Tagged: Mindy Newell

John Ostrander: That Time of Year

ostrander-art-131110-150x108-3720871The other night, My Mary and I were looking for something to watch on the tube. She had recorded Fly Away Home, the 1996 film by Carroll Ballard, starring Jeff Daniels, Dana Delaney, Anna Pacquin and Terry Kinney. We’ve watched it many times and I think we even own a copy of it. It’s wonderfully acted and beautifully shot; if you ever watch it, try to see it in wide screen. Some of the shots of Canadian Geese flying are breathtaking.

One of the things that struck me (again) was Mark Isham’s soundtrack and the haunting song that opens and closes the film, 10,000 Miles, sung by Mary Chapin Carpenter. (You can find it on YouTube, along with the lyrics.) It was one of the pieces of music that I played over and over again during that year of grieving after my wife, Kim Yale, died. Music was, and is, one of my coping mechanisms in life and hearing that song brought me back, not to Kim’s life or death, but that time of grieving, of learning to live without her, of starting my life again. Not to the grief itself but to the memory of that grief.

It’s that time of year. Here in the Midwest, the leaves fall from the trees, the days get shorter and darker, it’s colder as we head towards year’s end. Labor Day comes, signaling an end to summer. We lurch towards Halloween and All Saints Day (or Day of the Dead) with its skulls and ghosts and reminders of mortality. The harvest comes in and the fields look bare even as we celebrate Thanksgiving. Christmas is coming, yes, but so is Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year. The cycle completes as the old year dies and a new one begins.

It’s not grief I feel now but a rise of melancholy. It’s always a part of me and, I think, always has been. I’m not sure of its origins – I went to many wakes and funerals as a boy, seeing people in caskets who I had known when they were alive, and I know it made an impression on me. I wouldn’t say that I treasure my melancholy but I do value it. I’m aware of death as part of life and that, I think, has informed my work as a writer. I enjoy life immensely and I don’t wallow in melancholy. It is simply there, a constant, and it makes me value those who are there and the joys and pleasures of life. Knowing they will all pass doesn’t make me depressed. Shadows help define an object and my melancholies help define my joys.

Every morning, I see a photo of my Dad sitting atop a shelf that he made for me and my brother when we were boys and I say, “Hi Dad.” I remember him and I miss him and I still love him just as I remember and miss and still love my Mom and Kim and friends and relatives and even pets. I miss places that are no longer there. They all still live in my mind and heart and I still know their stories. They all still have a value to me and are still helping to shape me into who I am.

It’s that time of year to remember and feel, to harvest our emotions, and value what we have. That’s what I’ll be thankful for as we approach Thanksgiving – the shadows as well as the light.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

fishman-art-150x186-1751555

Marc Alan Fishman: R.I.P. Collect-ability

fishman-art-150x186-1751555A fine friend of mine – a comic shop retailer, convention promoter, and all around great geek – tasked me with a topic for the week: the death of collect-ability. As a collector himself, my friend postulated that “[It seems like] Marvel Comics no longer has any ongoing series, and everything they create now is a limited series.” Interesting thought, no?

For those paying close attention to the racks these days (which I admit I’ve not… but more on that later), they’d note that within the big two, no issue is numbered over the forties. Between Marvel NOW and the New 52, the industry has taken a shine to newness as the gimmick du jour. Gone are the long-running series that toppled in the hundreds before they were relaunched into new volumes. Serious collectors would amass each issue into their glorious bags and boards, stacks, and boxes.

Devotees of the X-Men, Fantastic Four, Action Comics, or Detective Comics would “ride the run” as it were. Through the high times and low, the collector made a simple statement: I want all of this. When the volume ended, a new line in the Overstreet is made and thus, said geek has the ability to opt out and move on. It might also be appropriate to hypothesize that when a volume ended, it did so not at the height of its quality or popularity. As my buddy Triple H might say? It’s always about what’s best for business.

Let us dive into that then, shall we? As a retailer, a #1 is a boon for business. It’s the universal jumping on point for a reader. Sales charts proclaimed that the New 52 was an initial success. As were several gimmicks revolving around funny numbers. Marvel NOW got into the same tactics, albeit under slower pretenses. At the end of the day though, all the ongoing series now sit in their infancy, and it is perhaps leading to an antsy fan base changing titles the way they surf the Internet. Keep producing #1s and you spark the base for a quick jolt of sales each time. The same way TV launches their seasons of new shows. The same way movie studio reboot and relaunch franchises when they want guaranteed money.

