognize the difference between intentional actions the male characters chose themselves and cruelty done to a character against their will that they’ve had to survive. But this wouldn’t be the last time the writers failed to understand context.

Gendry finally finds Arya in the castle working on her archery instead of reveling in the feast (Big Introvert Energy) and tells her that not only is he the son of a King, he’s now a proper lord himself. Kissing her, he gets down on one knee and tells her it doesn’t mean a thing without her by his side and proposes. Maisie Williams sells the scene with just her eyes, as she kisses Gendry back onto his feet, but has to let him down gently that being a lady is just not her. It calls back to what she constantly told Ned in season one, and the realization she had in her reunion with Nymeria last season.

Jaime channels his inner Drake and brings a flagon of wine to Brienne thee Stallion’s room, reminding her that she hasn’t finished the game. Brienne keeps her room nice and hot, so the Kingslayer starts to take off all his clothes, while probing her interest in Tormund. Always one to keep her guard up, Brienne finally realizes what’s about to happen and helps him take his shirt off as she joins him in disrobing and they finally consummate the years-long dance around and to each other’s hearts.

Daenerys and Jon finally have a heart to heart where Rhaegar’s son reiterates that he has no desire for the throne and is pledged to her. She then begs him to not tell anyone else (specifically Sansa and Arya) and to swear Samwell and Bran to secrecy lest the truth of a rival with a stronger claim gets out and threatens her position. So of course, Jon does the opposite and, forcing Sansa and Arya to promise to keep the secret in the family, has Bran divulge that he’s actually Aegon Targaryen. The scene cuts to black before we get to see their reactions to the news, but hold that thought.

With the demise of the Night King (who we’ll have to wait on the books which shall never be written to learn more about) and his army of the dead, Daenerys finally begins drawing up battle plans to take King’s Landing. As is her wont, the Dragon Queen wants ALL of the smoke and is ready to take Cersei out, whatever it takes. Ever the idealistic pacifist, Tyrion urges the long game of a siege to turn the people against her by starving the Lannisters out. Jon, who at this point doesn’t want to be in the middle of any other squabbles, concedes the feasibility of the plan but then in comes the maester of checking people in public, Lady Sansa. She councils a bit of patience on Dany’s part since her troops are dead tired from fighting zombies, one of her dragons is flying with a limp, and she really has no plan other than “I want the throne.” Admittedly, I’ve been #SansaHive for a while now, but the show seems intent on driving this division between the two matriarchs for no other reason than to manufacture tension and rush towards this narrative that Dany is the Mad Queen that has not been justified. Trying to get back in her good graces (or her bed), Jon however pulls rank and reminds the room that the North is pledged to Daenerys and will follow her to whatever end.

Ser Bronn finally arrives in Winterfell and displays the level-headed pragmatism that I’ve said more than once will put him on the Iron Throne. Rather than outright killing the Lannister men as Cersei wanted, he negotiates. While we finally discover the Queen offered him Riverrun and presumably reign of the Riverlands, Tyrion counters with Highgarden and the seat of the Reach. Less out of an affinity for the brothers and more because he’s seen what dragons can do to an army, he accepts the side he thinks is more likely to win, but promises his bill will come due once the war is over. Another thing this episode has done is remind us just how many Great Houses have fallen in Westeros. Daenerys mentions the support of a new, unnamed Prince in Dorne, and Edmure Tully is possibly still alive in a dungeon somewhere or hiding in oblivion with young Robin Arryn, but almost all of the ruling southern houses have been wiped out.

On the road from Winterfell, the Hound is riding south alone until he’s joined by Arya, and it seems they both have unfinished business back in the capital. If they’re pump faking us and we don’t get Cleganebowl, somebody has to square up. For now, the best buddy duo is back on the road again and neither have plans on coming back alive. Sansa, on the other hand, almost immediately tells Tyrion the ONE thing she promised not to and confides Jon’s secret identity. That’s how we know he wasn’t Ned’s son. Eddard managed to take decades of hate from his own wife to protect his nephew, Jon couldn’t even last a damn week.

The goodbyes continue as Tormund finally takes the wildlings back home to the REAL north to settle down and repopulate now that the threat of the White Walkers is gone. The show, choosing to emphasize his embrace of his Targaryen roots (and that he’s probably going to die soon) has Jon send Ghost north of the Wall as well, since a direwolf has no place in the South and would be happier. This is where the disrespect began and we should have seen the okey doke coming. The relationship between Jon and Ghost is one the show has always underplayed but my man would never! He didn’t even give his beloved companion a goodbye hug, simply looking on as Ghost whines for his friend. We also find out Gilly is pregnant with Sam’s baby for real this time, and if it’s a boy they’ll name him Jon. Yeah, he’s definitely going to die.

Hearing what went down at Dragonstone, Jaime, after knocking the sheen off of Brienne’s starry sapphire again for good measure, leaves in the middle of the night bound for King’s Landing. She runs out in her housecoat and slippers begging an ain’t shit man to come back into her life after just 24 hours; men are a curse. Jaime reads through the litany of things he’s done in the name of his love for Cersei and insists he’s not the good man Brienne thinks he is. It seems clear he’s going back to try to stop her this time (and possibly fulfill the prediction of the valonqar), but he doesn’t tell that to his new boo, who very uncharacteristically breaks down in tears.

Dragonstone

With her fleet preparing to invade King’s Landing and take back the throne, Daenerys and crew set sail to her birthplace on Dragonstone. Tyrion couldn’t even wait to make it to shore and immediately tells the news of Jon’s true parentage to the Benita Buttrell of Westeros in Varys, but he ain't one to gossip, so you ain't heard it from him. As the ships drop anchor in the port however, Drogon and Rhaegal are attacked by Euron Greyjoy’s suspiciously sneaky Iron Fleet now outfitted with improved Scorpions which catch Rhaegal unaware, killing yet another dragon. Gotta pour one out for the homie as we’re now down to one and I am inconsolable. Daenerys in a rage is tempted to fly Drogon straight on to light them all up, but facing another round of fire is forced to flee. Euron being the trash panda he is then targets the ships themselves, sinking most of them and forcing the Unsullied to swim to shore. A distraught Grey Worm is left to panic as he screams for Missandei, who was not among those who washed up on the beach.

On the verge of losing everything, Daenerys is understandably tired of being checked by her advisors and is finally ready to burn the Red Keep to the ground if she can sit on the ashes. In a private conversation, Tyrion keeps trying to push the obvious solution that Jon and Dany, who are in love as it is, should just get married, solving all their problems. As infuriating as it may be that the simplest answer is the one that will never happen, even he realizes the futility of hoping for logic to win out. Varys stops short of admitting he’s putting a hit out on Dany, but the Spider, going back to his defense of the realm, is obviously ready to move on to a new leader and leaves Tyrion to drink.

King’s Landing

Meanwhile, back in the capital Cersei has been opening the Red Keep to the common folk in an attempt to call Dany’s bluff that she wouldn’t burn the city with so many people inside the castle walls. Congratulating walking STD Euron on his successful mission Cersei tells him she’s carrying his child (as Qyburn confirms), and hides her disgust as Greyjoy is overwhelmed with new daddy glee.

The writers then lose the plot entirely as they cut to Missandei, back in shackles, Cersei’s prisoner as the queen remarks “so much for the breaker of chains.” We’ll get to it soon but it goes without saying that seeing a Black woman, the ONLY Black woman on the show, placed back into bondage when her story arc has been one of rising above her enslavement is reprehensible. That said, this is a show about reprehensible people doing reprehensible things. It hurts no less, but what used to elevate the series was that these actions were grounded in an internal logic and narrative fullness that resonated with character motivation and agency for both sides. This was simply done for shock value, both in-universe for Daenerys and out of it for the viewers.

Outside the Red Keep, the walls of which we see have also been outfitted with Scorpions, the two Hands of the Queen meet to discuss terms, and when it’s clear that Cersei will not be surrendering, Tyrion tries to speak directly to his sister and beg for her better nature to avoid bloodshed, insisting that she’s not a monster. WHAT WOMAN DOES HE THINK HE’S BEEN DEALING WITH FOR ALL THIS TIME? Of course that nonsense doesn’t work and Tyrion’s inability to recognize that villainy is possible even under the guise of white womanhood is what should get him killed. Instead it’s Missandei who is caught in the crosshairs of the 53% as she utters her last words, “Dracarys,” before being beheaded by the Mountain.

My personal affinity for Missandei should be well known, so you can imagine how I reacted to seeing this mess. To clarify, it's not just that she died that was so galling. If you read the episode two review we called that happening, and I’d assume most of you weren’t shocked either, even though it doesn’t hurt any less. It’s the how and why that was so poorly handled that added insult to injury of the pain that's inherent when you have so few people of color in the cast in general, but Black women specifically. Had she had the agency to choose her own end and her death come as the result of her story arc, so be it. This is a show of terrors and loved characters die everyday, B. Had she died in the crypts of Winterfell fighting for her life and the Queen she believed in, and Daenerys and Grey Worm had gotten to mourn her the way they gave tired, rockface Jorah his final respects it would have been better. Had her Dracarys command gotten Drogon to start the roast of the city? We outchea! But for it to be simply the impetus to justify razing King’s Landing, and as a pawn in a war of aggression between two white women while she’s placed back in bondage, was a perfect storm of disrespect, to the character and the audience. We've established for seven seasons that that city is a rathole, filled with people we haven't seen in years. I don't care about Dany burning the castle to the ground, but NOW? I need Thanos to show up because I want nothing left but ashes. For a blog whose motto is MORE Black Girls MORE Dragons, this episode was always going to be particularly painful, but the fact that there was no greater narrative purpose for it makes it even worse.

#Game of Thrones #Season 8 #Recap

2 notes · View notes

preserving-ferretbrain · 6 years ago

Text

Quis Copyright Ipsos Custodes?

by Dan H

Wednesday, 06 June 2012

Dan rambles about copyright, DC, and the Watchmen Prequels~

Poking around the internets a couple of days ago I discovered the

following article

about the upcoming (or by the time this article is published, recently released) Watchmen Prequels.

I'm in two minds about this. Part of me says that this is a horrible shameless cash-in that pisses on the memory on one of the greatest graphic novels in history. Another part of me says that the first part of me is just being reactionary and fanboyish.

The Slate article I link at the top of this piece starts off with the oft-repeated observation that DC paid Siegel and Shuster $130 for the rights to Superman and went on to make a shit-ton of money out of the Man of Steel while his creators died in relative poverty. It also points out that the estate of Jack Kirby, who created most of the original Avengers saw nothing from the recent movie.

Now obviously there is a lot wrong with the comics industry. Comic book companies do treat a lot of their writers and artists like shit, and the comics fandom as a whole is as problematic as all fuck. But try as I might, I can't get angry about the fact that the rights to most comic book characters are owned by big companies, instead of by the people who created those characters for those companies.

Perhaps it's that my professional background is in Education while what limited creative background I have is in RPGs, so I'm very used to the idea that what I do in either my professional or my creative life ceases to be mine the moment I put it out into the world. If one of my D&D players wrote a book based on my campaign, I might expect a thank-you but I wouldn't expect royalties, and I obviously don't expect my students to cut me in on their future earnings just because I teach them things which help them get on in their lives (nor does it bother me that the various syllabus documents, schemes of work, and sets of revision notes I have produced as part of my work belong to my school and not to me).

Indeed thinking about it from the perspective of any industry apart from the creative media, the notion that somebody might deserve a share of the profits from a piece of work somebody else does based on work they did as part of their job ten years earlier is completely alien. It reminds me, tangentially, of that

SMBC

strip which suggests that the principle known in academia as “publish or perish” is known in the rest of the world as “do your job or get fired.” There's the same peculiar sense that something which is seen as the mother of all injustices in one industry is just par for the course in most others.

