Tagged: James Bond

Ed Catto: Whose Brand Is It, Anyway?

On a recent Saturday morning, I treated myself to yet another TV comic book show. But unlike Flash, or S.H.I.E.L.D., or iZombie or Arrow, this was an old one. TCM is showing episodes of the 1943 Batman movie serial. I’m sure you know about these serials. Long ago, kids would make weekly pilgrimages to the theater for cliffhanger style chapters of an adventure serial. Often it was shoehorned between a cartoon, a newsreel, and the main feature. During my recent TCM viewing, I was disappointed that the host didn’t offer any of his usual insightful perceptions.

BatmanSerial5This serial is important in “geek mythology” for all sorts of reasons, including the debut of the Bat Cave. But then a peculiar childhood memory was triggered. And I mused about how this peculiar incident was just a pale precursor to a big branding issue that seems to dominate today’s entertainment world: the struggle to understand who really owns a brand.

As a quick background, I was one of those kids who was influenced brainwashed by the 1966 Batman TV show. After just a few episodes, my brain exploded and my worldview was set forever. But when I become a teenager, a strange thing happened. At that time, I was reading those moody Batman comics of the seventies. It was at that point where I realized that the 66 Batman was ‘camp’, and it wasn’t the version of Batman that I was then enjoying. I wanted my version of Batman, or The Batman, to be serious, dark, and un-silly. I was essentially rejecting that horse I rode in on. I was cherry-picking from the different entertainment offerings what I felt was best for this brand called Batman.

Batman Serial 1943 ComicMixAnd, back then, there were no Chris Nolan or Tim Burton visions of Batman for the world at large to see. Everyone who wasn’t reading the comics equated Batman with the silly fun of POW/ZLONK/BOFF! My vision of the brand was in conflict with the brand understanding of the world at large.

And that’s about the time that my dad introduced me to the 1943 Batman serial. It was actually edited versions on Super 8 film. We’d show these on our home movie projector. Even though they didn’t have sound, they were glorious! Batman was purposeful and focused, whether he was slugging gangsters or flirting with the female lead. It was full of zombies and radium guns and cliffhangers. The bad guy even fed his enemies to crocodiles. (Who knew that the fella who was playing an evil Japanese stereotype would soon be a big hit during the golden age of radio playing a comedic Italian stereotype?)

batmanfortythree2Oh sure, Robin looked a little goofy, those pesky capes got in the way of brawling, and Batman’s ears made him look like the devil…but that was the all fine. He was foreboding and mysterious. The opening credits were somber and menacing. To me, as a teenager, this is what I wanted “my Batman” to be. I was creating my personal brand vision of Batman by combing the comics of the day with vintage movies. And it was in complete conflict with most of the country thought of as Batman.

And that’s exactly what’s happening in the passionate pocket universe of Geek Culture right now. Engaged fans each have their own vision of what a character or brand should be like. They then analyze, anguish and appraise the interpretations fed back to them. Fans want their brands the way they want them. Despite the fact that most comics are created by publishing professionals, and that most TV Shows/Movies are made by filmmaking professionals, Geek fans don’t trust these folks to handle their brands in the correct way. Instead, fans judge and speculate to see if the brand they are being offered fits with the brand they each think is the true brand. They don’t only judge a book by its cover; they judge the book by the preview of the cover.

Does this happen with other brands?

BATMAN-1943-Douglas-Croft-and-Lewis-WilsonCan you imagine years ago, readers making demands for, or clearly laying out their expectations, for Hemingway’s next book? Or could you imagine 1950s western fans outlining their expectations for the third season of Maverick? Can you imagine Ian Fleming monitoring fan buzz before writing the third or fourth James Bond novel? Of course not. He probably graciously nodded to friends’ cocktail party accolades, was amused that JFK was a fan, and then worked with his editor as he brought his vision of the character to life for the next adventure.

You could argue that fans grab onto the brand ownership in sports. That’s so much of what sports radio is all about. Fantasy Football is also a way to assume total ownership of the brands, and essentially cut out the corporate owners, albeit in parallel universe.