I personally am not getting any book with Wolverine in it. I freely admit though that when I see a new Wolverine #1 with a new team I stop and think “maybe I should get in on that kooky Logan business…” Hell, whilst driving home from the New York Comic Con, my Unshaven cohort declared that Matt Fraction was going to write a new Silver Surfer series. Given that I loved the new Defenders mini he did (which I bought, oddly enough, because it was a #1 and I was low on books to buy that week it debuted…), there I sat, hands on the wheel thinking that it’d be worth a try. By the way, I hate the Silver Surfer. He defeated Kyle Rayner in Marvel Vs. DC in the 90’s and I’ve never forgiven him. Yet, the allure of a #1 and a creative team I like is enough to sway my snarky heart. Scary, no?

My unnamed pal noted his sadness that his newer customers would “never get to experience of watching a series / character / creative team grow”, and those words ring true. Ron Marz’s run on Green Lantern anchored my teen years. By watching Rayner grow from a newbie ring-slinger to the true torchbearer of the corps, I built a life-long love of the character. Do I feel the same way about any character I’ve read in the last several years? Hardly.

I love the Superior Spider-Man right now, but I know that love is entirely fleeting. Much as I’d hoped Dick Grayson would hold the cape and cowl of his mentor for more than a hot minute, I knew that the industry I wallow in is one of transitory entertainment. Nothing lasts longer than the sales figures allow them to. When Walt Disney’s petulant corpse and the unseen Brothers Warner loom in the darkness with gluttonous desire, the idea that a paltry four dollar rag be given years to find a voice and mature is as impossible as a mouse actually piloting a steamboat. It’s a small world after all, and it doesn’t run on dreams and candy. It runs on movie and merchandise revenue. Comics these days serve their purpose more for maintaining rights, and collecting otaku for monetary tribute. The business model for doing that simply doesn’t take into account anything more than a bottom line in the black.

One thing I’d be remiss to mention here is how my very own studio has thought of production. Our Samurnauts concept was built to be presented as a maxi-series of mini-series… if that makes any sense. Knowing our audience as we did when we started, it was hard to not want to make everything last only long enough to make it into a trade. Then slap a new #1 on the next mini, and make everyone start back at the beginning. Simply put? When I walk past an indie table, and see a series past even four issues? I’m already walking past for fear of the costly barrier to entry. While the series itself may be absolutely amazing, as a fan, I freely admit that I’m always less likely to buy-in when I know there’s a backload of material to catch up on. Comics aren’t seasons of shows on Hulu or Netflix; they’re commitments of dollars, and as such I’ve ended up becoming a slave to newness.

I open the argument to you, the people of the court. Are Marvel and DC doing you wrong by continued experimentation, relaunching, and ADHD production? Or do you like the idea that you’re never too far away from a jumping on point? Do you find the pulp of today to be too transitive, or do you like to consume your sequential fiction one micro-series at a time?

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

 

Marc Alan Fishman: New York, New York

fishman-art-131012-150x116-6493724After a quick li’l jaunt across the lovely Midwest, Unshaven Comics has arrived in fabulous New York City. Well, technically, we’re in New Jersey. Is it as fabulous? Time will tell. At very least, our swell hosts have shown us nothing but the finest hospitality. Is it New Jersey tradition to spit in your guests faces and declare “Welcome to Jersey, fuck face!”?

So why the long trip? Well, we’re about to embark on the second largest convention in North America. The New York Comic Con boasts an audience five times the size of the largest con we’ve attended to date. While we’ve been conning for over five years now, NYCC will perhaps show us what an audience of serious mass will look like. Our game plan isn’t any different; we stand, we pitch, we smile, we sell. And we’ll be doing it alongside our ComicMix cohorts. Suffice to say, we’re excited.

New York is not just a city. It’s the city. Marvel has built its entire comic continuity around the damned city. Except the West Coast Avengers, and well, who cares about them? They don’t even care about themselves. And why not?

What I saw on our trip, in-between bouts of getting lost on one of the 7,986 turnpikes in the area, is beautiful. The NYC skyline is a thing of beauty. It’s no Chicago mind you, but hey… this is the concrete jungle where dreams are made of. So says Jay Z. Chicago only has R. Kelly and Kanye, and well, I’ll take Hova over them any day. But I digress. (note: I’m taking complete credit for ComicMixers coining this phrase. I stole it from my choir director in high school, and in turn they stole it from me. Nyah nyah boo boo.)