To put it another way, although like most human beings I'm prone to irrational and inconsistent ideas, I do make a vague effort to keep my beliefs consistent with one another. And I'm a big fan of Creative Commons, a supporter of fanfiction, and a strong believer in fair use and the value of transformative works. I am not sure that I could reconcile my belief that the Harry Potter Lexiconhad every right to compile information from the Harry Potter books into an accessible format, or that people have the right to write original stories using other people's characters and put them on the internet (fanfiction.net, for what it is worth, already hosts nine hundred and forty pieces of Watchmen fanfic), with the belief that it is unreasonable for the people who published the original Watchmen to publish sequels if they damned well want to.

I think what bugs me the most about this issue, and more specifically with the attitude that it is somehow self-evident that the person who “creates” a character is entitled to royalties in perpetuity, is that it seems grounded in a mindset with which I am all too familiar. I am, as I believe I have said in many previous articles, an overeducated underachiever. I am very, very good at coming up with ideas and very, very bad at following them through.

The reason people like me react so strongly to the story of Siegel and Shuster isn't that we have genuine sympathy for the hardworking Jewish immigrants who were screwed over by the cynical fatcats at DC, it's that we're all dreaming of the day when we will come up with that one “idea” that will make us millionaires without our having to do any actual work. We baulk at the idea of comic book companies making millions from an idea for which they paid $130 not because it was exploitative (although it probably was) but because we see no value whatsoever in all other work that went into turning a $130 character idea into a billion-dollar IP. This is particularly ironic since a lot of that work was, in fact, done by Siegel and Shuster themselves (and it was work for which they were in fact well paid, Wikipedia reliably informs me that while the pair were only paid $130 for the rights to Superman they were paid $75,000 a year to write Superman – and that was in the 1940s).

People like me love to pretend that ideas are all that matter, that because The Avengers was a pre-existing IP, that all the people who made the film had to do was show up and shuffle things into vaguely the right order. This is, of course, nonsense. Yes, The Avengers wouldn't have existed without Stan Lee or Jack Kirby, but nor would it have existed without Wayne T. Silva the assistant payroll accountant, or Nuo Sun the actor trainer, or Matthew Roper the set medic, or any of the literally hundreds of people who were directly involved in making the actual movie. Of course the original characters are part of what made the film successful, but so is the fact that the actors did their stunts right, or that the payrolls were correctly managed.

Valuable intellectual properties aren't created by individual geniuses – even when a single person owns the copyright the actual brand (and make no mistake about it, thats all a valuable artistic property is – a brand that people buy into and want to hear stories about) is created by a vast army of professionals. We might believe that Harry Potter was created by JK Rowling, but in truth it was partly created by Thomas Taylor (who drew the first cover for Bloomsbury), Mary GrandPre (who drew all of the US covers and seems to have created the distinctive “Harry Potter” font later used in the movies) and Daniel Radcliffe. Yes, the fact that JK Rowling started out as an unemployed single parent and is now one of the richest people in Britain makes for a lovely rags-to-riches story, but one could make the case that she is (in part) reaping the rewards of other people's work. Building a brand, after all, is the role of a corporate marketing department, not an individual artist.

To put it another way, Siegel and Shuster may have created Superman, but it was undoubtedly DC that turned him into a billion-dollar brand, and it is downright perverse to celebrate the success of that brand while at the same time condemning the company that created that success. Did the creators of Superman get screwed? I honestly don't know. Certainly DC negotiated a contract that was in the company's interests rather than the artists', but it is not inherently wrong to make a lot of money out of something for which you initially paid very little money. If DC had known for certain that the Superman property would make millions then it might have been immoral to encourage Siegel and Shuster to give up all rights to the character, but they almost certainly didn't. They took a punt on the property, and it paid off.

Of course money isn't the only issue here. Alan Moore is far more upset about control of his creations than anything else. But even this is a commercial issue. It's easy to be snooty about the way the comics industry exploits its IPs, but – well – that's kind of how they make their money. More than that, it's kind of what's good about the medium. As in, what's artistically good. If Superman had remained in the exclusive control of its original creators, it would still look

like this

. Batman, by a similar token, would still look

like this

. Enduring comic-book characters remain relevant to a modern audience precisely because they are continually created and recreated, and this is possible only because the rights to these characters are owned not by their individual creators but by corporations. This idea doesn't sit comfortably in the mind of the average comics reader, who I suspect likes to place themselves on the side of the artist (not least because so many of us believe ourselves to be artists), but the truth is that we benefit directly from the system being the way it is.

Which brings us all back to the Watchmen prequels. The instinctive reaction of, I expect, most of nerddom, will be to raise a hue and cry because blah blah capitalism blah blah integrity blah blah cash-in blah blah blah. Because apparently we've forgotten that doing new things with old characters is what comic books are all about. The question of whether they are actually any good or not will be entirely academic (as

this edition of Our Valued Customers

nicely illustrates).

The whole thing seems grounded in a kind of skeevy Great Man Theory. The prequels might be brilliant, or they might be terrible, but what people seem to be concerned about is the fact that they will no longer be the product of One Man's Genius, that the mere fact that the prequels will not be written by Alan Moore irrevocably taints them. The whole thing reminds me of the kerfuffle over the proposed (but I believe never realised) Buffy revamp, when people were up in arms about the idea of Buffy without Joss Whedon. Even more peculiarly, people were insisting that a de-Whedoned Buffy would be a terrible blow against feminism, despite the fact that the lead writer on the proposed revamp would have been an actual woman.

This last point – that taking a property away from its straight, white, male creator will be bad for women and ethnic minorities – was made quite explicitly in the Slate piece that inspired this article:

For example: Moore’s comics have often been concerned with feminism, and one theme of Watchmen is that the superhero genre is built in part on retrograde sexual politics and thuggish rape fantasies. And how does Before Watchmen address these issues? Like so. If this were some piece of fan fiction detritus—naked Dr. Manhattan, porn-faced Silk Spectre!—it would be funny. But given that this is an "official" product, it starts to be harder to laugh it off.

I'm not sure where to begin with this. The first thing I'd say is that I have no idea which version of Watchmen this person was reading if they (a) think that “naked Dr Manhattan” is in any way a deviation from the original text and (b) think it's remotely appropriate to describe the original comic as “feminist”. This is a comic in which the fact that Sally Jupiter had a relationship with, and became pregnant by, the man that raped her is the detail which convinces Dr Manhattan that humanity is beautiful and worth saving (this is a slightly uncharitable gloss to put on that moment in the comics, but only slightly).

The second thing I'd say is that I can't help but notice that the article not only assumes that you can deduce an entire comic's gender politics from the cover of one trade paperback, but also fairly deliberately chooses the only cover that could have remotely illustrated his point. You can look at all of the other covers

here

. Most of them don't feature women at all, but this is a consequence of there only being one significant female character in the original text, which is surely Moore's fault as much as anybody else's (and again, doesn't seem to say much for his “concern for feminism”). You might specifically want to take a closer look at the cover of the

Silk Spectre

prequel, which is not only a good not-especially-sexualised portrayal of the character, but which is also drawn by an actual woman.

I think what I find most ironic about the backlash against the Watchmen prequels is that it's grounded in the very same notions of heroism which the comic itself deconstructs. The only reason to believe that (as the Slate article puts it):

Rorschach and Nite Owl and Dr. Manhattan have been raised from their resting place, and Moore—and the rest of us—now get to watch them stagger around, dripping bits of themselves across the decades, until everyone has utterly forgotten that they ever had souls.

Is if we accept that Alan Moore is somehow so uniquely talented that nobody except for him is capable of writing decent stories with those characters. As if somehow Moore's talent was so great that unlike Superman, Batman, the X-Men, the Avengers, or all of the characters he purloined for League of Extraordinary Gentlemen his creations would be uniquely tainted if they were touched by lesser mortals.

Perhaps even more tragically, this really does seem to be Moore's attitude. In

this interview

he makes a number of almost embarrassingly self-aggrandising claims about how uncreative, miserable and talentless pretty much everybody working in the mainstream comics industry is. He also, inexplicably, insists that his use of the character of Allan Quatermain in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is different from the Watchmen prequels because apparently nobody had heard of Allan Quatermain before he put him in a comic (whereas Dr Manhattan is – what – a literary icon?). And complains that the people who got his share of the money from the Watchmen and Extraordinary Gentlemen movies didn't ring him up and personally thank him.

Perhaps the most mystifying quote in the whole interview is the part where he claims that the people working on Before Watchmen are doing so because: “It will probably be the only opportunity they get in their careers to actually be attached to a project that anybody outside of comics has ever heard of”. Leaving aside the fact that one of the writers on the project is J. Michael Straczynski – who created one of the most respected (although perhaps also most overrated) works of TV SF ever made – what is Moore smoking if he believes that anybody outside of comics has heard of Watchmen at all other than as that movie that guy made in 2009.

The thing is, Alan Moore absolutely does have the right to be bitter and angry about this whole affair, because he did get screwed by DC. But whatever he might think, Watchmen is not some dazzling beacon that demonstrated to the outside world the true potential of the comic-book medium. It's an okay-but-slightly-dated long-form comic book which comics nerds (and only comics nerds) obsess about because they think it makes them look clever.

The Watchmen prequels are very likely to be dull and uninspiring, but that is because Watchmen is dull and uninspiring. And any spark or relevance they have for a modern audience will have come from the people who wrote and drew them, it will not have been reflected from Alan Moore's imaginary genius.

Themes:

Topical

Sci-fi / Fantasy

Comics

Watchmen

bookmark this with - facebook - delicious - digg - stumbleupon - reddit

~Comments (

go to latest

)

Arthur B

at 14:31 on 2012-06-06I simultaneously have no sympathy for the "what about Alan Moore?" argument but also think

Before Watchmen

is highly likely to be an enormous waste of time.

On the first point, it's worth noting that originally Alan Moore

didn't intend to use original characters for Watchmen at all

. Moore wanted to use the characters from the Charlton Comics stable of superheroes, which DC had acquired after Charlton bit the dust. DC were like "ummmm... we'd prefer you didn't junk these characters, why not make some original ones anyway?", Moore acquiesced and cooked up the Watchmen we know and love as thinly-veiled re-imaginings of the Charlton chumps.

The important thing about this anecdote, vis-a-vis this discussion, is that

the entire concept of Watchmen came about as a result of the corporate ownership of characters created by people who were not Alan Moore, and Moore wanting to write a story very much at odds with the original intentions of the characters' creators.

So the idea that the

Watchmen

characters somehow get to be sacred and mustn't be tampered with when they owe their very existence to Moore wanting to tamper with other people's characters seems pretty hypocritical to me.

On the other hand, with respect to

Before Watchmen

itself, I can't see how it can really be very interesting.

Watchmen

was constructed like one of those really cool domino runs - the interesting thing is watching this very delicate setup collapsing as the result of one little push. Watching the dominos getting set up before the actual domino run is just going to be tedious and I'd rather not.

permalink

go to top

Wardog

at 14:54 on 2012-06-06I'd have more sympathy for Moore in general if he was less of a complete dick...

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 15:07 on 2012-06-06Theologically Moore says he believes that all fictions are real in some sense.

If that were the case it shouldn't matter that someone else is using those characters or messing with those stories because they were never Moore's in the first place, he just found them.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 16:01 on 2012-06-06

The whole thing seems grounded in a kind of skeevy Great Man Theory.

This is a bit of a tangent, and I apologize if it goes too far off course.