But it doesn’t really happen with traditional brands. Generally, Oreo fans don’t get indignant when the Oreo packaging and logo change. A small percentage do (trust me) but they are just that: a small percentage. The grocery store retailers don’t get mad because they can’t predict the correct quantities to order based on the new “rebooted” packaging for a particular cookie.

Recently, we’ve been teased by trailers for big entertainment movies like the new Star Wars, Mad Max and Batman vs. Superman. Closer in, in the comics world, fans have been offered glimpses of what the Marvel and DC universes will look like after their big summer events. These efforts seem to be the creators, or corporations, saying, “we have a plan, and this is what we’re going to do with your entertainment brand”. And then fans collectively ponder, predict, and prognosticate. Edicts are issued and judgments are rendered. Predictably, the folks in charge of the brand, at least legally and financially, reveal a little more and the cycle continues.

Of course, this all is just further evidence of the combatively symbiotic relationship of brand ownership for entertainment properties. The creators put forth their vision, and then the consumers render their judgment.

But who’s really in charge? Is it those who take the risks? Those who enter the arena of public opinion? Or are the people in charge really those who willingly offer their hard-earned dollars to support the brand? Those who give up their precious time to see what’s being served up?

I’m not sure if there’s an easy answer. I’m typically been on the side of the creators, but the entertainment world has changed since Ian Fleming was typing the James Bond thrillers. One thing I do know is that this all reinforces the notion of pop culture fans as important to branding conversations. Whether they are conversing about a recent reboot of DC’s Suicide Squad, or the new Dr. Pepper Avengers cans or upcoming shows on cable networks or the new Schick Hydro shaving cream, they have an opinion, have made themselves part of the conversation, and have a real ownership in all brands. And that makes it all more fun, doesn’t it

 

Martha Thomases: Defending Peter Pan

Over the weekend, film critic A. O. Scott wrote a long essay in The New York Times Magazine that irked me, and I wanted to use my column to unpack some of my feelings about it. If you have opinions about the state of modern pop culture, you might want to join me.

(I’m now going to paraphrase and reduce his arguments to the bones. By all means, read the entire piece for more nuance.)

Scott seems to think that the modern American adult, by his and her refusal to grow up, has had a deleterious effect on the popular arts. He specifically mentions “bromance” movies, like those produced by Judd Apatow, superhero movies, and adults who read young adult (YA) books like the Harry Potter series and The Hunger Games. In his opinion, the success of these genres means that we, as grown-ups, are rejecting our responsibilities.

As a tax-paying citizen who serves on jury duty, votes in every election, raised a productive citizen and volunteers in my community, I think I qualify as an adult in attitude as well as age. And I like all the things that Scott decries.

For the purposes of this column, I’m just going to talk about the books Scott talks about. You may assume I have parallel arguments about the other categories, and we can talk about this in the comments, if you like.

First of all, unless we are talking about marketing categories (as determined by publishers, booksellers and librarians), the YA category doesn’t make a lot of sense. When I was in middle school and high school, I read all kinds of books that were not considered to be YA. I read To Kill a Mockingbird, The Catcher in the Rye and The Old Man and the Sea, books that are often read by people in those age groups. I also read Giles Goat Boy by John Barth. I read James Bond and Ray Bradbury and Philip Roth. We can argue about the varying qualities of these books, but none were racked on the children’s shelves.

Today, my reading includes some of these writers, and Neil Gaiman, William Gibson, Neal Stephenson, J.K. Rowling and others who some may perceive to write for non-adults. I enjoy some genre fiction.

And I enjoy comic books. Lots of comic books.

Scott seems to think that graphic novels are not as intellectually demanding as prose novels. Like many, I think he confuses the medium of graphic storytelling with the genre of superhero comics. There are certainly books appropriate for the average young adult, such as March. And there are books that are not easily understood by those who haven’t had a certain amount of real-world experience, such as V for Vendetta or Promethea, which require at least some knowledge of history, linguistics, and adult relationships.

Please note: By adult relationships I mean actual relationships between adults, and not just sex. Thinking the word “adult” only refers to sex is actually kind of adolescent.