New York’s Comic Con is run by Reed, the same company who brought us (Unshaven that is) to C2E2. That convention, held in downtown Chicago, has been the toast of the town for three years running. While we’ve seen more production on our sales goals at Wizard World, to be frank, C2E2 gives us both decent sales and amazing exposure. Whilst here in the city that never sleeps (which makes sense, since the drivers are far more cranky than we friendly and amazing Chicagoans), we expect to see the best of both worlds. With expected attendance that dwarves R2D2, and a guest list that reads more like the old Wizard Top Ten lists of yesteryear, Unshaven Comics is getting access to the best fans we could ask for; people there to meet their favorite creators, with an open mind to find something new. Given that our east coast exposure has been limited to a pair of Baltimore Comic-Cons, we’re basically brand new to the biggest city in the world. And Unshaven Comics does well with being new.

By the time you read this, we’ll be in the thick of it. A four-day show is a major undertaking. We’ll be behind our table, hurling books left and right. If you’re still in the area, make sure you come out and say hello. Or you know… “Hello, fuck face!”

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

Marc Alan Fishman: The Diamond Exchange

fishman-art-131005-150x110-2579912The other day I was conversing with a friend on the ol’ Facebook chat (can I call it the ol’ Facebook chat?), and he lamented to me that he recently took on a pro-bono position designing a video game largely due to the inspiration of me and Unshaven Comics. I was floored. I was touched. I had a hard time not laughing. Not in jest mind you, but because after seven years of making books… it doesn’t feel like I’m in all that different a place. Why? Well, let’s look at the cold hard facts:

Unshaven Comics sells its wares exclusively at conventions. It’s not to increase the collectibility either. It’s because we couldn’t possibly afford to tackle the direct market. At all. Don’t believe me? Well, about the only way one can get their books offered on the racks of the local comic shop is to be in the Previews catalog put out by the Diamond Comic Distributors company. Diamond makes it insanely easy to do this. A publisher simply makes up a preview (heh!) of their issue they want to solicit in the catalog, and submit it, alongside some paperwork, to their headquarters. Then, the publisher sells their stock, wholesale, to Diamond with 60-75% discount off of the cover price. How many issues? Well, Diamond doesn’t say exactly… but you must ultimately meet their sales expectations in enough time in order to continue working with them. And that’s only after they approve your application. Still with me?

It takes roughly six months between the time a publisher first contacts Diamond to when you actually receive monies back from an order. Now, in simplest terms, this means Unshaven Comics would have to have the capital to pay for whatever orders come through the Previews catalog and then wait another month to see about 40% of our cover price come back in the door. And for those not familiar with printing these days, allow me to be blunt: Unless you’re printing thousands of books, your per-book price for a full color, 36 page book, where you charge a fan $5, leaves you with less then half of that coming back as profit. Suffice to say, we put out comics because we love connecting with fans, and are hopeful that it will one day lead to something bigger and better. If we tried to go to Diamond with our current printer, we’d see about twenty-five cents for every comic we sold.

And we haven’t even talked about marketing and promotion! Just because your publishing company is accepted into Diamond does not mean you get a big flashy full-page ad in Previews, enticing comic shops to order. In fact, we would have to sell 2000 books in order to break even with the smallest possible ad. It’s a sad fact: A comic shop in LA, New York, or hell… even our own damn backyard (Chicago, baby) wouldn’t have any clue who we are. We’re not a name to the common comic shop frequenter. While we’ve attended about 40 – 50 conventions in the time we’ve been a company, there’s no chance in hell we’ve saturated even the pit stains of the market. And that translates into the cold hard truth: A comic shop that hasn’t heard of us (even with an ad) is unlikely to purchase anything from Previews from us.

So now, in order to sell to those retailers, we have to market ourselves to them as well. If we took out a small bank loanand marketed ourselves properly, we might just stand a chance.

Are you as excited about all this as I am?

The reality is this: Almost a decade ago, I attended the then-beloved Wizard World Chicago show. I waited until the end of the DC previews panel and boldly walked up to Dan DiDio and asked what it would take in order to write for him and DC. He smiled and said “Well, get noticed. We don’t really look for writers.” I figured a great way to get noticed would be to capture the zeitgeist on my own. Well, seven years later, and that still feels far out of touch.

That being said, Unshaven Comics is not without the teeniest bit of clout. We’ve grown our gross sales by 86% in the past year. And the year before that? 69%. That’s actual calculated growth. We’ve been to the largest conventions in the Midwest, and in another week we’ll be at the second largest convention of the nation – New York Comic Con (at the ComicMix table, nyuck, nyuck, nyuck). We successfully funded our own Kickstarter. All in all, we’re doing pretty well for ourselves, even if we are in fact a spec on a blip on a fart cloud somewhere around the outskirts of the industry we love so much. And we’ve done all of that without tackling the only player in the distribution game.