I've been thinking about the Great Man Theory as it applies to capitalism and entrepreneurship, especially the popular notion that all great successes in business are the work of individual (male) supergeniuses. An entrepreneur has a Great Idea that works and makes him billions, he becomes a cultural icon, and he can then do no wrong until he does. Women can't have Great Ideas, because barefoot pregnant make me a sandwich.

The other day I hear a guy bring up that Sheryl Sandberg is the real brains behind Facebook, for taking that slack-ass Mark Zuckerberg's idea and finding a way to make it profitable. Another guy loudly counters that Zuckerberg was the "visionary" who had the "great idea" for Facebook and therefore deserves 100% of the credit and fame he's received at everyone else's expense.

Now obviously Zuckerberg's role in Facebook was much greater than simply coming up with the original idea, and his role in creating and running the company shouldn't be downplayed. And the second guy is a bitter, thwarted misogynist anyway, so if Sandberg and Zuckerberg's roles had been switched he'd be championing execution over ideas. It just strikes me that an idea rarely, if ever, starts out as a Great Idea, and only becomes so in hindsight. If we're not used to thinking of women's ideas as potentially Great Ideas, we're never going to get to the point where women have a reputation for Great Ideas to point to. And of course nascent ideas are a lot harder to judge fairly and objectively than, say, job performance.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 17:35 on 2012-06-06

The important thing about this anecdote, vis-a-vis this discussion, is that the entire concept of Watchmen came about as a result of the corporate ownership of characters created by people who were not Alan Moore, and Moore wanting to write a story very much at odds with the original intentions of the characters' creators. So the idea that the Watchmen characters somehow get to be sacred and mustn't be tampered with when they owe their very existence to Moore wanting to tamper with other people's characters seems pretty hypocritical to me.

While you have a point, I think it's oversimplifying to some degree. I'm pretty sure that, had Moore been allowed to use those old characters, they would have been significantly and obviously different from the originals. They would have been almost totally reimagined. With the Watchmen prequels, they're supposedly about the actual characters themselves, so what happens in the prequels may directly relate to what happens in the original graphic novel itself.

Even so, I really just don't see what the big deal is, to be perfectly honest. It'd be one thing if Alan Moore were some poor downtrodden author whose works barely got any attention beyond a small but loyal cult following, and then some huge corporate giant came in and swindled him out of his rights and completely ran away with the man's franchise in a way he never intended and never credited him with anything. But The Watchmen is a very, very well-known graphic novel. There have been numerous sequels written to the Oz books by a variety authors, yet nobody really bitches and moans about those because the originals are firmly understood to be the originals. The millions of Star Wars tie-in books, games, action figures, etc. don't somehow warp the quality of the original movies.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 17:49 on 2012-06-06

Actually, as I understand it the point was to use established characters with an established history to sucker in readers with a cosy sense of familiarity before exposing them to just how vile the characters really are, so had that plan gone ahead I imagine it would have involved more than a few callbacks to the Charlton stable's original stories.

But it's impossible to say one way or another because DC didn't let Moore do it.

The millions of Star Wars tie-in books, games, action figures, etc. don't somehow warp the quality of the original movies.

Of course, in the case of Star Wars George Lucas has proved himself perfectly capable of ruining it all by himself...

permalink

go to top

http://scipiosmith.livejournal.com/

at 18:09 on 2012-06-06

The whole thing reminds me of the kerfuffle over the proposed (but I believe never realised) Buffy revamp, when people were up in arms about the idea of Buffy without Joss Whedon. Even more peculiarly, people were insisting that a de-Whedoned Buffy would be a terrible blow against feminism, despite the fact that the lead writer on the proposed revamp would have been an actual woman.

Disregarding Buffy's feminism (I never interpreted Buffy as a show about feminism but rather about vampires, becasue I was 10) I don't think you can argue that it would have been different. Star Trek was very different after Gene Roddenberry's death to what it was before; which some people preferred and some people hated, but the difference is undeniable. So if you thought that Buffy was perfect just the way it was I can see the idea of someone messing it about might be upsetting.

Of course people ought to be honest and admit that they don't like the idea because they don't want their cherished memories polluted instead of trying to conjure politics, but that wouldn't sound as good in Slate.

permalink

go to top

http://scipiosmith.livejournal.com/

at 18:09 on 2012-06-06Sorry, wouldn't have been different.

permalink

go to top

http://barefoottomboy.livejournal.com/

at 18:40 on 2012-06-06Not being overly attached to Watchmen (or Alan Moore in general), I may not be best placed to make this call, but I just can't get too worked up about the prospect of a prequel that isn't/might not be as good as the original. As James D says, the existence of (a) prequel(s) doesn't negate the existence of the original, or somehow retrospectively reduce its quality.

Not to say that all prequels/sequels/extensions/whatever are always a good idea, of course. But if you don't like them, there's nothing stopping you ignoring them and sticking to the originals you liked in the first place.

In terms of creators getting screwed over by copyright & the comic book industry, I really don't know enough about either to comment intelligently. Though I must confess that my immediate/gut reaction to Jack Kirby's *estate* losing out on a share of the profit of the Avengers film is "so freaking what? Why should I care about Jack Kirby's estate - what did they have to do with the creation of those characters?".

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 19:29 on 2012-06-06

Though I must confess that my immediate/gut reaction to Jack Kirby's *estate* losing out on a share of the profit of the Avengers film is "so freaking what? Why should I care about Jack Kirby's estate - what did they have to do with the creation of those characters?".

We care because it's the 18th Century and people's copyrighted works aren't just meant to earn them money, it's also meant to be a way for them to provide for their wives and children.

This is

literally

the only reason why copyright has this weird "until the author's death plus X years" duration thing going on.

permalink

go to top

http://scipiosmith.livejournal.com/

at 20:25 on 2012-06-06You say that like its such a bad thing.

I must say I'm of the opinion that if you can live on unearned income you probably should- and free up a slot in the job market for someone who needs it.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 21:15 on 2012-06-06

Of course, in the case of Star Wars George Lucas has proved himself perfectly capable of ruining it all by himself...

One might say the same of Michael Moorcock and Elric, or any number of other creators who went on to ruin their creations. Honestly, when it comes to shoddy sequels, I can't really think of any corporation that did as much damage to other people's characters as those two did to their own. There are plenty of shoddy corporate sequels out there, to be sure, but does Alien: Resurrection really tarnish Alien at all? I certainly wouldn't say so. It's much harder to be that sure about the Star Wars prequels, or Moorcock's ill-advised later Elric stories that he shoehorned into the original chronology, when new viewers/readers could very well go into those series and take them as a whole, without differentiating much between the old and the new.

An argument might be made that the comics industry is unfairly entrenched in the practice of forcing authors to sign the rights of their characters over if they want to be published, but as I mentioned earlier it's not like Moore and his family are starving while corporate fat cats reap the benefits of his ideas. It's not like they're spuriously attaching Moore's name to projects he has no part of. There may be an argument to be made here, but The Watchmen is hardly the ideal battleground for it.

permalink

go to top

http://melaniedavidson.livejournal.com/

at 21:53 on 2012-06-06

He also, inexplicably, insists that his use of the character of Allan Quatermain in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is different from the Watchmen prequels because apparently nobody had heard of Allan Quatermain before he put him in a comic

I think it's funny that he chose probably the most obscure character for that example. Because even if Allan Quatermain was "almost entirely forgotten" (I don't know if this is the case even though I personally hadn't heard of him), the others are all from pretty well-known classics. I'm sure he knew how ridiculous it would sound if he said Jekyll and Hyde were obscure and forgotten and only about six people had heard of the story.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 22:07 on 2012-06-06

You say that like its such a bad thing. I must say I'm of the opinion that if you can live on unearned income you probably should- and free up a slot in the job market for someone who needs it.

The number of copyrighted works which actually still rake in a substantial amount of royalties decades after publication is amazingly small. I don't know whether the Tolkien Estate rakes in enough loot from LOTR for Christopher Tolkien and his extended family to sustain themselves without working - I suspect not given the drip-drip-drip of unpublished works coming out from those quarters. In fact, a hell of a lot of the beneficiaries of properties which still rake in mad loot after decades aren't estates or widows or orphans at all. It's the Disney Corporation and people like them.

And of course anything we can say about the state of comics industry author contracts with regards to Watchmen applies mainly to contracts as they existed in the 1980s, when the rights were actually handed over, and offers us little insight into contracts as they exist now.

The situation in the 1980s isn't one I've investigated much, but today I'm really not bothered about it. We exist in an age when if a comic creator wants to publish their work online for everyone to enjoy, they can do so - and in fact make some money out of it. Enough to live lavishly? Probably not, but unless you're writing/drawing a big heap of stuff for DC/Marvel as well as your own personal pet projects you're not likely to be earning great cash from them either. There's no

reason

to even offer your all-original creations up to DC or Marvel in the first place unless think signing over your rights to them is a worthwhile price to pay to get wider distribution and a higher profile - and if you don't think that's a worthwhile price, don't sign the contract in the first place.

Conversely, if you want to write for DC and Marvel because you want to write stories using their characters, it's only fair that they should have editorial control over what you do and only fair that they get to play with any original creations you add to their universes. If you want to play in the big sandpit which is Gotham City (or wherever) it's silly to expect to be allowed to take your sandcastle home with you, and short-sighted to imagine that another kid won't kick over or improve your sandcastle once you leave.

permalink

go to top

Dan H

at 22:44 on 2012-06-06

That's a good point and one I'd failed to notice.

(Sorry, I have no comment beyond that)

permalink

go to top

https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawkWbOwQVOANXVz3Xs8lGIILC0qzTMuEKS4

at 13:13 on 2012-06-07

Leaving aside the fact that one of the writers on the project is J. Michael Straczynski – who created one of the most respected (although perhaps also most overrated) works of TV SF ever made

Wow, I didn't realise Jeremiah was so popular!

permalink

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 02:54 on 2012-06-09

I'm sure he knew how ridiculous it would sound if he said Jekyll and Hyde were obscure and forgotten and only about six people had heard of the story.

I'm not that familiar with LoEG but the little I remembered from it was making me ask just this question!

I must say I'm of the opinion that if you can live on unearned income you probably should- and free up a slot in the job market for someone who needs it.

But what's funny about that is that it's actually not about giving all money to someone for having the idea. Once you're talking about the estate you're saying that it's somehow more ethical to pay someone for being related to the person who created the character than for being the person who had something to do with making the character famous.

I really think people's real fright when it comes to things like this is that someone's going to tell a story they really don't like that bums them out--and I can sympathize because I hate it when comics play around with backstory in ways I don't like. Luckily if a story sucks it usually gets quietly dropped from continuity anyway. (There's a name for it I can't remember, referring to a bizarre alien who visited the Flash...)

With Watchman it seems like it's got a lot to do with the importance that Watchman is supposed to have, even though it's not really that tremendous.

Also, not only is it ironic that Moore was originally planning to use someone else's characters for the story, but it's not like Moore hasn't made some major changes to other peoples' characters and left others to sort them out. For instance, by paralyzing Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke. I know he says he never knew it would be in continuity, but it changed comics--and not because of his story (which gets imo overpraised) but because other people came in afterwards with an idea for the character.

permalink

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 02:55 on 2012-06-09Oh, p.s. That reminds me, thinking of the TKJ that yeah, I am really confused by the idea that Watchman needs to be kept in the hands of AM because other writers--especially female ones--will mess up all the feminism.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 13:14 on 2012-06-09

I know he says he never knew it would be in continuity, but it changed comics--and not because of his story (which gets imo overpraised) but because other people came in afterwards with an idea for the character.

I think it would be incredibly short-sighted for any comics author to say "but I didn't know that this idea I put forward in a

Batman

story would become

Batman

continuity!"