Now, I don’t really care what Scott thinks about my personal entertainment preferences. While we know some of the same people, I’m not likely to ever meet him, nor would I begin a conversation by attacking this particular essay.

And I don’t think he’s entirely wrong. Baby Boomers in general don’t like growing up, and we have clung to the remnants of our youth with a death-grip. We can be really obnoxious in our attempts to stay relevant, to the detriment of our popular culture.

Still, that is no reason to dismiss examples of popular culture because they come dressed in the costumes of youth and fantasy. After all, for nearly two centuries grown-ups have taught us that you can’t judge a book by its cover.

 

Weekend Window Closing Wrap-Up: December 14, 2012

saulbassh3qo2hrf-4676066

Closing windows on our desktops so you can you open them on yours. Here we go…

 

Anything else? Consider this an open thread.

 

Gerry Anderson’s Gemini Force 1 Heads To Kickstarter

  • News
  • September 5, 2013

GF1-logo-trans

Based on concepts and story written by Gerry Anderson, a new adventure series from the creator of Thunderbirds and Space: 1999 will be funded by his fans via a Kickstarter campaign starting September 5th.

Gemini Force One (or GF1) is, as the Anderson Estate describes it, “the story of a secret organization involved in rescues and averting disasters and terrorist events”. Gerry began work on it back in 2008, but was unable to complete development due to his advancing Alzheimer’s Disease, which led to his passing at the end of last year.

The project has been planned as a series of adventure novels, the first of which will be completed by best-selling author MG Harris, writer of The Joshua Files, under the guidance of Gerry’s son Jamie, who is spearheading the project.  Harris has experience with popular science fiction series; she’s just recently completed a new Blake’s 7 adventure for Big Finish Productions.  Television, film and other media development will follow, based on the success of the book series.  The GF1 vehicles, a cornerstone of any Anderson series, will be designed by Andrew Probert
(Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica) and Dominic Lavery (New Captain Scarlet, James Bond, Event Horizon);

GF1 will be fan-funded with a Kickstarter campaign, with the first book scheduled to be completed and released to backers in April of next year, leading up to a full launch in August, coinciding with the 50th anniversary of his most famous series, Thunderbirds..  The campaign will provide the project with the funds for an initial print run, an audio-book edition, and a major media campaign.

The Anderson estate sees the project as a way to reach not only Gerry’s current fans, but a new generation of fans. Gerry lost the rights to many of his series in the 60s and 70s, and as such, never benefited properly as they grew into global cult favorites. With the renewed popularity of young-adult fiction, a new adventure series from such a franchise name seems like a good bet for success all around.

Details of the campaign, including backer awards, are available at www.gerryanderson.co.uk/GF1

Dennis O’Neil: Iron Man Grows Up

oneil-art-130516-2774612I think I know what I liked about Tony Stark when I first encountered him back in Cape Girardeau. I was a cheap-seats journalist who was just rediscovering comic books after forgetting about them for more than a decade, spinning the rack at the drug store, scanning the displays in the bus terminal, killing time in a strange town by reading these relics of my childhood. And liking them.

I particularly enjoyed some of the mags that bore the Marvel Comics logo, and among these, staple-to-staple with Spider-Man, The Hulk, The Avengers – the beginnings of Marvel pantheon – was Tales of Suspense, a title that delivered two stories, two heroes. These were Captain America, a super-patriot I dimly remember enjoying when I was six or seven, and a new guy, Iron Man. His other name was Tony Stark.

There was a lot not to like about ol’ shellhead, as he was sometimes called. Let me count the ways… He was an arms dealer and, to a peacenik like I was, arms dealers belonged somewhere deep in hell. He was a capitalist. (Okay, nowhere near as bad as being an arms dealer, but I did not count the Rockefellers among my role models.) He was a technologist and, like a lot of hippie-types, I did not trust technology. (There is evidence that technology has been exacting revenge ever since. Note to technology: I was wrong, okay?) And finally: it was suggested, though maybe not much shown, that our Tony was both a conspicuous consumer and a womanizer. Two more nixes.

A lot not to like.