It’s nothing to hang a beard on, but it’s enough to inspire our friends to do great things. I don’t think we could ask for more.

If you want to help Unshaven Comics, do us a solid by voting for us in the Intuit Small Business Big Game Contest. If we win? We actually get a commercial about us during the Super Bowl! No e-mail hoarding. No registration necessary. Just click here for a vote.

 SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander: Fashion Statements

supermaninatux-3138530My good friend Martha Thomases, as usual, wrote an interesting column this week on her way to the Baltimore Con. She wrote about choosing what to wear at the Con and that, in turn, set me to thinking and provided grist for my own essay mill. Some weeks I need a lot of grist.

Something that’s important in comics and too little discussed is the importance of clothes. The fashion choices made by a character says something about that character. What you wear makes a statement about who you are even if that statement is, “I don’t care.” As often as not, my criterion still is, “Is it clean? Is it clean-ish? Does it at least not smell? Does it not smell too badly?”

However, I can dress up. I clean up fairly well, to be honest. I’m not keen on wearing ties but I know how and when to do so. I like hats, especially fedoras, although the Irish cloth cap works well on me. One wonderful fan made me a beret like GrimJack wears and I like that a lot and can be seen at conventions with it.

Some people dress for success. Some people dress to be invisible. Choices are made even when it appears to be a non-choice. If you say, “I don’t care how I look; I don’t think it’s important,” that’s a choice. It says something and don’t bother maintaining that it doesn’t or shouldn’t matter. It does. We make up our minds about people right away depending on how they appear to us. They do the same with us. Assuming the phrase, “Dress for the job you want, not for the job you have.” Is true, why is it true? The answer is we want people to perceive us in a certain way even if our goal is not to be perceived, to blend in.

When I was working with student artists, I wanted them to look at different source materials for the way people dressed. Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne would be more likely to dress out of GQ whereas Peter Parker might dress from the Old Navy store.  Here’s an extra-points question – how would Tony Stark dress differently from Bruce Wayne? Bruce’s suits are a costume for the playboy image he plays whereas Tony’s wardrobe is who he is (and, yes, I’m including the Iron Man costume).

Certain costumes can be a short-hand to who the character is – in Westerns, it used to be the good guys wore the white hats and the bad guys wore the black hats. Made things simple – an oversimplification, really. Clothing and costumes can describe a character but they can’t be substituted for characterization itself.

Clothing can reveal character: who the individual is, how they think of themselves, how they present an image of themselves. We do it (deny it if you want) and so characters do it as well. What’s true in life should be true on the page.

A very fun aspect of this in the past few years has been the rising importance of cosplay (costume playing for those of you who don’t know the term) as part of fandom. Fans become the characters they see in the comics or on the screen. The costumes can be elaborate or silly or elaborately silly or anywhere in that spectrum. They’ve become fixtures at most conventions these days and are often stunning. They’re a merger of the person who is wearing the costume and the character they represent.

Whether it’s in a drawing or in prose, clothes can make the character and if you want to work as an artist or a writer, you’d do well to remember that.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

John Ostrander on… The Substitute!

ostrander-art-130811-8170175On June 10th of this year, Jon Stewart took leave of his job hosting The Daily Show on Comedy Central to go direct his first film, handing the hosting duties over to John Oliver, one of the show’s top “reporters.” This was a big deal to me – I’m a huge fan of the show but Oliver has never been my favorite performer on it. He’s been a little too over-the-top manic, playing at a character rather than being the character as predecessors like Ed Helms, Rob Corddry, Steve Carell and Stephen Colbert have done. Or Samantha Bee who comes off as a genuine lunatic (and I mean that as the highest compliment). I thought he was trying too hard to be funny rather than being funny.

Someone I would have picked over Oliver was Larry Wilmore – the dry and droll “Senior Black Correspondent.” I saw him doing a documentary about African-Americans and the Mormon Church in a Showtime special titled Race, Religion and Sex. His interviews were first-rate. I was somewhat disappointed they didn’t pick him to sub for Stewart.

I was also concerned that The Daily Show itself would suffer. Stewart has been so identified with it, rarely taking a night off even when obviously physically ill. There was simply no one else to do the job. Until now.

So, the summer wanes and Labor Day approaches and with it Stewart’s return to the desk of The Daily Show. How’s it gone without him?