I mean, I see that you genuinely wouldn't know whether any particular story of yours would become key canon, get banished to the outer darkness of non-canonicity, or linger somewhere in between. But to not at least consider the possibility that DC might declare that something you have done should stick seems to involve wilfully ignoring how comics continuity works in the first place.

permalink

go to top

Adrienne

at 23:09 on 2012-06-09Arthur B: Not so much so, actually. There's a lot of stuff done by the major comix houses that's very specifically pitched and written from the start as not-in-continuity. All of the

Elseworlds

from DC, and similar "What If..." stories from Marvel are in this category, as are the "Ultimate [Whoever]" stories by Marvel that explore alternate origins.

I grant that a VERY FEW of the Elseworlds stories have eventually ended up with bits in continuity (they apparently wrote a sequel series to Kingdom Come, and brought bits of that timeline into continuity. Which makes me sad, mostly because i think Kingdom Come was a remarkably self-contained and lovely piece of storytelling!) But if Alan Moore was told that Killing Joke was Elseworlds, frex, it would not at all have been an unreasonable assumption that nothing in it was going to ever be in continuity.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 23:32 on 2012-06-09

Not so much so, actually. There's a lot of stuff done by the major comix houses that's very specifically pitched and written from the start as not-in-continuity. All of the Elseworlds from DC, and similar "What If..." stories from Marvel are in this category, as are the "Ultimate [Whoever]" stories by Marvel that explore alternate origins.

True enough, though

The Killing Joke

wasn't, to my knowledge, promoted as being any of these (and as you point out, if an idea in an Elseworlds thingy gets popular enough then it'll snake its way into canon anyway).

As you say, if Alan Moore was told that

The Killing Joke

was an Elseworlds but then it wasn't promoted as one that'd be kind of sucky on the part of DC, but I don't see any suggestion that that was the case. On the other hand, I don't see that this is one of the reasons why he's upset with his treatment by DC in any case. Surely any comics author would be

thrilled

to have a plot element they introduced become a major ongoing thread in Batman continuity rather than something retconned away within a story or two?

permalink

go to top

Sonia Mitchell

at 13:08 on 2012-06-12I have to admit to feeling that Watchmen is a bit of a special case, not because of merit (although I do like it an awful lot) but because it's *specifically* about how characters interpret the past. The story's present is not the key date; it's the lead-up to the Keane Act that the narrative really revolves around.

Which does kind of mean that any 'glory days' Minute Men [II] prequel is going to be dipping into the same timeline Watchmen covers in the narrative, which to me blurs the line between 'prequel' and 'reinterpreting a story which has already been told'. Watchmen showed us the Minute Men days from a number of perspectives - either the prequels will show more of the same old thing (in which case why bother?) or they'll introduce something which will specifically challenge the parent narrative.

I'm sort of intrigued to see what they do, and I do agree that Watchmen can bear to be challenged, I just don't think it's quite as clear-cut as some other prequels. Yes, plenty of comics and other stories have had backstory added later, but I don't think all that many of them were specifically *about* backstory.

permalink

go to top

https://me.yahoo.com/a/bpFlIkMVk4ZqOVtCOXzX2V_0665JvfqFHA--#af083

at 14:16 on 2012-06-13A thoughtful and thought provoking essay. Excellent stuff.

I wonder, though, if your focus on commerce and copyright doesn’t tend to swerve a bit around Alan Moore's concerns. I think that the argument is not that DC and the writers and artists involved can't produce Watchmen prequels but rather that, for aesthetic or artistic reasons, they ought to choose not to. And the question of who profits from the endeavour is, as far as I can see, neither here nor there for these purposes.

So Watchmen is, according to this view, a finished work of art, and by monkeying around with the characters and back story you monkey around also with the integrity of the work; you risk diluting its affect or altering its cultural resonance. You might legitimately argue that no amount of monkeying prevents Watchmen from continuing to exist as the thing that it is. However, there seem two reasonably valid counterpoints, both stemming from the basic assumption that art is rarely meaningful without context. First, as Sonia Mitchell very acutely pinpoints above, Watchmen is very much about time and continuity, the future and the past, and by filling in the backstory you almost necessarily, although perhaps in a limited sense, do damage to the extant work. Second, Watchmen speaks implicitly to comics as a medium, and part of its power may be that it remains separate from the usual retrofitting, rebooting, continuity errors and the associated slash and burn approach to narrative. These arguments still rather depend on a willingness to think of Watchmen as exceptional, I admit (although as far as US superhero comics go I think it takes a lot of work to say that it’s not).

What I suspect really gets Moore’s goat about this is the simple disrespect, in particular as evidenced by his fellow artists. Watchmen is his single best claim to cultural relevance and longevity, he has explicitly said he’d much rather they left it alone, and yet still a whole bunch of quite eminent comics dudes (many of whom seem to bang on about how much they like/admire/were influenced by Moore in general and Watchmen in particular) are happy to take a DC cheque to monkey about with a story which he feels is complete.

On Moore ‘the personality’ I tend to think that while he may be intemperate, a bit silly, creatively stalled and less unimpeachable on, in particular, gender politics than I’d like, he’s generally more consistent, principled, and intellectually interesting than his opponents.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 14:40 on 2012-06-13

What I suspect really gets Moore’s goat about this is the simple disrespect, in particular as evidenced by his fellow artists.

Again, though: is this really that different from Moore's original intention to take characters and stories from the Charlton stable and monkey around with

them

? The only substantive difference is that whilst we know Moore's feelings about

Before Watchmen

nobody seems to have asked the Charlton creators how they'd have felt to have their characters despoiled had Moore's original vision for

Watchmen

come about.

I have a simple stance on these things: if you don't want someone to slaughter your baby,

don't sell your baby to them

. If

Watchmen

really is Moore's best claim to cultural relevance and longevity*, then at least part of that is down to DC's promotion of the book as this big-time smart comic for smart people and in their efforts in keeping it in print.**

* I'd dispute this point too.

V For Vendetta

, surely, has attained a greater level of cultural ubiquity thanks to Anonymous.

From Hell

is arguably on a par with

Watchmen

when it comes to critical acclaim.

** I understand that Moore argues that DC swindled him by not letting

Watchmen

go out of print, thus ensuring that the "reversion clause" in his contract would never kick in (which would have caused the rights to revert to him and Gibbons). It's hard to say how truthful or accurate this statement is unless Moore or DC actually publish the contract. However, if that is the case it seems that Moore negotiated a contract with DC where they'd either have to keep his comic in print for perpetuity - which I would argue goes a long way towards reinforcing that cultural relevance and longevity shebang - or give the rights back to him. In other words, they have to do one of two things they wouldn't do for Joe C. Ordinarywriter, and they chose the first option over the second option. Who could blame 'em?

permalink

go to top

James D

at 15:04 on 2012-06-13The difference between the Watchmen characters and the Charlton Comics characters is that they were conceived very differently. When DC discouraged him from using the Charlton Comics characters, he invented his own - not to be a series, but to be a one-off novel with a specific character arc for each that brings their stories to a close. Comics writers inventing series understand that their characters will be written by other people, and probably take great pains to introduce plotlines and conflicts that they know won't ever truly be resolved or will at least last a really long time - Batman vs. Joker, Darkseid's quest for the Anti-Life Equation, etc. Watchmen instead invents characters not for a series, but for a novel, and ends them decisively.

Had Moore used the Charlton Comics characters, it would have been clear that the Watchmen story was very separate from their original stories, and highly unlikely to be ever seen as 'canon' to the original series, especially since he permanently kills a lot of them. Instead, it would have been seen by those who knew about the characters as an ironic counterpoint to who they actually were - like if someone wrote a one-off graphic novel in which Batman and Superman were evil, or something. That's the difference as I see it.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 17:52 on 2012-06-13Well, Moore thought that there'd be scope for a prequel - back when the thing first came out he said he'd consider doing one if

Watchmen

did well enough.

Of course, that was under the assumption that it'd be Moore writing it rather than someone else, which he was always against. But again: if someone doing something with your characters is unacceptable, don't sign a piece of paper giving them the right to do that.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 19:00 on 2012-06-13Yeah, no argument here. It's not like there weren't alternative comics publishers back then that might have offered him a better deal in terms of what rights he would retain, but that would probably have involved settling for smaller print runs, less distribution, and less money in the end too.

permalink

go to top

https://me.yahoo.com/a/bpFlIkMVk4ZqOVtCOXzX2V_0665JvfqFHA--#af083

at 12:38 on 2012-06-15

Again, though: is this really that different from Moore's original intention to take characters and stories from the Charlton stable and monkey around with them?

I think it’s pretty easy to draw distinctions (see eg James D. above), even if only of nuance, and I don’t, in any event, have much interest in asserting that Alan Moore is a paragon of moral and philosophical consistency (although he may very well be). However, I suspect that the extent to which you find the distinctions convincing and the possibility of hypocrisy forgivable will in the end align with how highly you rate Watchmen.

I have a simple stance on these things: if you don't want someone to slaughter your baby, don't sell your baby to them.

I wonder if this simplification obscures more than it illuminates. Selling a baby might well reduce the stake you have in its future, but it doesn’t necessarily mean you have neither say nor interest in how the new owner treats it, and nor does it mean that they have no responsibilities towards it, particularly in a world where baby-sale is the standard means by which babies are encouraged to fulfil their potential. However, this just takes us into contract law, and as I say there’s no suggestion that DC are doing anything illegal.

If Watchmen really is Moore's best claim to cultural relevance and longevity*, then at least part of that is down to DC's promotion of the book as this big-time smart comic for smart people and in their efforts in keeping it in print.**

Sure, I suppose so - good work DC! But so what?

It’s not directly relevant to this issue, but I’ve always struggled with the characterisation of Watchmen as a smart comic for smart people, it strikes me as at its best if understood as a smart superhero comic for smart superhero comics fans.

You may well be right about V for Vendetta, and From Hell - it’s probably an indication of my age that I still think of Watchmen as a sacred cow.

I’ll set out my stall for what it’s worth (the paper it’s written on, ie): I don’t care very much about Watchmen prequels, although I’d prefer it if they didn’t make them and I suspect DC of being a creatively bankrupt shower; I don’t think the prequels will do harm to Watchmen but I do think there’s a genuine risk that they might; I don’t find Alan Moore’s response to the decision particularly edifying; but I think he’s earnt the right to the respect of his peers and to be heard sympathetically.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 13:25 on 2012-06-15

Sure, I suppose so - good work DC! But so what?

So then Watchmen as a cultural institution is not purely a product of Alan Moore's unfettered genius or Dave Gibbons' stylish art; it's also a product of the promotion that DC has provided it with and DC's custodianship over the franchise as a whole. DC has a stake in the thing's success, and has more than earned it with said custodianship, so the idea that DC has no place to decide whether or not a prequel series would be a good idea because AUTHOR UBER ALLES seems a stretch. You can quibble as to whether DC is

practically capable

of doing a good job or whether the particular writers they have are up to the task, of course, though the arguments Dan's objecting to in the article aren't about such specifics; they're about general, absolutist claims that the prequels

cannot possibly be good because Alan Moore isn't involved

You may well be right about V for Vendetta, and From Hell - it’s probably an indication of my age that I still think of Watchmen as a sacred cow.

I dunno, I can't think of

any

pop cultural work which I'd describe as a sacred cow these days whereas I was much more inclined to do so when I was younger.

I don’t find Alan Moore’s response to the decision particularly edifying; but I think he’s earnt the right to the respect of his peers and to be heard sympathetically.