But he got his powers from a device he invented to deal with a heart damaged by shrapnel. For some reason, that appealed to me. I’m pretty sure that I’d never read the story of the centaur Chiron – Catholic schools in the 50s were not big on “pagan” mythology – and so I didn’t know the tale of the half-man/half-beast who was wounded by a venom-tipped arrow and could never be healed. Chiron was a great teacher but what qualifies him as a possible predecessor of Iron Man is that he later gave up his life to redeem Prometheus and that gives him hero cred. (The other side of the story is that Chiron, being immortal, was doomed to countless eons of agony because of that damned wound and he could have seen the Prometheus situation as a quickhop off the struggle bus. But he never really existed, so mind.) Anyway: even with twisting and tugging of the myth, it’s hard to make a case for a direct connection between Tony and Chiron, and yet Chiron was the closest analogy to Iron Man I could find. Why bother? Because maybe by rummaging around in antiquity, I’ll be able to figure out why I responded favorably to an tin-plated lounge lizard.

Later, Tony redeemed himself and became a good guy I could like without those nagging reservations. But those first meetings…Well, I liked womanizing assassin James Bond, too. Still do.

FRIDAY: Martha Thomases

SATURDAY: Marc Alan Fishman

 

AIRSHIP’S LATEST RELEASE DEBUTS! GHOST BOY!

  • News
  • February 17, 2013

Airship 27 Productions announces the release of their second title for 2013, GHOST BOY. 
ghost-boyb-7224839
The during the 1960s America was locked in a tense Cold War with the Soviet Union, Ian Fleming’s James Bond unleashed a spy craze and the Beatles swept across American shores with their version of new pop-rock and roll.  Meanwhile American comics had entered into the Silver Age with the birth of Marvel Comics.  Every week new titles seem to proliferate drug store magazine racks. 
Now Airship 27 Productions has dug deep into those long forgotten comic vaults to revive Jigsaw Comics’ odd-ball hero, GHOST BOY.  Created in 1964 by writer Art Croxton and artist Ric Sippo, the short lived series starred young Alex Conroy as the top agent of S.O.S (Science Operational Security) who is possessed with strange superhuman abilities. His best friend was an eight foot robot called P.O.P.S (Photoelectric Optimal Protection Sentry). 
Writers Terry Alexander, Micah Harris and Andrew Salmon recapture the fun and magic of this 60s forgotten character and offer up four brand new adventures. As an extra bonus, Ron Fortier and artist Gary Kato recreate the origin tale of GHOST BOY in a special 9 pg strip which kicks off this thrilling collection all gathered under a gorgeous cover by Laura Givens.
Comics fans rejoice, GHOST BOY is back! 
“Actually he never left,” explains Airship 27 Productions’ Managing Editor Ron Fortier with a mischievous grin in his eyes.  “That’s because there never was such a title and this particular project is in reality our homage to those wonky Silver Age comics we all grew up loving.”  Fortier goes on to explain the idea came about when the company looked into adapting an authentic 60s comic series only to discover the property was still under license.  “That’s when we collectively had this idea to make-up our own comic hero from that decade and see if could recapture the odd-ball exuberant charm those books contained.  We will let our readers judge if we’ve succeeded or not.”
AIRSHIP 27 PRODUCTIONS – PULP FICTION FOR A NEW GENERATION!

Available now at Create Space –
(https://www.createspace.com/4176057)
As a PDF download from our website for only $3.
(http://robmdavis.com/Airship27Hangar/index.airshipHangar.html#ghostboy)
Within another week on Amazon proper and Kindle.
And within two weeks at (www.IndyPlanet.com)

Volunteers to Assemble Skyfall Care Packages Next Week

Some Thoughts on SkyfallMetro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios and Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment are partnering with Operation Gratitude to launch the care package initiative “Operation Skyfall” in honor of the February 12 Blu-ray and DVD release of 007’s latest adventure.

Beginning at 10:00 a.m. Feb. 12 at the Army National Guard armory in Van Nuys, California, volunteers including military families, war veterans, fans and more will be on hand to assemble up to 7,000 Skyfall branded care packages to be sent to active duty soldiers overseas. The packages will include personal care items such as body wash, deodorant, shaving cream and other toiletries and will feature a DVD copy of the explosive 23rd installment of the James Bond franchise, Skyfall.