In my view, surprisingly well. Oh, no question that I will be glad to see Stewart’s return but John Oliver has, overall, done a very good job. I get a better sense of Oliver as a person in his work as anchor for the show. He’s also been willing to play the straight man for the gang of comedic lunatics that comprise the show’s “reporters.” He’s been an adept interviewer, which is important because the interview sessions comprise about a third of the show. Stewart is still the better interviewer but Oliver is better than David Letterman. And he’s getting better.

An early criticism I had for Oliver’s anchorman duties was that he appeared to be imitating Stewart’s intonations and gestures and even posture. Understandable – you go with what works and you don’t want to lose the audience (I’ll bet that is one of Oliver’s recurring nightmares; that he loses the audience for Stewart). It’s gotten less as the summer has gone on, however.

My larger concern was the show itself. Stewart’s not just the anchorman for the series; he’s a writer and co-executive-producer for the show. He has set the tone for The Daily Show, I think, and that’s important. It’s not only a satire of news programs in general but of the news itself and how it’s covered. There’s a sense of real moral outrage running through the show that gives it the edge it shows. There’s a point of view that is consistently presented.

The show is biased and that’s fine; those who say it should be more balanced forget that this is actually a comedy show and not an actual news show. They proudly proclaim themselves a “fake news” show. However, in 2009 the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said that 21% of people between 18 and 29 said that The Daily Show was their primary source for news. Stewart and producers of the show have discounted that and suggested those who used the show as their only news source would wind up horribly misinformed.

My concern was, what would the show look and sound like without Stewart, no matter who was in the anchorman’s chair? I’m happy to say it still has the same voice, the same values, the same moral outrage underlying it.

That bodes well for the show’s future. I’m glad Stewart is coming back but, let’s face it, at some point he will leave and not come back. He may want to direct some more (depending on how this first film goes), he may get offered a gig on a broadcast network late night show, he may just get tired and want to do something else. This summer has proven The Daily Show can go on without him.

It will also give him a viable substitute on the nights when he’s too ill to perform or needs to be elsewhere. That’s a good thing; it will help keep Stewart from burning out. Will the sub/heir apparent be John Oliver? It depends; Oliver’s gotten a lot more visibility and credibility as a result of this summer’s experiment. I‘d be surprised if he doesn’t get more offers as well.

So let’s call the experiment a success – John Oliver showed he can do the job and welcome back Jon Stewart. Just don’t go away again too soon, okay, fellah?

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

John Ostrander: The Essence

ostrander-art-130804-3794866A week or so ago I was talking about how in the Man of Steel movie they had Superman kill someone. No spoiler alert: if you haven’t seen the movie yet, it’s your own damn fault. It did violate one of the traditional tenets that marked Superman as Superman – he doesn’t kill. Lots of innocent bystanders must have also died during his battle with Kryptonians in Smallville and Metropolis but hey – collateral damage.

I did note, however, that characters that have been around a lot need an updating to keep them relevant to the times in which they are being read/watched. The question to me is – how much change is acceptable before you’ve altered the character so much that they are no longer really that character. What defines each character? What are the essentials?

I read in a recent Entertainment Weekly that Andrew Garfield, the current movie Peter Parker/Spider-Man, suggested that the next Mary Jane actually be a guy. Have Peter explore his sexuality with a guy. Even the director, Marc Webb, when asked if he had heard Garfield’s idea, seemed to do an eye roll.

That idea certainly isn’t traditional Peter Parker and got some discussion, but is it that far off? I’m not saying I endorse the idea but wouldn’t it make Peter more contemporary, something to which younger readers/viewers might relate? Would a bi-sexual Peter Parker be any less Spider-Man? Would a Peter Parker in a lip lock with a guy be more shocking than a Superman who kills?

The comics’ Spider-Man has taken it further. In the book, Spider-Man’s old foe Doctor Octopus has taken over Peter’s body and life and identity of Spider-Man with Peter looking real dead and gone. Otto Octavius is now Spider-Man. WTF?

The powers are the same, but the character sure isn’t. Is it the powers that define who Spider-Man is or is it the man behind the mask? If the latter, is this really Spider-Man?

This isn’t the only character to which this has happened. Iron Man has had people other than Tony Stark in the armor. Batman has had a couple of people under the cowl. And let’s not start on Robin. Or Batgirl.

The stories of Sherlock Holmes have also lent themselves to numerous interpretations. There are currently two TV series that put Holmes into modern day. I only really know the BBC series, Sherlock, but despite changing the era it feels so Holmesian to me. It feels like they got the essentials right.