I think he has the right to be heard but how sympathetic I hear him kind of hinges on how much what he says makes sense to me. If someone's talking whiny, self-serving crap then I'm going to call it that whether it's Alan Moore or Random McWebcomicartist.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 14:19 on 2012-06-15

I think this is oversimplifying things. The roles Moore and DC fulfilled in the production of the Watchmen were totally different; as far as I know, DC had little to nothing to do with the creative aspect of the novel, and Moore's objections to the prequels seem to be purely creative in nature. If on the other hand the dispute were on the business side, that Moore didn't think Watchmen prequels would sell and DC did, the shoe would be on the other foot.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 14:31 on 2012-06-15Again, since Moore a) wanted to do prequels back in 1985 and b) has said he'd have gladly accepted DC's offer to do the prequels (which was going to involve giving him the rights to

Watchmen

back if he said yes!!!) if they'd offered in 1985, then it seems to me that the dispute is entirely on the business side and the complete collapse of Moore and DC's professional relationship (and more particularly, the fact that Moore would rather keep sulking than engage in any sort of constructive dialogue with DC, even one which would lead to him getting what he'd wanted all along).

Also, FWIW Dave Gibbons is 100% fine with the prequels, so at half the original creative team is cool with the project.

permalink

go to top

James D

at 17:37 on 2012-06-15Ah, I didn't know Gibbons was down with them. That does change things a bit. Moore is pretty much handling the whole thing like a big whiny baby. If there were prequels coming out to a book I'd written and there was nothing I could do about it, the first thing I'd say was "let me do them." If he didn't have ridiculous demands, DC would probably jump at the chance to slap Moore's name all over them.

permalink

go to top

https://me.yahoo.com/a/bpFlIkMVk4ZqOVtCOXzX2V_0665JvfqFHA--#af083

at 09:39 on 2012-06-18

Setting aside the perplexing CAPITALISED ALLUSION to the German national anthem (or possibly the Dead Kennedys), this is a fair point, although it seems designed to address a binary understanding of this dispute - I think everyone who has contributed to this thread has expressed a fairly mixed view, despite tending one way or the other. Meanwhile, the fact that DC are going ahead with this, in the face of Alan Moore’s explicit disapproval suggests that their interests are fairly well protected and represented. Your implicit notion that DC have earnt a right to a say in the artistic content of Watchmen (beyond questions of marketing, design and the commercially relevant business of protecting, managing and exploiting lucrative copyrights, I mean) is one that hadn’t really occurred to me, and that I instinctively don’t like, but I ought to go away and think about it properly. Thanks!

You can quibble as to whether DC is practically capable of doing a good job or whether the particular writers they have are up to the task, of course, though the arguments Dan's objecting to in the article aren't about such specifics; they're about general, absolutist claims that the prequels cannot possibly be good because Alan Moore isn't involved.

I’m not sure who you’re arguing with here so I’ll leave it.

I dunno, I can't think of any pop cultural work which I'd describe as a sacred cow these days whereas I was much more inclined to do so when I was younger. I think he has the right to be heard but how sympathetic I hear him kind of hinges on how much what he says makes sense to me. If someone's talking whiny, self-serving crap then I'm going to call it that whether it's Alan Moore or Random McWebcomicartist.

Quite a nice unintended irony here, but perhaps I’m just reeling from the old school ‘... yeah, I used to think that too … but then I grew up...’ dis. Is it possible, do you think, to imagine an

even older, even wiser Arthur

? I can just about manage it: he’s grizzled and twinkly-eyed, smoking a pipe, and, with a wry smile, looking down the years at his younger self’s righteous withholding of sympathy from both the mighty and the meek, his fearless enthusiasm for detecting 'whiny self-serving crap' in strangers, and his habit of slaying sacred cows while denying their existence.

JK! Before this degenerates into us chanting 'no YOU'RE immature!' at each other, I should also say, Arthur, that your precipitous enthusiasm for getting stuck in with the minimal possible delay is one of the things that make Ferretbrain fun for me, a fond reader.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 10:00 on 2012-06-18

Actually, it's a CAPITALISED ALLUSION to the extraordinarily pervasive idea that authors are an exalted form of being and anyone else's contribution to the success of a creative endeavour is secondary. Putting DC aside, I'd say there's a strong case that Dave Gibbons' contribution to the art, which extended to more than simply drawing stuff Moore described to him, is a part of the final package which can't be ignored, so Gibbons' support for the prequel project ought to be weighed against Moore's disapproval. And yet, so often in discussions about the subject Gibbons isn't even mentioned.

Is it possible, do you think, to imagine an even older, even wiser Arthur?

I can imagine all sorts of things, but winning an argument by hypothesising a version of your opponent who will agree with you is a strategem I hadn't even begun to conceive of. Bravo, I guess. ;)

permalink

go to top

https://me.yahoo.com/a/bpFlIkMVk4ZqOVtCOXzX2V_0665JvfqFHA--#af083

at 10:16 on 2012-06-18Ha ha! Such a speedy reply, arguing so fiercely against points no one is currently making, is surely a nice intended irony!

I surrender the field to you Arthur - please continue to slag Alan Moore without any let or hindrance. I will instead exchange gentle, supportive imaginary emails with the imaginary future Arthur, who, you must concede, does at least seem like a jolly nice chap.

Good piece on the Soul Drinkers by the way.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 10:20 on 2012-06-18I anticipate being as confused by our future correspondence as I am by our present.

permalink

go to top

http://fishinginthemud.livejournal.com/

at 19:50 on 2012-06-18

I will instead exchange gentle, supportive imaginary emails with the imaginary future Arthur, who, you must concede, does at least seem like a jolly nice chap.

Best. Flounce. Ever.

permalink

go to top

Fin

at 23:51 on 2012-06-18and now for the moment when it's revealed that you've been speaking with your future self all along.

permalink

go to top

Arthur B

at 00:08 on 2012-06-19/decodes lottery numbers from posts in thread.

permalink

go to top

Ibmiller

at 18:44 on 2012-07-02So, anyone check any of these out? I'm currently following Silk Specter, Minutemen, and Nite Owl, and liking them. Because his Superman story left me cold and his Wonder Woman story leaves me furious, I'm giving Azzerello's Comedian and Rorschach stories a pass. Plus, I'm not a huge fan of those characters by themselves - seeing a young Rorschach with a Nite Owl is much more interesting to me.

#Ferretbrain #Watchmen #Before Watchmen #Alan Moore #DC Comics #Copyright law #Dan H

1 note · View note

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 6 years ago

Text

I got some things to say about Child Within and Death of Vermin

Back when ASM v5 #2 got released I had problems with how Peter and the Lizard were characterized, specifically due to the shadow of Shed and it’s infanticide cannibalism. To dive deeper I looked at the Child Within and Death of Vermin story arcs by DeMatteis. My thinking was we are discussing Spider-Man’s reactions to a character who was a man mutated into an animal hybrid who engaged in cannibalism and well, there was already a precedent for that in Vermin.

However in diving into the stories there were other things I wanted to say about the stories more generally.

The big thing I should qualify is that these are good storylines but those come with certain qualifyers.

They are not badly written on a craftsmanship level per se but that is dependent upon whether you look at the stories in isolation vs. within the broader context of Spider-Man’s history or from the which particular character’s perspective.

The thing is DeMatteis who authored both stories (as well as KLH which Child Within is a pseudo sequel to) created Vermin and he was plainly an author’s pet character. I dunno from where DeMatteis’ affection for Vermin comes from but it’s plainly obvious from KLH, Child Within, Death of Vermin and his Captain America run from which Vermin originated.

And that’s the big deal when it comes to Death of Vermin. The Death of Vermin is kind of a Vermin and Ashley Kafka story first and a Spider-Man story second. It isn’t that Spider-Man doesn’t appear, or is passive within the story or unimportant. Its more like it’s not his story, it’s Vermin’s and Ashley Kafka’s. Whilst DeMatteis’ later invention of Judas Traveller was an example of an author indulging themselves most of the Traveller stories still were rooted in their focus upon Peter and/or Ben Reilly’s characters and used Traveller as an opponent or plot device for exploration of said characters. Death of Vermin provides a weird reversal wherein it is better written than...well every scene Traveller showed up in, possibly better written than every story featuring Traveller (except stories where he appears only briefly, e.g. ASM #400). And yet it places the majority of focus upon characters other than Spider-Man himself.

In truth the story could be regarded more as a wrap up arc for Captain America than a Spider-Man story, but even that’d not be wholly accurate. There is greater resonance offered to Spider-Man’s presence via his connection to Ashley Kafka via Child Within and to Vermin via Kraven’s Last Hunt. However Cap could’ve arguably had resonance with Vermin too from his interactions with him and of course Zemo’s presence in the arc makes much more sense if this was Captain America.

Possibly the solution would’ve been if Death of Vermin was a mini-series/crossover that featured both heroes. But in truth either way it just underscores the fact that this wasn’t truly Spider-Man’s story, nor Cap’s. It was Zemo’s (a non-Spider-Man character), Ashley Kafka’s (a then very new addition to Spidey’s word) and most of all Vermin’s (a Captain America character then recently adopted into Spider-Man).

So in truth Death of Vermin was...a DeMatteis pet project arc.

And hey if you like Kafka, if you like Vermin, if you like Zemo and if you liked Dematteis Cap run then this is for you. Problem is apart from those last two I don’t think the audience for those first two was big enough or enthusiastic enough to warrant a story like this. More poignantly if you are telling a multi-part story arc within the pages of a main monthly Spider-Man title...shouldn’t Spider-Man himself be the main point? Shouldn’t aiming it for an audience who first and foremost want to see Spider-Man and important/notable Spider-Man characters get focus be the point?

All this in spite of the story again not being bad per se. It’s more that it’s bad from a certain point of view. But that point of view is from the pov of a Spider-Man fan/reader wanting to read about Spider-Man in a Spider-Man title.

That being said this was just one arc and at the time there were after all 3 other monthly Spider-Man titles to choose from. Perhaps the mentality at the time was that there was space to do more different stuff. If you didn’t want to read a story arc where Vermin and/or Ashley Kafka to all intents and purposes are the main characters and would rather read a story where it was in fact Spider-Man then you had the chance to do that every three weeks before or after the publication of any given part of Death of Vermin.

If you do feel it’s bad though or at least overly indulgent of DeMatteis remember that even the best writers make mistakes or are prone to that from time to time. Unlike with Slott DeMatteis didn’t do that stuff routinely, Vermin, Scrier and Judas Traveller were basically it. And for Ashley Kafka specifically it did add a lot of character development to her to be fair, character development pissed away by Slott when he killed her off.

Moving on we have Child Within.

Again...an incredibly mixed bag.

There are two major retcons to Child Within and one works great the other not so great.

The gist of Child Within is that DeMatteis compares and contrasts Peter, Harry Osborn and Vermin in terms of them coming face-to-face with traumatic childhood memories they’ve been repressing.

For Vermin this is the realization that he was sexually abused by his father. This is another example of DeMatteis wanting to develop Vermin because he loves the character but in context of the story it works as effectively as the ways in which Kraven and Peter and Mary Jane are contrasted against one another along with Vermin in KLH.

For Harry, he realizes that his father was physically and verbally abusive towards him, even before he got the Goblin formula. Additionally Harry remembers Peter’s identity as Spider-Man and comes to grips with the fact that his father killed his friend Gwen Stacy.

For Peter he realizes that he’s always had a guilt complex even pre-dating Uncle Ben’s death stemming from the internalized blame and guilt he felt over his parents’ deaths. I also suspect this story choice was connected to the soon to be published return of Peter’s parents in ASM #365.

It is Harry and Peter’s revelations that are specifically retcons.