“Skyfall is the most popular Bond film ever made and an action-packed film like this can really boost morale with our troops overseas,” said Operation Gratitude founder Carolyn Blashek. “Operation Gratitude has been supporting our servicemen and women for 10 years and this partnership was a great opportunity to provide some much needed entertainment along with toiletries and personal letters that our Military heroes greatly enjoy.”

Bond fans in Southern California are encouraged to come out and support “Operation Skyfall” by helping assemble the packages the morning of February 12 in Van Nuys. For more information on how to volunteer please OpGratVolunteer1@yahoo.com.

Fans can also send donations in the name of “Operation Skyfall” directly to Operation Gratitude by visiting www.OperationGratitude.com.

In Skyfall Bond’s loyalty to M (Judi Dench) is tested as her past returns to haunt her. With MI6 now compromised from both inside and out, M is left with one ally she can trust: Bond. 007 takes to the shadows – aided only by field agent, Eve (Naomie Harris) – following a trail to the mysterious Silva (Javier Bardem), whose lethal and hidden motives have yet to reveal themselves.

RANKING THE JAMES BOND FILMS, PART 3: THE TOP 3!

  • News
  • December 22, 2012

So today we finish up my rankings of all 23 of the Eon Productions JAMES BOND films, with the TOP THREE overall.

We looked at numbers 23-14 here and at numbers 13-4 here.
Remember, folks–stuff like this is entirely subjective.  We’re (mostly) talking my favorites, not the “greatest” or “highest grossing” or whatever.  This represents my views.

Without further ado, then, here are my three favorite Bond films, in order:

oddjob-9634852

3. Goldfinger

Hard to argue against this one, which really does have almost everything. I had it ranked second until yesterday when I re-watched it, and found it oddly disappointing in places.  My main complaint is that, given the larger scope of this one than its predecessors, Goldfinger’s scheme is not quite up to the world-ending level of many of the others—but that’s probably just me.  The middle is sort of dull, too, while Bond plays golf and then is held prisoner in Kentucky.  But the Aston Martin goes a long way–even if he never quite gets to use it as creatively as we might have liked.  And so does Honor Blackman (and “Jill Masterson” at the start ain’t bad, either). Odd Job is iconic.  And it has probably the second or third best theme song, too–and the most iconic.  It’s a great Bond movie.

fromrussia-2019574

from-russia-with-love-gun2-4674074
2. From Russia with Love
A simple, straight-ahead spy movie with vivid characters and great action.  Bond’s Turkish ally, Kerim Bey, remains a favorite, and Robert Shaw as the SMERSH assassin is very cool–is he the only actor to have fought both James Bond and (the shark) Jaws?! The visuals of Istanbul and along the European rail line are gorgeous—as was the leading lady, Daniela Bianchi.  The theme song is great–and, interestingly, doesn’t appear (with lyrics) in the opening credit sequence; it’s only at the end.  The story sticks just close enough to the novel to make it a tight, taut thriller rather than an over-the-top spectacle.  And you can’t beat a catfight in a Gypsy camp.

you-only-live-twice-girls-8808715

1. You Only Live Twice

The prototype for seemingly half the rest of the franchise, with the original “supervillain base in a volcano.” Japan in the 1960s provides a great backdrop and Tiger Tanaka is rivaled only by Kerim Bey of “From Russia with Love” as Bond’s greatest “regional ally.”  Is it over-the-top, much of the way?  Sure.  Does the plot make sense?  Not a lot of it, no.  Will many criticize me for this choice?  Probably.  But it’s my list, and this one has always been my favorite.  And it has my favorite theme song of all, to boot.  This one is my favorite.

youonlylivetwiceart-9474923

So there you have my entire list–all 23 Bond films from Eon, in the order I like them (or don’t like them).  

Be sure to visit www.whiterocketbooks.com to listen to our James Bond podcast episode (or find it on iTunes) and also to check out the many great books we have available.  Thanks for reading!