I did it myself with my own character GrimJack. First I killed off the main character, John Gaunt, then I brought his soul back into a clone of himself and then, eventually, I had him reborn into another person, James Edgar Twilley, although again, it was the same soul. Munden’s Bar remained but the supporting cast was different and I had bounced the whole thing down the time line a hundred years or so and the setting of Cynosure was also changed.

I knew why I did it at the time. I felt my writing was getting stale and the character was as well. We hadn’t been around all that long but I felt we were getting tripped up on our own continuity. Sales were eroding. My editor asked me to come up with some way of making the book dangerous again.  That’s how I chose to do it.

Was it still GrimJack? Yes, I felt it was – in its essentials. An alienated and violent loner in a strange city living by his own code. Same soul, two lives. It still felt like GrimJack.

I’m willing to bet that most re-examinations of a given character or concept stems from that – to look at it all with fresh eyes, to make the reader/viewer do the same. To me, that’s trying to get to the essentials.

Maybe we aren’t all agreed as to what the essentials are in any given character or concept. That may vary from person o person, fan to fan. I think that’s why there are quibbles right now about Man of Steel; if Superman not killing is essential to the character, there’s a problem with the newest version. On the other hand, if “do not kill” rule is just like wearing red trunks, then it’s not essential. Is the Man of Steel Superman?

That comes down to you.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Marc Alan Fishman: Top 5 Reasons Batman Beats Captain America

fishman-130720-7904906OK, honest confession time. The geek blogger extraordinaire for Chicago’s newspaper Red Eye, Elliot Serrano, posted on his Facebook page that there were three things he knew to be facts:

  1. Schroedinger’s cat was dead. There’s no air-holes in the box.
  2. Superman never kills. For any reason. The End.
  3. Batman would lose in a fight to Captain America.

Now, upon seeing this – perhaps because I was in a crabby mood – I was immediately consumed with anger. I swore vengeance on Elliot. Luckily he’s of the sporting kind, and told me I was allowed to disagree with just one of those aforementioned facts. Well Mr. FancyHam? Let’s tackle this issue of one Mr. Rogers and Mr. Wayne. Submitted here for you, Elliot and my intrepid Fishmongers…. the top five reasons Batman mops the floor with Mickey’s super soldier.

  1. Gadgets. Unlike Cap, who chooses to limit his preparedness to a shield and a few MRE’s stashed in an errant thigh-pouch, Batman’s utility belt is 36” of versatility built for battle. Beyond a plethora of Batarangs and smoke pellets, Cap will also have to deal with freeze grenades, plasma torches, electrical tazers, and lord knows what else is tucked away. Sure, most of these will end up being a distraction at best when it comes to a full-on fight for nerd-supremacy, but that’s exactly what they are there for in this case. Batman unloads his belt busters to throw Cappy off his game. And then? Bat-boot to the face.
  2. Combat Training. Captain America is easily considered on the top fighters in the Marvel Universe. Obviously he went through boot camp basics after becoming a super soldier. After he thawed out, he continued to train on the battlefield. He is the ultimate soldier. His combat is built to stop an opponent quickly, so that he can move on. Batman, in contrast, is a student of the world. He took years – years – to hone his craft. He learned martial arts from several masters. He learned the art of escape from top escape artists. He learned to use fear and his environment to his advantage. And then? Then he learned on the field. Cap fans will be quick to point out that Rogers has been fighting since WWII. What they tend to forget that in cannon he was frozen for a solid 40 or so years. In my mind, he’s technically the same age as Batman in this mock fight. With that in mind, Batman has had more training, from better trainers. Beyond that? Batman has fought super soldiers before. And they didn’t win either.
  3. Friends. Captain America has the Avengers at his disposal. That’s quite a lofty roster. He also could claim a few X-Men, and his former sidekick The Falcon. Batman has the Justice League. He also has large parts of the Justice Society (I’m so not counting the New 52, suck it.). And when it comes to sidekicks? Bats has a small army there too. If they stood across from one another on the field of battle? Sorry Mousecateers. You’re outgunned, outnumbered, and out-Batmaned.
  4. Stategic Thinking. Sorry kiddos, this is gonna be a mean point to make. Face facts: When Captain America wants to win the day? He punches things and makes speeches until Reed Richards or Tony Stark figure out what to do. And when Tony disagreed with Cap? Well, we all know how great things turned out after Civil War, right? In contrast Batman’s so good, his backup plans were good enough to detain the Justice League. His A.I. almost broke reality down because it could. And when he needs to save the day? He can do it from his wrist-top computer while he’s crotch-punching the Riddler.
  5. Vehicles. Look, no good fight can be with just bare knuckles alone. Captain America has had a few cool rides every now and again. Batman has the Batmobile. Now, if I were to be so kind and give Cap the Triskellion to borrow for this little fracas, he just might have an edge. But if I were to be that nice? Well I’d have Batman borrow his Justice League space-station. And the heli-carrier can’t go into space. What about SWORD you ask? Sorry… it’s dealing with some problem with asteroid-M. At the end of the day, we know the Batmobile has way more tricks than any S.H.E.I.L.D. Hum-Vee. Plus chicks dig it. That alone tips the hat towards Batman.