Ironically both (more or less) date back to the same moment from the same issue: ASM #39 (the first Romita Senior issue and reveal of Norman as the Goblin). In that issue Peter and Harry bond over their childhoods, with Harry telling Peter he and his father were pals up until a few years ago (the subtext being that his Dad changed due to the Goblin formula). Peter for his part claims he doesn’t even remember his father since he died when he was too young to remember.

Later stories would further explore Peter’s childhood with varying levels of contradictions. Half the time (such as when Howard Mackie or Paul Jenkins were writing the series) it seemed Peter was a young boy in the 4-7 age range when his parents died and he came to live with Ben and May. The other half the time Peter was a baby or a toddler when that happened.

Confusing matters more is the fact that even the stories that put Peter in roughly the same age range don’t jive with one another. Roberto Aguirre Sacasa and Stan Lee both wrote stories depicting Peter as a baby or a toddler but whilst Lee claimed that the Parkers died whilst Peter was in May and Ben’s care (prompting them to continue that as his guardians), Sacasa depicts them as picking Peter up from somewhere after the fact and resolving to raise him. Yet other writers (like Michelinie) depict Peter as not remembering his parents yet still apparently knowing certain details of his life with them.

As far as canon goes though I think it only really makes sense to side with Stan on this one. He established Peter as not remembering his parents in ASM #39 and his account of Peter’s early years from ASM Annual #5 was the first such account and jives with issue #39. Plus you know...he created Spider-Man.

DeMatteis’ retcons in Child Within thus contradict both peter and Harry’s established childhoods but whilst Harry’s is workable and enriching, Peter’s is nonsensical and reductive. DeMatteis is a superb writer and Spider-Scribe but like I said, nobody’s perfect. Even Stan and Steve had the odd faux pas with the characters.

With Harry Child Within was the start of DeMatteis’ character arc for him which would culminate in Spec #200, with the issue and arc over all regarded as the best Harry centric story of all time, and one of the best Spidey stories of all time to boot. The storyline developed Harry beautifully as a character, making him a complex yet sympathetic villain.

At the same time it’s contradictions to ASM #39 and what we thought we knew of Harry made sense. He was repressing all this stuff so of course there would be contradictions. More poignantly ASM #40 depicted flashbacks wherein Norman himself is clearly out of touch with the reality of his past relationship with his son and the picture they paint doesn’t exactly showcase Harry and Norman as pals either.

So there was already something of a precedent for Harry or the Osborns in general having major memory problems, drugs, goblin formulas or blows to the head or not.

And you know thematically this worked really well for Harry. Painting him as this messed up helped explain his outings prior to that as a villain, his initial antagonism towards Peter, his drug abuses and his devotion to his father and even his own family. After all he was a devoted father to his own son Normie. Could he perhaps have been seeking subconsciously a more positive relationship with his own son than he had with his father (a father who his son was named for)?

If you take Child Within in isolation the retcons to Peter’s own past and how Harry was key to awakening them work really beautifully in symmetry and contrast with Harry. These two friends inadvertently unearthed painful childhood memories connected to their parents which had subconsciously shaped them into who they were today. And in awakening those memories it had set them on a path towards their futures to. In Peter’s case it was a form of closure, or at least the start of a healing process wherein he could walk forwards in life more whole than he was before, more able to be a god family man. In Harry’s case it started him on a road to madness as self destruction that would scar his family. This is of course summed up in the closing pages of part 6 wherein we get complimenting splash pages of Peter brightly and triumphantly swinging away from his parents’ graves whilst Harry scared and sad flies away from his living wife and child.

Great writing. Beautiful writing.

In isolation.

The problems then arise when you put the story within the wider context of Spider-Man’s established history, the defining themes of the character and the genre considerations for a superhero series like Spider-Man.

See it is theoretically possible for Peter to have blamed himself for his parents’ deaths and then repressed that blame creating the examples of guilt we’d seen for 30 odd years by that point.

If he was old enough.

But as I said ASM #39 established Peter didn’t remember his parents because he was too young and the very next elaboration upon that we see is in ASM Annual #5 where Peter is at a humungous push maybe 3 years old tops. Both written by the same person before anyone else says anything about Peter’s early years and that same person happens to be the co-creator of Spider-Man himself.

At which point you have to say “This makes no sense, of course he wouldn’t blame himself he wouldn’t be old enough for that to have happened.”

In fact in Spec #254, DeMatteis does another psychedelic story in which Peter symbolically revisits the moment Uncle Ben informed him of his parents’ deaths and in said scene Peter is in a crib, which again would render him too young to remember his parents.

Spec #254

You could always explain this one away as a glorified dream sequence but it’s food for thought.

There is an even more pressing problem with the retcon though.

The retcon clearly leans hard upon the interpretation that Spider-Man is defined by guilt. That in fact guilt is the root of his motivations to be a hero. This story goes further as to essentially say up until now Peter has essentially been a hero due to...well....not getting enough therapy over the years.

Child Within inadvertently codifies that Spider-Man is Spider-Man not because Uncle Ben died so much as because Spider-Man has if not a mental illness then very serious unresolved childhood issues which have unhealthily manifested in his internalizing blame and guilt and alleviating those feelings by...risking his life all the time...

...er...can you see how this is something of a problem within the big picture of the series?

This isn’t saying Spider-Man is a hero in spite of some serious condition he has or he is able to take the unfortunate circumstances of an illness and use it to propel him into something positive.

This story essentially (though perhaps unintentionally) spelled out that Peter has been suffering with something very serious for the entire time we’ve known him and that is the actual reason he is a superhero. The idea being that if Peter was to treat this, was to make himself well or had been well the entire time he WOULDN’T have been a hero in the first place. Because he’d have lost the root of the thing that compelled him to be Spider-Man in the first place.

I adore DeMatteis but in this respect Child Within can be seen as his most reductive Spider-Man story.

This retcon invalidates/undermines Uncle Ben’s death and Spider-Man’s actual origin story and the central message of great power=great responsibility.

It presumes Spider-Man’s sense of responsibility is interchangeable with or stems from a inherent sense of guilt when this is just plain not the case and goes against the ‘rules’ of the superhero genre. Or at least the rules as they apply to a character like Spider-Man.

Spidey is supposed to be an everyman, someone to relate to and be inspired by. In this sense codifying his motivation and central message as one about learning to use the powers you have responsibility to help others makes sense and is powerful and resonant. When it’s actually nothing more than the by-product of a serious personal issue that he’s unhealthily left unresolved you seriously mess with the foundation and heart of the character.

It is the same kind of nonsense which presupposes Batman must be insane and traumatized and have unresolved issues to go about being a crime fighter in a bat costume, as opposed to someone who went through something bad and used his pain to safeguard innocent people from the source of that pain, using his costume as a (highly effective) battle tactic.

To be honest I think this change to Spider-Man’s early years and driving emotions came from again a place of indulgence on DeMatteis’ part. I have spoken at length about how Slott indulged himself so much during his run so I want to make it clear I don’t mean DeMatteis indulged himself in that sort of way.

Rather I think he was maybe putting a lot of himself or people he knew or stories he’d encountered which struck deep within him into Peter’s backstory as seen in Child Within. It was a sincere attempt to develop the character and dive into who he is and why, he just came at it from an ill considered and problematic angle.

Moreover the story talks at length about needing to admit to and deal with these repressed childhood memories and get help to cope with them.

But then...DeMatteis doesn’t depict Spider-Man doing that. There is no ongoing subplot of Spider-Man coping with this newfound knowledge that the root of his tendency to blame himself for everything stems from this messed up childhood trauma. It comes up a little bit in DeMatteis’ run as throwaway lines but it essentially goes uncommented upon in consequent Spider-Man stories in other titles and even within the same run by DeMatteis that established it. I don’t even recall it coming up much when his parents seemingly come back after being presumed dead, though I admit it’s been a long while since I checked those stories out.

Is that a faux pas on the part of later writers and editors. Kind of but this is also a case of something that really doesn’t belong in Spider-Man lore being essentially ignored because it has to be for the character to function properly. But if you buy into the Child Within retcon (which I do not advise you on doing) it paints the horrible picture that Spider-Man basically didn’t address this trauma and backslide into old habits of blaming himself and repressing the root of why that was the case.

To be honest, this is honestly why I always advise against doing stories with the main or highly recurring supporting characters who essentially show up every issue wherein you put them in situations where they’d need a lot of therapy over a long period of time. It’s just not practical to do a story like that when you got to put out a monthly (in this case basically weekly) action adventure series.

Mini-series like Lost Years with characters who exist for that story alone or with infrequently recurring villains like Vermin or less vital supporting characters ever, where you can park them and let us presume they will be getting better off panel, is fine.

But this just wasn’t practical at all for Spider-Man.

What compounds the issue is that we see in Death of Vermin the deep scars childhood trauma results in and how it takes a lot of time, effort and hardship to recover from them. But here Spider-Man is basically fine a few months (publishing time, less time in-universe) later just...over it.

Both stories are ultimate a gigantic testament to how great writers can still make missteps, even ones born out of good intentions and creative instincts, whilst the end results can still possess plenty of merit nevertheless.

#Spider-Man #peter parker #J.M. DeMatteis #Vermin #Edward Whelan #Marvel #marvel comics #Ben Reilly

7 notes · View notes

wazafam · 4 years ago

Link

The Falcon & the Winter Soldier showrunner Malcolm Spellman is now working on Captain America 4 with Marvel Studios - and here are the lessons he needs to learn from the Disney+ series. Phase 4 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe looks and feels so very different to what has gone before. For one thing, the modern MCU is a transmedia initiative where stories move from big screen to small screen, and back again.

Fans now know that's the case with Sam Wilson's Captain America. Sam was given the shield in the final scenes of Avengers: Endgame, but even there he told Steve Rogers it felt "like it's someone else's." Falcon & Winter Soldier was essentially the story of how Sam came to accept his new identity, while acknowledging the complexity of Captain America's legacy. Malcolm Spellman, head writer and showrunner of Falcon & Winter Soldier, is now confirmed to be working on a script for Captain America 4 with Dalan Musson, a staff writer who was also attached to the show. It's safe to assume there'll be a straight narrative throughline and character arc, although it's worth remembering specific plot threads - such as Sharon Carter's Power Broker - could well be picked up in other Marvel properties first.

Related: Falcon & Winter Soldier Ending Explained & MCU Future Setup

Falcon & Winter Soldier became the most popular series in the world, but that doesn't mean it was perfect. Spellman would do well to reflect both on what worked and what didn't in order to ensure Captain America 4 is a worthy successor to the legacy of the Captain America films, which have been some of the best in Marvel history.

It's safe to assume Captain America 4 will focus on Anthony Mackie's Sam Wilson, who has officially succeeded Steve Rogers as the next Captain America. But it should also feature Sebastian Stan's Bucky Barnes; Mackie and Stan are both tremendous actors, and Falcon & Winter Soldier was at its best when it allowed the two to play off one another. Sam and Bucky were initially only associates because they had a friend in common, but Steve's absence has meant they've bonded and become friends in and of themselves. That friendship really needs to continue, and on the big screen too. Meanwhile, there would be a smart thematic inversion in seeing Sam headline the franchise, with Bucky serving as backup; Phase 1 of the MCU was critiqued for frequently having white main heroes with Black sidekicks (Iron Man and War Machine, Captain America and Falcon), so this would turn that idea on its head.