Ranking the James Bond Films, Part One: Numbers 23-14

  • News
  • December 20, 2012

Having read through Peter Travers’ travesty of a ranking of all the James Bond films, I decided the only thing to do was to create my own, much more accurate list in response.  That’s a little joke, of course, because it’s all subjective–few topics get fans more fired up than ranking any series of anything, and especially Bond movies.  But I’ve been watching Bond movies for four-plus decades; I grew up on them, as is my little daughter even now.  (Yesterday we finished her first viewing of “Dr. No” and she loudly demanded that we continue on into “Goldfinger!”)  So here is how I see them, beginning with what I view as the TEN WORST BOND MOVIES OF ALL:

23. A View to a Kill

Simply a wretched film under any circumstances, and the worst of the Roger Moore series—which is saying something.  I’ve watched it several times, and can’t get those hours of my life back, I’m afraid.  There’s virtually nothing redeeming about this movie.  Moore is a thousand years old.  Duran Duran does the theme song.  Dear lord.  It’s all just dreadful.
22. Octopussy

While overall not as terrible as “A View to a Kill,” it contains the single worst moment in any of the films: James Bond, in full clown makeup, pleading for someone in a circus audience to take him seriously and believe him that an atomic bomb is counting down toward detonation.  And they’re all laughing at him. YOU DON’T EVER LAUGH AT BOND.  Except, y’know, when he’s making one of his little dry jokes.  Just horrible.
21. License to Kill

Watching Dalton is as exciting as watching a layer of paint dry on your secret underground supervillain volcano lair, and the film looks more like a made-for-TV movie from the mid-1980s than a big-budget blockbuster.  Even “Dr. No,” made for about a buck fifty, looked more “epic” than this.  And a drug lord and his cartel–big in the Eighties as far as bad guys go–just seems so “yesterday” now.
20. Die Another Day

The parts are all there for a great Bond film–particularly the Korean DMZ opening, a locale we hadn’t seen before in any of the Bond films, and a very logical one for him to be seen at–but they came together in such a depressing way that this movie actually made me ready for Pierce Brosnan’s run as Bond to die thisday.  And that says a lot, considering he is my favorite Bond.

19. The Man with the Golden Gun

What seemed in the mid-1970s as an amazing spectacle—the fantastic Christopher Lee as the assassin “Scaramanga,” with his literal “golden gun,” flying car, and island base complete with lasers and fake Bond in the shooting gallery—now seems supremely cheesy.  Still, it did serve as sort of a backdoor pilot for “Fantasy Island,” so we’ll at least give it credit for that.  “The plane! The plane!”
18. The Living Daylights

While Timothy Dalton is the dullest Bond of all (and those who say he’s like the Bond of the books must be reading different books than I have), and while there are parts of the film that induce cringes to this day (toy soldiers shooting at Bond? Really?), it’s still tons better than Dalton’s other outing in the role.  Seeing Bond on the Rock of Gibraltar at the start was a nice touch.  Not horrible, but a far cry from “great.”
17. The World is Not Enough

As is true to one degree or another with all four of the Brosnan films, the pieces are there, but it doesn’t quite come together.  Love the villain; like the plot; don’t like the execution of any of it.  Denise “Nucular” Richards gets routinely trashed for her “contributions” to this film, and rightfully so; her performance in the final reel is the cruddy cherry on top.
16. Moonraker

Another that I have a particular soft spot for.  While the return of Jaws—in his new, comedic role—nearly sinks the picture, and while the plot is a virtual Xerox copy of the previous film, “The Spy Who Loved Me,” but in space rather than underwater, the deliciously understated Hugo Drax and the astronauts-with-laser-guns battle at the end save this movie for me.  Sort of.
15. Quantum of Solace

Parts of this movie—Craig’s performance, the whole “Quantum” bit that seemed to be setting up a modern-day SPECTRE, the theater sequence where he talks to the baddies over their communications link—border on spectacular.  Everything else (from Mr. Green to the Latin American dictator) slides over into the ridiculous.  The plotline involving Green’s girlfriend makes no sense whatsoever.  A huge letdown of a movie.
14. The Spy Who Loved Me

