A Superior Spider-man Tale?

Big things have been happening recently in the world of Spider-man and if the Internet chatter is to be believed a large percentage of folks are pretty pissed off about it. If you haven't heard, not only was Spidey's long-running flagship title, Amazing Spider-man, cancelled after a mammoth 700 issues and replaced by a new book, Superior Spider-man, but Peter Parker himself has apparently been "killed" and replaced by one of his arch-enemies; the notorious Doctor Octopus. That's right, Otto Octavius is the new Spider-man!

Intrigued? I was. I haven't picked up a Spider-man book in years but when I heard about the above, I couldn't wait to part with my hard-earned pennies. Which I guess is the type of reaction Marvel was hoping for. After all, the whole point of a story like this is to get maximum attention, draw in new or casual readers, and boost sales. As far as I'm concerned, in this day and age, when comic sales have long been on the decline, there's nothing wrong with this type of marketing stunt. That is, providing it's done right and the story is solid. Now granted I haven't been following Spider-man in recent years so I may have a different perspective to avid readers, but in my opinion writer Dan Slott is doing it right. Because so far it's a cracking read.

 

"How did it all go down?" I hear you ask. Well, in a three-parter titled "Dying Wish", a deathly-ill Dr. Octopus uses a golden "Octobot" he designed to swap consciousness with Peter Parker so that he can take over Parker's life while Parker is left to die in Ock's failing body. Following a confrontation at Avengers Tower, Parker attempts to use the Octobot to swap back bodies only to discover that Octopus has added shielding to the Spider-suit to prevent another transfer. But as Octopus is about to finish him off, Parker uses the connection they share via the Octobot to imprint his memories on Ock's mind, causing him to see the error of his ways. As Parker finally dies, Octopus promises to keep Spidey's loved ones safe and use his own intelligence and resources to become a "superior Spider-man". Which is where the fun really begins. Because watching the arrogant and ambitious Dr. Octopus trying to be a hero is hugely entertaining.

Unfortunately some fans disagree. So much so that Dan Slott actually received death threats on twitter. Which is pretty ridiculous. Apparently Slott took it all rather seriously but if it were me I'd have been laughing my ass off. Just the thought of some spotty nerd, who probably looks something like Napoleon Dynamite or Screech from Saved by the Bell, sitting in his parents basement typing with sweaty fingers, "I know where you live..." Well, that's some funny shit. It's as if these fools (who apparently care waaaaaaaaaaay too much about fictional superheroes) actually think the new status quo is gonna last and Doc Ock will be Spider-man forever. I mean come on! We all know that ain't gonna happen. So far, Dying Wish/Superior Spider-man is following a well-used template that sees popular heroes die, get replaced, and then return from the dead to reclaim their identity. Only five years ago we saw both Batman and Captain America "killed" and their former sidekicks step in to fill their respective shoes until their miraculous return from the grave. Spider-man will be no different. But what makes this storyline more interesting is that Spidey's replacement is an enemy rather than an ally. In this regard, Slott has added a great little twist to the usual format that opens up a ton of interesting story possibilities. How anyone can have a problem with that is beyond me.

I'm a big fan of the classic Stan Lee/Steve Ditko/John Romita/Gerry Conway Spider-man tales. In fact, I'd say superhero comics don't come any better. And honestly, Dying Wish/Superior feels to me like the kind of "how will Ole Webhead get outta this one?" tale those guys might have spun. Sure it would've only lasted for an issue and the book wouldn't have been cancelled and replaced but that's just the way modern comics are—what would have been a single comic's worth of story is always stretched out to fill a trade paperback now that comics are "a more visual medium". But Spidey seemingly dying and a deadly foe stealing his identity? That's classic Marvel mayhem.

To all the haters, all I have to say is chill out and stop taking this shit so damn seriously. Slott and Co. have crafted an over-the-top, whacky little thrill ride in the classic Spidey tradition. It won't run forever so get on board and enjoy it while it does.





 

 

 

 

 

The Dark Knight Returns: A Proper Batman Movie

Anyone like me who has read Frank Miller's seminal graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns dozens of times has probably also wondered what kind of movie it would make. Well thanks to producer Bruce Timm (Batman: The Animated Series) and writer Bob Goodman you need wonder no more! Yes, the film an army of batfans have waited a lifetime to see has finally been made—albeit an animated one, produced in two parts, that went straight to DVD. As somebody who was ultimately very dissatisfied with Chris Nolan's recent, massively over-hyped trilogy, I was more than a little apprehensive about watching a movie adaption of one of my all time favourite comic books. But I can honestly say that I wasn't disappointed at all. If anything, The Dark Knight Returns (part 2 especially) exceeded my expectations.

 

If you've never read it, Frank Miller's original work is widely considered to be one of the greatest—if not the greatest—Batman stories ever written. More than that, it is, unlike the vast majority of comics, actually taken seriously as literature and Time ranked it as one of the the 10 best graphic novels ever written. I don't want to give too much away but basically the story goes something like this: It is a bleak near-future in which the Cold War is ongoing and superheroes have been outlawed. Batman, now 55, has been retired for ten years following the death of his partner, the second Robin, Jason Todd. But Gotham City is going to hell at the hands of a criminal organisation called "The Mutants" and Batman is driven by his inner demons to once again don the cape and cowl and take his city back. He eventually defeats the Mutant leader and the organisation disbands. But then he must face the equally grievous threat of his arch-nemesis the Joker, who is awakened from a catatonic state by Batman's reappearance. Along the way, Commissioner Gordon retires and is replaced by Ellen Yindel whose first act as Commissioner is to issue a warrant for the Batman's arrest. Eventually, Superman—who is weakened from having just stopped a nuclear warhead launched by the Russians—is asked by the President to bring Batman in. But Batman, who has no intention of coming along quietly, may be the only man in the world with the ingenuity to take Superman down.