The best Marvel superhero stories are grounded in their characters' worlds. Classic Spider-Man tales are as much about Peter Parker's love life and struggle to look after Aunt May as they are about his web-slinging; Tony Stark's battle with alcoholism and sometimes-desperate attempts to keep his businesses afloat are as much a part of his story as his suiting up as Iron Man. Falcon & Winter Soldier suggests Spellman understands that truth on an almost instinctive level, because he spent so much time developing Sam Wilson's personal world. Viewers got to meet members of Sam's family, to learn their history, and to enjoy watching Sam interact with his nephews. Even more amusingly, Bucky soon found himself drawn into Sam's world as well, and seemed to quite enjoy flirting with his sister.

Captain America 4 needs to be grounded in Sam's personal life, continuing to develop the new Captain America as a three-dimensional person who exists in a specific cultural context. This is necessary to ensure viewers have a strong relationship with Sam, that they appreciate him as a character rather than just a shield-slinging Avenger, and it will also help distinguish Sam from his predecessor. Steve Rogers was a man who was forced to give up his personal world in order to become Captain America; he sacrificed himself in Captain America: The First Avenger, found a new context working with SHIELD but had to bring them down, and ultimately tore apart the Avengers because of his refusal to compromise. Sam should feel the same tension, the pull between being Captain America and being Sam Wilson, but he should contrast with Steve in that he attempts to find a balance. That would give us a Captain America story like nothing we have seen before.

Related: Every Falcon & Winter Soldier Easter Egg In Episode 6

Falcon & Winter Soldier may have been enjoyable, but sadly it was flawed. The scripts were absolutely packed with good ideas; the secret legacy of Captain America, historic racial prejudice and racism in modern America, the plight of refugees, even the potential for a debate on the very nature of American self-identity by contrasting Sam Wilson with John Walker. Unfortunately, there's a sense in which there were simply too many ideas, and as a result few of them were well-developed over the course of the series. The show felt like it had a lot to say, but it never quite managed to say it, in spite of Sam's speeches and sermons in episode 6. Worse still, sometimes the messages was muddled and even problematic, particularly around John Walker.

Captain America 4 is a movie, meaning it will have a much shorter runtime. That actually bodes well for Spellman, because it means a lot of ideas and themes will wind up cut in order to streamline the narrative. Spellman will need to carefully consider what themes are particularly important, and what messages he wants viewers to pick up on. The shorter length should mean the narrative winds up being a lot tighter.

The final issue Spellman needs to deal with is a more subtle one; he needs to avoid over-signposting. In narrative terms, a signpost is a hint that helps you perceive which direction a story is going to take. Falcon & Winter Soldier suffered from serious over-signposting, in that it was possible to see twists coming a mile away - especially if you were familiar with the original comics. Anyone who'd read about John Walker knew he was going to fail at being Captain America, probably in spectacular fashion, and instead would be dubbed the "US Agent." The Sharon Carter/Power Broker twist was so obvious most viewers had figured it out by the end of episode 3. All this unfortunately led to a season finale that was, however enjoyable, also fairly predictable.

To be fair to Spellman, part of the problem lay in the fact it was obvious how Falcon & Winter Soldier fitted into the overarching narrative of the MCU; it was clearly going to be the story of how Sam decided to accept the shield he had been given by Steve Rogers, and suited up as the new Captain America. The purpose of the story was so clear that viewers could go into it knowing what to expect, well aware John Walker existed purely to contrast two different approaches to being a superhero, and confident where the lead character would end up by the final episode. So the issue is related to the nature of the show as much as to the writing, and Spellman can approach Captain America 4 with a lot more freedom. There are frankly countless directions Captain America 4 could take - especially if it also draws in some plot threads and even supporting characters from other Marvel Disney+ productions that haven't come out yet. This time round, the story should have some truly shocking twists.

It's great to hear that the story of Sam Wilson's Captain America will not be relegated to Disney+, but will instead continue on the big screen. What's more, Malcolm Spellman has done a tremendous job fleshing out Sam's world and developing him as a potential lead character, so he's undoubtedly the right man to be working on the script. For all that's the case, though, he would do well to cast a critical eye to Falcon & Winter Soldier and ensure he learns from both what he did right and what he did wrong. The Captain America franchise is one of Marvel's best, if not the best, and Captain America 4 has a lot to live up to.

More: How Did Marvel Get The Falcon & The Winter Soldier So Wrong?

What Captain America 4 Needs To Learn From Falcon & Winter Soldier from https://ift.tt/3vad1tG

#Blogger

0 notes

dachi-chan25 · 7 years ago

Text

Game of Thornes- Season 7 episode 2 Recap (Pt.2)

Warnings: Spooooooilers; not a D@nee fan my dude, no hate either just critizism; Jonsa shipper so most of the fandom thinks I’m delusional.

————-

6.- Dat raven from Oldwarts reaches WF (OK but like where is Edd’s raven about Bran???) and Jonny boy is in Brooding mode, he calls for the Lords to tell them the situation, they are not happy at all about being all buddy-buddy with a Targ (and rightfully so) but Jon has a good reasons for going himself (even if I don’t like it):

- He is KitN and unlike other rulers J0n has already proven (remember when he wanted to have a 1 on 1 fight with Ramsey so no one else would die??) he takes responsability over his people and if it’s a trap he’ll rather sacrifize himself than an innocent.

- He is the only one who saw and fought a WW and the only one who can explain how much of a threat they are.

-The raven asked specifically for his presence, and to be allies (they both seek that) there should be some amount of trust, he NEEDS their help after all.

Of course it’s not so simple, because D@nyy has Melissandre with her (you know the same J0n exiled) and she wants him to surrender the North to her (which wasn’t mentioned in the raven and OH!! That if we believe the leaks she is gonna send him on a pointless stupid hunt to prove he says the truth (so no trust on her part I see)

Also, Sansa speaks up to remind him about their grandfather and how he was invited and then killed by a Targ (very fair point) and of course she doesn’t want him to leave!!!

“You’re abandoning your people! you’re abandoning your home!”

Some fellow shippers (I’m not saying your feelings/thoughts aren’t valid guys you are allowed to have your own reading and I am in no way trying to impose my view) mentioned they were wating for her to include ‘you’re abandoning me!’ but she already did in adding home, what makes WF his home is not the fact that he was raised there but that his family is! So in a subtle way she did acuse him of abandoning her.

And can you all blame her??? Sansa already lost so much, and wheter you ship them or not, it’s clear she loves him and doesn’t wanna loose him.

Problem is Jon is the same, y'all remember he wanted to fuck off to Essos after being brought back?? He had nothing left to loose and no fucks to give anymore, Enters Sansa giving him a purpose to live and someone to give a fuck about so of course he is gonna do anything in his power to protect her and the home she fought so hard for!! He is once again gonna fight for her now on the political side and honestly I dig so much this ship!!!

Anyway Jon is not getting much support (even Little Lyanna doesn’t want him to go) but he already made up his mind, Sansa is worried about who the fuck is gonna run the place in his absence and, be still my heart, because he says the North is hers (my shipper heart!!!!) and she is sooooo touched. Also that Jaime/ Brienne parallel.

Creepyfinger is pleased and honestly I can’t wait for Jon to choke the slimy bitch.

7.- Back in the Citadel, Sam says to Slughorn (I can’t remember his actual name, sorry) he knows how to cure greyscale (how very convinient) but hold your horses Potter!!! the thing is dangerous and you really shouldn’t do it. But of course he is gonna do it anyway, because I guess it’s more important to cure his ex-Lord Commander’s son than keeping his place on the Citadel (Slughorn said the procedure was forbbiden so I’m guessing they could expell him for this) to become a Maester for the NW like he was supposed to. Honestly this is all so convinient to have one of D@€nerys stans out and about again *sigh* Also the dialogue was like a porn and I was laughing way to hard even though the scene was disgusting.

8.- Eww that transition was just ewwww I’m glad I wasn’t eating when I watched it, so now we have Arya on her way to KL, and Yay! Hot Pie, I Love him so much, and LMAO Arya and her pies.

So at last Arya hears about the BoB and in that moment she forsakes her revenge to go home (Imma cry again) I think that’s the best damn decision because things are going to be ugly in the south.

9.- Jon in the crypts!!! (It’s happening y'all!!!) I must say that’s a pretty good looking statue of Ned tho. So LF is supposedly trying to get in his good graces but is he really??? I mean his words and tone are polite, he talks about how HE was the one who sent Ned’s bones back to WF (ya you trick ass bitch but you got him killed!!!) and wistully talks about how despite their differences they both loved Cat, and then smoothly reminds Jon about how Cat didn’t care about him and even says she was wrong (I called it!!! That LF was gonna say the last best chance quote from the trailer to Jon) but why was he talking about such a thing, we know Cat (and his bastard status) is a very touchy subject for Jon, as a matter of fact on a deeper level one starts to think maybe he was trying to provoke Jon (Starks. Quick tempers, slow minds is his motto afterall) and even I was surprised by how calm he acted when LF wanted a thank you for saving my life (that FUCKING creep). Until we get the ‘I Love Sansa, like I loved her mother’ it’s such an intresting way of phrasing it, isn’t it?? Because moments before LF states he loved Cat in a romantic way, and when he says he loves Sansa adds the last sentence to leave no room of doubt about what kind of Love is it and what his intentions are. What shaked me was Jon’s expression, he was furious, while moments ago he let LF words slide, a single mention of Sansa and he wants to kill the creeper. Jon’s threat is both terrifying and unexpected ( also I know everyone was freacking out about the sister but Jaime also called Cersei that and they had like 3 children together, same applies to but J0n said D@ny’s name OMG twu wuv, like LMAO Qyburn also said her name and I don’t see anyone shipping them) if LF wanted to provoke a reaction out of him it wasn’t that one definitely. Far to raw and protective to be brotherly.

Jon’s anger doesn’t fade even when he let’s the little creeper go!! He is downright murderous. But then he looks at Sansa and it’s like his whole demeanour changes, I was like what in the Seven hells is this!!!! And the little wave gives me hope they’ll see one another again in this season.

Now what I find real intresting is that last bit with LF. He gets outta those crypts, baffled and massaging his neck, when suddenly he seems to figure something out (you can see it in his eyes) and his first reaction to whatever he was thinking was looking at Sansa (she is looking at the spot Jon just left in such a wistfull and sad manner) and I think he knows something is happening there… Or maybe I’m delusional.

10.- Arya and Nymeria reunite and all is sad, but I think it linda makes sense, Nymeria is not her because Arya herself is not her fully, she had to strip from her identity to become a faceless man, and was using that to take revenge, but now she is stepping back from that destructive path because she has the option to come back home and it’s beginning to be herself again. maybe when she finally does Nymeria will come to her.

11.- I totally lost my shit in here, so Yara and Ellaria are flirting and drinking (so much for this is a war!! ) and far to relaxed and distracted to be part of a group that wants to take the Iron Throne, (Theon is super done with them btw) suddenly all hell breaks loose and Euron’s armada is on da house (he got to get that gift for his Lady) everyone gets crushed, the snakes are murdered and Ellaria/Yara taken prisioners. Also Theon is like LOL no I’m out. But are we supposed to think OMG Euron is totally GOT’s Jack Sparrow!! Cuz I think Ellaria and Yara (also Varys and Theon) were total dumbasses. In being sneaky 101 we learnt that if you wanna smuggle someone somewhere you gotta be disguised (see: LF getting Sansa on the Eyre and Varys taking Tyrion to Essos) Ellaria and Yara had those huge Greyjoy banners like 'here we are!!! The enemy!!!) and they also already knew about Euron’s armada but they choose to believe he was just gonna stay in Pyke pouting.

Like I said totally moronic!!! They could have disguised the ships and the people, traveling in broad daylight and maybe then they could have succeded.