I see it like this: Captain America is very skilled. In a bare-knuckle brawl against Bruce Wayne, in a ring, with no prep time, and nothing to fall back on? He’ll get in more than a few good licks. But a comic-book fight is not so cut and dry. If it were, it’d be boring. In this dream-fight, Cap and Bats would hurl everything they had at each other. After Superman and Wonder Woman drag Thor and the Hulk to the other side of the world… After Nightwing and Bucky are sucking down pity beers in a local pub over how short their run with the big-boy pants on was… After the Batmobile and Cap-Cycle are in ruin… after every last gimmick and gadget has torn Cap’s uniform into rags… After Batman resets a dislocated shoulder from one to many hits from a shield…. It comes down to two men ready to end the fight. Batman is better trained, and smarter. Captain America, even with enhanced speed and strength, is no different in Batman’s eye than any of the cadre of folks he’s bested in combat.

With a final firing of a Bat-Flare to the face (he was hiding it in his glove), dazed and confused… Batman sidesteps Cap’s haymaker, dodges the feinting jab Cap tried to sneak in, and jumps over Cap’s now clumsily executed leg sweep. After that? It’s just five quick thrusts to pressure points Stevie didn’t even know existed, and then a long nap. Broken, but not beaten… the Bat limps away in victory. And Elliot, if you’ll look under your chair, you’ll see this fight was decided before if even began. When the dust settles down, Batman is Batman. Captain America is just a patriotic drug-user.

SUNDAY: John Ostrander

MONDAY: Mindy Newell

 

John Ostrander’s Got Nothin’

This is what a deadline looks like on writer’s block.

ostrander-art-130630-7376995

Nothin’. I got nothin’. Lots of stuff has happened this week, lots of stuff happened in the pop arts, there are sure to be lots of topics from which to choose, something must interest me enough to blather about for the length of a column aaaaaaand

. . .nope. Brain’s not interested in any of them.

I finally went to see Man of Steel. There’s sure to be a column in that. What I thought of it, good bad or indifferent. Except that everyone has commented on it. Martha Thomases has commented twice and done it well both times. I’ve been lapped in Superman commentary by Martha Thomases. The film dropped 60% in attendees between the first and second weekends. Everyone who wants to see it already has and have their own opinions. A review on Man of Steel at this point is lame. Superman is dead. Even my brain doesn’t want to go there.

I got nothin’.

Hey, I’m a professional writer. I’ve encountered brain freeze and deadlines before. I know tricks and ways around writer’s block. One is to stop staring at the blank screen and go do something else.

Okay. Did something else. Aaaaaand. . .more nothing.

Distract yourself, John. Go on Facebook. Read what other people are saying, doing with their lives. Share funny things on your wall. Go do that.

Did that. FB bores me. It’s fifteen minutes later and I still have plenty of nothin’. And I’m slipping past deadline now.

I’m tired. That’s what it is. Go take a nap. That’ll do it.

No, it didn’t. A half hour shot and . . .

AAAAARGH! I can’t write I never could write why did I decide to be a writer?! The screen is still blank. Hungry. Demanding. Intimidating. Whatever made me think I could be a writer?

Oh, that’s right. Mike Gold offered me money. Curse you, money, you evil temptress! Why couldn’t I have remained as I was – an unemployed professional actor working part-time straight jobs to cover the rent? I was happier then.

No, I wasn’t. I’ve obviously gone around the bend. I’m hallucinating about the “good ol’ days” that were never really that good.

I’ll distract myself. Go play with the cats. Here, kitty kitty kitty.

Two minutes later. They’re bored and abandon me to my deadlines. Wretched felines. Can cats smell loser on you?

Play a game online. I often do that to cleanse my mental palate, get my concentration up and the brain cells energized. At least, that’s always been my justification. Yeah, that’s the ticket. Go play a game.