 

It is almost impossible to overstate the impact The Dark Knight Returns had when it was first published in 1986. The very first prestige-format limited series, aimed at mature readers, it parodied (among other things) the sensationalist U.S. media and the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Miller's Batman was a brutal vigilante who revelled in violence and was seemingly as happy punching the faces of cops as he was robbers. As such, he not only set the template for all future Batman stories, but those of literally hundreds of other comic book heroes too. Grittier versions of popular characters like Green Arrow and Aquaman would soon follow and almost every superhero would eventually take on a darker hue. Simply put, The Dark Knight Returns was a game-changer that revolutionised the superhero genre. Many would argue that Alan Moore's Watchmen, first published a few months after Dark Knight, is the pinnacle of superhero comics. But for my money Dark Knight has it beat hands-down.

So how well does it translate to film? Really, really well. So well, in fact, that part 1 has a 100% approval rating at Rotten Tomatoes. The traditional animation (always preferable to CGI) is inspired and the voice acting is top notch. Peter "Robocop" Weller makes a mean Batman, Mark Valley is a near-perfect Superman, and Michael Emerson—despite having some pretty big shoes to fill—makes the Joker all his own. There is one major element of the graphic novel that is missing from the movie: Batman's monologue. At first, I wasn't sure how this would work. After all, some of the best lines in the book are those Batman utters to himself. But the truth is that keeping the monologue would have weighed the film down. In fact, there is so much of it in the book that were it used in the movie it would have sounded more like a director's commentary. The golden rule of cinema is "don't tell me when you can show me" and Bob Goodman clearly understands this principle. Ultimately, he made the right choice and I'm convinced the film is better for it.

If you've read the graphic novel, and you haven't done so already, you should rush out and buy both DVDs. If you haven't then you should get the lot because you're seriously missing out on some top-notch entertainment.

 

Man of Steel: A Nerdseye (pre)View

I've been in love with comic books for nearly 25 years but I've never been an avid Superman reader. In fact, my favourite storyline featuring that last son of Krypton is still the groundbreaking "Death of Superman" epic from way back in 1992 and I've bought relatively few Superman books in the two decades since its publication. On the other hand, I loved Richard Donner's 1978 movie as a kid (still do, in fact) and I cannot help but have a genuine fondness and respect for the only comic book superhero to have stayed in continuous publication for almost 75 years. So when I heard that a new movie was in the works, with 300/Watchmen director Zack Snyder at the helm, I did get a little excited. But having just read the "exclusive" Man of Steel preview in this month's Empire magazine that excitement has begun turning to apprehension because, according to Empire, Superman is about to get "the Dark Knight treatment". And I for one cannot see how that is a good thing.

 

Contrary to popular opinion Chris Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy was not all that. The final chapter in particular was a dull, convoluted and hugely pretentious mess of epic proportions and trying to understand its critical acclaim is like trying to figure out how the hell Lil Wayne became the recipient of four Grammy awards. By far the most infuriating aspect of the Dark Knight Rises is its overemphasis on supposed "gritty realism" and its seeming embarrassment at its own status as a comic book movie. Hell, Batman—actually as Batman and not Bruce Wayne—only appears in about 25 minutes of his own damn film. And as for Selina Kyle, well you just better not get all silly and start calling her "Catwoman" because, dammit, this is serious stuff.

 

Unfortunately, it sounds as if Kal-El is set to follow in Bruce Wayne's footsteps and what we'll be getting is being called a "new take" on the classic character. According to writer David S. Goyer, "We're approaching Superman as if it weren't a comic book movie, as if it were real". Because that's the best way to treat your source material, right? As if it doesn't work. As I see it, this is why Marvel's movies are ultimately superior to those based on DC characters. With Marvel, they don't shy away from the original comics. They take their superheroes and put them right there on the screen pretty much as they were always intended to be—tonally anyway. With DC, it's always gotta be "cooler, darker, and more realistic". As a result we have stuff like Nolan's Batman trilogy and the recent Arrow TV show in which the characters only vaguely resemble their comic book counterparts, have questionable morals, and do virtually nothing super heroic.

 

For three quarters of a century, Superman has been popular enough to appear in cartoons, TV shows, movies, radio dramas, books, computer games and thousands of comics (not to mention the toys, posters, lunchboxes, and millions of other collectibles adorned with that familiar red S) and yet according to the makers of Man of Steel the Superman known and loved by many, the one who stood for truth, Justice and the American way, just can't cut it on the big screen anymore. Henry Cavill, the new guy in the tights, explains that "Past representations of the character have been quite light...this is a more realistic view on the character". So what does this "more realistic" Superman story entail? According to Snyder, whom Empire writes had "never really taken Superman seriously", it's a story about "first contact...He's an alien. You can easily imagine a scenario in which we'd be doing a film like E.T., as opposed to him running around in tights. If the world found out he existed, it would be the biggest thing that ever happened in human history." Admittedly this sounds like an intriguing concept but the question remains, is it really a Superman story? Indeed, do you really need Superman to tell it? I guess if you wanna cash in on the well-deserved popularity of a classic character you've "never really taken seriously" then you do.

I'm still looking forward to Man of Steel but it looks as if I'll be going to watch it with a more critical eye than I would have liked. I already know that I don't like the new, darker (more realistic?) costume and I can't help thinking that Walt Flannagan is right that you have to have the spit curl or it ain't Superman. I'll do my best to keep an open mind but I think they're really gonna have to knock one out of the park to get me on board.