Others think very highly of this movie, but I am not the Viewer Who Loved It.  Part of it is personal, based on the circumstances under which I first saw it.  (It was 1977 and I wanted to see “Star Wars;” my brother wanted to see this.  He won.  I had to wait months longer to see “Star Wars.”) Part of it is that I’m not remotely intrigued by Barbara Bach.  Part of it is that, to borrow a phrase from Queen, “Jaws was never my speed.”  Hate me if you want, haters, but this one doesn’t do a lot for me.  Do like the underwater Lotus, though.
Back soon with numbers 13-4!  Then we’ll finish up with the three best of all.
If you loved –or hated–this list, please check out my weekly podcast, The White Rocket Podcast, where a special guest and I sit down each week for a one-on-one conversation about some topic (such as James Bond books and movies!) of interest to Pulp, comics, SF and pop culture fans in general.
You can follow me on Twitter: @VanAllenPlexico and find me on Facebook as “Van Allen Plexico.”  And my main web site is www.plexico.net.
See you next time!

Dennis O’Neil: Movies, Comics, and Heroes

oneil-art-121129-2964854Okay, first another bow toward my friend and colleague, John Ostrander. No sense in reviewing Skyfall, the new James Bond flick, since, in his November 18th column, John already wrote virtually everything I might have written about the entertainment. Let us agree: best Bond ever, for the reasons John cited.

It’s been a banner year for this kind of show, hasn’t it? We had two of the best superheroes – no, let’s not be mealy mouthed, Marvel’s Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises were, though quite different, the best superhero movies yet. (You want to disagree? Fine. This is only my opinion and, doggone it, I’ve misplaced my cloak of infallibility. Wonder if I could borrow the pope’s…) I think there’s been, among media types, a discernible learning curve. They have learned how to do this kind of material really well. Not that all such material is really good, but now there is the possibility of it being as good as anything out there. And, maybe more important, there has arisen the consensus that it ought to be good; no need to phone it in just because it’s that comic book stuff.

Reasons? Hey, do I look like a savant? Let’s just make one guess and hurry on.  The guess: for the past couple of decades, many (if not most?) of the bright, creative kids have been comics readers. The form is familiar to them and they’re friendly to it. “Of course the movies can be good,” they might say. “Why wouldn’t they be good?”

The first Hollywood guys who tried adapting comics to the screen were on unfamiliar turf; to the current guys it’s home territory.

That was the guess, plus addenda. Now, the moving on, in the form of a confession: When I was a drifting, quasi-beatnik/peacenik, still on the south side of the dreaded 30, Bond was a Guilty Pleasure. A peacenik buddy (who was not as quasi as I was) and I saw the movies, first run, and enjoyed the action and adventure and romance and pretty females – all the Bondian delights – but! There was what I thought was an unhealthy glorification of consumerism – no, whoever has the most toys when he dies doesn’t always wins – and this aspect is, blessedly, almost absent from Skyfall. The other guilt-inducer was a bit thornier: wasn’t James Bond a fascist?

Sure, the word “fascist” has been tossed around and in the process lost some precision, but it usually involves unquestioning obedience to some authority figure, presumably for the common good. (Has any leader ever claimed to act for the common bad?) Strongly implicit in this conduct is that the authority figure gets to decide what the good is. So enter Bond: His friendly neighborhood authority figure, M, tells him to go commit bloody mayhem and he does. No questioning of right or wrong–just do the mayhem, often merrily. Recent history has demonstrated the inadvisability of blind obedience to the boss.

Again, we can pretty much find Skyfall innocent. The authoritarianism is muted, and neither Bond nor M seem to be happy about the mayhem. And they both seem fallible.

Maybe this kind of analysis is bringing too much baggage to what is, after all, just show-biz. But I’m glad I did it 50 years ago, and I don’t think it’s unhealthy to do it now.

FRIDAY: Martha Thomases

 

Categories

Archives

Everything you need to make great comics!

comicmix-pro-300x69-2

Nucleus X

Bookshop Zaks