Did that, just came back,  and. . .I got nothin’. It’s just later in the day.

I went and washed dishes. That’s how desperate I am. It might work. Put my mind in zen mode and something will come out.

It didn’t work.

Stupid Computer! You know how I write! Why can’t I bring up an app or something and you write my column?!

Wait. There’s an idea. When musicians reach a certain age and don’t have anything new to do, they put out a Greatest Hits collection. Maybe I could do that. Just go back over some of my past columns and pull out random lines and string them together and see what happens.

Godfather II deepened and expanded on the first film; Godfather III – not so much. Any list of faves, yours, mine, or the guy down the street, says something about us. What I want is something new. As I said, Pamela Lee Anderson starred in the movie and I lingered, waiting to see if she would take off her clothes which is the main reason for any guy to watch a Pamela Lee Anderson movie. Mitt Romney wants to deep fry Big Bird.

Okay, that’s not going to work, either. Maybe interesting as a paragraph but a whole column of that? I don’t think so.

Maaaaybe I could write a column on what it’s like having to write a column when you have writer’s block and the deadline is upon you.

I wonder if I could get away with that?

Hurm.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

John Ostrander: We Have Met The Enemy

ostrander-art-130623-7497194Finally got around to seeing Iron Man 3 this week (which I enjoyed). Yeah, I know. We’re way behind on our movie viewing at this url. At the rate we’re going, we won’t see Man Of Steel until Labor Day.

In any case, I was struck by the underlying premise of the movie and certain events of the past week. (SPOILER ALERT: To discuss this, I’m going to have to tell things about Iron Man 3. If you are even more behind in your movie going than I am but still intend to see it and want to be unspoiled, you may want to avert your eyes.)

Central to the whole plot of Iron Man 3 is the idea of creating a terrorist threat to provoke a reaction in the American public and justify certain acts. In the news in our so-called real world this week, it’s been revealed that the NSA has not only been reading our emails but is creating a massive building to store and analyze everything they read. All in the name of “National Security,” of keeping us safe from terrorism. The idea is that we trade in our freedoms and we are safe from the hands of terrorists.

Except we’re not. To quote Rocket J. Squirrel to Bullwinkle J. Moose who was trying to pull a rabbit out of his hat, “But that trick never works.” Not completely. Of course, the justification becomes that the measures the government is taking makes terrorism more difficult, that some plots are stopped even if you can’t stop all of them, that some American lives are saved. Doesn’t that make it worth it? If it saved your life or the lives of those you cared about, wouldn’t the sacrifice of those freedoms be justified?

I think of the British people during the Battle of Britain in 1940. To break the ability of the UK to defend themselves in the air after the fall of France, the German Luftwaffe launched massive air attacks that escalated, finally, to terrorist bombing missions against the civilian populations in key British cities, notably London. Everyone has seen the photographs and newsreels, especially of the aftermath – the burning buildings, the shattered homes, the struggling people.

The purpose of the terrorism was to drive the British government to an armistice or even to surrender. That’s one of the key things to remember about terrorism – the acts of violence are not the purpose in and of themselves. As terrible as they are, the purpose is to achieve some other goal.

The Germans failed in 1940. The British people stood defiant. They did not break.

The purpose of the acts of violence on 9/11 was not the death and destruction alone that they caused. The purpose of the architects of those acts of terror was to change us, to make us destroy ourselves, our values, our way of life. We’re doing that.

For an illusion of safety, we seem to be willing to trade in at least some of our freedoms.

When we allow the government to tap our phones willy-nilly, to spy on us, to even kill some citizens deemed hostile combatants without any pretense of due process of law, the terrorists win.

The alternative is to live with the threat of destruction, of death for ourselves or those we love, of more horrific, terrifying images such as we saw on 9/11. To stand firm as the British did in the face of Nazi terrorism and not surrender.

In hard boiled fiction, the “tough guy” is defined not so much as the one who can hand out punishment but take it and not give in. Today, we seem more interested in someone who is “bad ass” – who can hand out the blows. Personally, I’ll take a “tough guy” over a “bad ass” any day of the week. They show more character.

So, gentle readers, what do you think? Do we trade in some outdated “freedoms” and maybe sleep better at night or do we take some chances in the interests of being who we are or are supposed to be?

You tell me.

MONDAY MORNING: Mindy Newell

TUESDAY MORNING: Emily S. Whitten

 

Categories

Archives

Everything you need to make great comics!

comicmix-pro-300x69-2

Nucleus X

Bookshop Zaks