Problem is everyone underestimating Cersei (except Sansa) even when they worked for her (Varys) and lived with her (Tyrion) and that’s what is allowing her to gain footing. As of now D@nys lost her armada and Dorne, her only allies are the Tyrell and with the Unsullied gone her only option is to go dracarys on KL (fuck the writers for this tho, she was actually making a good decision and you force her to hurt people, but maybe it’s intentional)

Also Sam is helping Jorah, but the leaks said the Tarly were going to die by D@nys hands. Looks like someone is gonna regret his decisions.

Anyway, leaving out the Stark bit I wasn’t very happy with this episode because the leaks keep being confirmed and they are still such bullshit (still I’m hoping some or most are fake)

That’s it. And yup I know I didn’t mentioned Greyworm/Missandei sexy time but I am very meh about it, yes it was tender and all but kinda pointless to me even if I like these two a lot.

#GOT season 7 #game of thrones #7x02 recap #dachi rambles #jonsa

6 notes · View notes

rantsaboutsuperheroes-blog · 8 years ago

Text

The Problem with Spider-Man

Despite Marvel’s success in bringing Iron Man, Captain America, and the rest of the Avengers to a much wider audience than ever before, the company’s most profitable hero by far continues to be Spider-Man. The character was absent for the first three phases of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (instead having his own movie series starring Andrew Garfield), yet he took in quite literally three times as much profit as the entirety of the Avengers team, all of whom have had recent solo outings and merchandising lines. Of course, that only seems absurd if you ignore the past 50 years of mainstream exposure Peter Parker and his alter ego have gotten. He’s reached a level of ubiquity only matched by DC’s marquee superheroes, Superman and Batman. Hundreds of thousands of comics all over the world, cartoons, movies, even the occasional stab at a live-action TV show (Thank you, Japan) have acquainted every continent in the world with Spider-Man.

So, Spider-Man’s absurdly popular. There’s always going to be money made on Spider-Man merchandise. That’s a given. But the sales and popularity of his ongoing comic series have not always been as rocksteady. In recent years, sales of the main Amazing Spider-Man title have been declining. Since the comic’s 2015 relaunch (as part of Marvel’s increasingly desperate rounds of biannual relaunches ever since “Marvel Now!” back in 2012) sales have declined by a little over 50%, dipping as low as 72% in late 2016. Other entries in the Spider-Man publishing line such as Spider-Man (Miles Morales), Spider-Gwen, Spider-Woman, and Venom have also suffered sales slumps. So, why is this happening? Because if Spider-Man, Marvel’s most lucrative character by far can’t sell issues, the rest of Marvel’s publishing line is probably in similar trouble. And, unfortunately, it is. But while Marvel does have massive problems regarding its current direction for its characters, Spider-Man and his supporting cast pose a separate, but equally difficult problem.

Teenage superheroes might seem like a common enough concept idea by this point, but it’s important to remember just how instrumental the story of Peter Parker is to the creation of practically every superhero that came after him. More than any other superhero that came before him, Peter was relatable. He wasn’t a super-strong alien or billionaire playboy, he was nerdy teenager. He got picked on, girls ignored him, his family wasn’t that well off, and he didn’t have a dazzling personality or anything. In fact, he was kind of an asshole. Even after he got his powers and learned his lesson about the relationship between Great Power and Great Responsibility, Peter continued to act like a stupid teenager, both without and without the mask. Which, once again, is incredibly relatable to teenagers and young adults such as myself. But what really set Spider-Man’s story apart from other superheroes at the time was the fact that he got older. He graduated high school and went to college. His longtime girlfriend Gwen Stacy was killed. He graduated college. He eventually got married to Mary Jane Watson. Sure, the rest of the Marvel Universe progressed with him in some ways, but remained static in so many others. It’s incredibly hard to replicate the anxieties and heartaches and triumphs that a person experiences when they’re becoming an adult. There’s no other period of our lives quite like it (said the 22-year old college student). But the thing about becoming an adult is, you can’t really ever be a teenager again. I’m not saying this like it’s a bad thing, being a teenager is a pretty shit deal most of the time.

The reason I bring this up is simple: Spider-Man graduated college and got married, but ever since the 2007 Spider-Man event “One More Day”, the character feels like he’s regressed back to his teenage personality and supporting cast. Marvel referred to the status quo following this shift “Brand New Day”. For those of you who know what One More Day is, you can probably guess the direction this rant will be taking. For those who don’t, let me give you the high concept: Peter and Mary Jane sells their marriage to Satan (or at least Marvel’s resident Satan stand-in, Mephisto) in order to save his dying Aunt May. If you think that sounds unbelievably stupid, you’re not alone. If you’re wondering just how the hell a storyline like that could be proposed by a writer and not instantly shot down by the editorial, it’s because the writer of the AMS series at the time, J. Michael Straczynski didn’t suggest it. Instead, the edict came down from on high, sprung from the mind of Marvel’s Editor-in-Chief at the time, Joe Quesada. But why would he want to do something like that? Why set back the company’s marquee character’s personal progression by over 20 years? And in a literal Deal with the Devil no less? Mr. Quesada’s reasoning can be summed up in two statements:

“If I’m going to live by the theory that I’ve always believed in –that a Peter being single is an intrinsic part of the very foundation of the world of Spider-Man — then the same can be said about mechanical webshooters vs. organic.”

“If we keep Spidey rejuvenated and relatable to fans on the horizon, we can manage to do that and still keep him enjoyable to those that have been following his adventures for years. Will everyone be happy with the decision? No, of course not, but that’s what makes it a horserace. At the end of the day, my job is to keep these characters fresh and ready for every fan that walks through the door, while also planning for the future and hopefully an even larger fan base.”

Now, I’m going to say right now that I am mostly of the opinion that the above statements are bullshit. But there is a logic to them that is also hard to deny. Well, at the time that is. After all, it is true that the character doesn’t belong to any one generation. Younger fans should have an access point to these characters that isn’t guarded by 500 issues of required reading. I absolutely agree with that sentiment. In fact, I would assert that in some regards One More Day and the subsequent Brand New Day status quo did help breathe some fresh air into Spider-Man’s corner of the Marvel universe. It is wackier, there is more outlandish stuff happening, and yes, there have been some damn fine stories that have come out of this direction. But I also think that by going in this new direction, Marvel editorial erased something much more valuable from Spider-Man: a feeling of growth and change and investment to see how Peter Parker’s life plays out. But luckily for Marvel, there’s a way they can have their cake and eat it too: legacy characters. Namely, a kid by the name of Miles Morales.

For those of you unacquainted, Miles Morales is the current star of the adjectiveless Spider-Man series written by Brian Michael Bendis. Originally starting off in the Ultimate Universe (an attempt at creating an edgy, youthful universe to counteract exactly what Quesada was talking about), Miles made the transition to the mainstream Marvel Universe to interact with the rest of the company’s stable of characters. So herein lies the problem: Miles Morales exists as a successor to the mantle of Spider-Man, and to recreate the teenaged high-school feel of the original AMS issues written by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko. That’s well and fine, except Peter’s entire status quo over the past ten years has been an attempt to do exactly the same thing. They’re trying to occupy the same niche, and as a result neither of them are fitting in well. Peter, like Miles, is perpetually single with relationships and love interests only really teased at, or existing as short term relationships at most. They try their best to keep their secret identities hidden from their loved ones. Of course, there are obvious differences. Miles is a high schooler, Peter is currently the CEO of his own megacorporation, Parker Industries.

You might think that sounds like character progression. Rest assured, it’s not. Peter is now an emotionally stunted manchild, but also a cut-rate Tony Stark. Unfortunately, lampshading that fact within the series itself did nothing to make the new status quo feel organic or even interesting. He’s had the company for less than a year and the tie-in to the next big Marvel event, Secret Empire, will see it all get torn down around his ears, returning Peter to his more well-known status quo of a single guy down on his luck.

So, my solution to this problem is actually very simple: Marvel needs to revisit the One More Day storyline in an arc written to undo the changes brought about by the event. Peter and Mary Jane’s marriage should be restored, Aunt May should either be allowed to die like the original storyline tried to avert or have her knowledge of Peter’s identity returned to her to more accurately recreate the status quo the character had before One More Day. Let Miles be the down-on-his-luck teenager that has to go through all the trials and tribulations of getting older. Let Peter be the adult that’s already gone through all of that, and deals with his own adult problems. Because ultimately, Spider-Man isn’t a story about being a teenager. It’s a story about growing up. And Peter, like it or not, has already grown up. There’s no point in trying to reset his characterization to his teenage self when there’s a teenage character ready and willing to take over that mantle. All that keeping the current narrative direction will do is push Miles further and further into irrelevance, and keep Peter from actually changing and evolving as a character. And frankly, neither Spider-Man deserves that fate.

#Marvel #Spider-Man #One More Day #Miles Morales

1 note · View note

aion-rsa · 6 years ago

Text

Dracula vs. The Marvel Universe! 14 Times The Lord of The Undead Fought Superheroes!

https://ift.tt/2AdEcKt

Hey, remember that time Dracula fought the Hulk? Or the X-Men? Or Spider-Man? No? Well, you're in luck, because we do!

facebook

twitter

google+

tumblr

Feature Marc Buxton

Dracula

Oct 16, 2018

Doctor Strange

Marvel

31 Days of Horror

In fact, Dracula has been the subject of 217 films, second only to the number of films starring Sherlock Holmes. But films, novels, and television aren't the only genres that have contained Dracula’s bloodlust. Comic books have been a compelling source for new Dracula material. Marvel Comics in particular have been a happy hunting ground for the Lord of the Vampires.

Amazon has all your Marvel Dracula needs

Dracula Meets Spider-Man

Giant Sized Spider-Man #1 (1974)

Buy it on Amazon

Allied with the Avengers (1973)

Avengers #118

further reading: The Weird History of Marvel Superheroes vs Monsters

The Creation of Baron Blood (1976)

Invaders #7

Dracula sends blood to England to punish the country for the actions of Dracula’s nemesis Jonathon Harker. As Baron Blood, Farnsworth fought the Invaders, Captain America, and even his own brother who adopted the heroic persona of the first Union Jack.

Available in - Invaders Classic: The Complete Collection Vol. 1

Dracula vs. Doctor Strange (1976)

Tomb of Dracula #44

further reading: Doctor Strange Comics Reading Order

You can read it here.

Dracula vs. Howard the Duck? (1980)

Howard the Duck Magazine #5

Not all Dracula appearances in the Marvel Universe are legendary but that doesn’t make them any less cool. The following is a treatise on why comics are awesome.

Howard is restored to his normal self and is actually able to stake Dracula before the vampire can feed off Howard’s hottie girlfriend, Beverly Switzer.

Dracula Joins The Defenders (1981)

Defenders #95

Ah, the Defenders. Long before they were edgy TV stars, they were the parking place for awesomely odd Bronze Age characters.

further reading: 13 Essential Dracula Performances

Dracula vs. The X-Men (1982)

Uncanny X-Men #159

further reading: Frankenstein - Comics' Greatest Monster

Dracula vs. Thor (1983)

Thor #332

The Death of a Legend (1983)

Doctor Strange #59-62

further reading: The Bleeding Heart of Dracula

Dracula vs. The Fantastic Four (2000-2001)

Before the Fantastic Four: The Storms

X-Men: Apocalypse vs. Dracula (2006)

You can read it here.

Dracula on the Moon (2009)

Captain Britain and MI:13 #10

Seriously, stop reading this and track down this storyline, we’ll wait.

Hulk vs. Dracula

An X feud renewed (2011)

X-Men: Curse of the Mutants

It's available on Amazon.

Read and download the Den of Geek NYCC 2018 Special Edition Magazine right here!

from Books https://ift.tt/2QWXcmj

#aion-rsa #Books

2 notes · View notes