Review: Iron Man 2

Iron Man, when it was released in 2008, was a fantastic example of science fiction taking examples from real life and twisting them around a bit. The first film nicely pulled themes of America’s military influence in the world, and updated it for the modern world , providing a set of themes that really felt relevant to a modern audience. The first film did this in a fairly neat and concise manner. The sequel, on the other hand, falls prey to what seems to be the siren's call of all comic book movies: more action, more villains, more, more and more. Iron Man 2 is by no means a bad film, however. Like the first one, it remains a pretty funny, action packed, amusing film, one that sits well with the first film, and it's easily better than some of the other sequels out there, like Spiderman 3, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer and X-Men 3. Despite the additional characters, storylines and setup for future films, the movie handles itself well.

Taking off from where the first film left off, Tony Stark is a celebrity, America's big superhero, who commands adoring crowds of people and blows off senators on committees, all the while becoming the protector of the United States. From early on, it's clear that there's a lot that Stark is combating: Senator Stern (what better name for a senator?), who wants the Iron Man suit under the control of the U.S. military, Justin Hammer, a major defense contractor who also wants the suit, Ivan Vankov, who wants revenge upon the Stark family after the death of his father, and Nick Fury, who wants Iron Man to help out with the Avengers. Stark is also facing a serious case of poisoning from the arc reactor that he built in the first film, leading to what looks like an inevitable death, and accordingly, starts to act recklessly: he takes control of his own race car, gets drunk at parties, and generally undermines his own credibility as America's shield and sword. And that's just the first half of the film.

At the midway point, Stark kicks into action. Rhodes makes off with one of his suits and turns it over to the military, who begins working on it for their own uses. Vankov attacks Stark during an F-1 race, and when he's presumably killed in prison, he is whisked away to Justin Hammer's facilities to begin working on suits for Hammer and the military. Stark finds the solution to his poisoning, makes a new suit and discovers some of the truth behind Vankov and his vendetta, all the while discovering that his new assistant (Pepper Potts is now the CEO of Stark Enterprises), is a member of S.H.I.E.L.D.

The plot is certainly action packed, and there's nary a dull moment in the film. Like the first, there's a lot of humor throughout the action, with Robert Downey Jr. slipping right back into the Stark role, and Sam Rockwell absolutely stealing the show as Justin Hammer. Mickey Rorke likewise does a fun job with Ivan Vankov, and a number of supporting characters really do shine throughout. Scarlett Johansen as Black Widow / Natalie Rushman is the only real weak point, but honestly, I'd love to see a Black Widow film after watching her here.

The main issue that I have with the film is this lack of commitment to any one theme, which stems back to what was probably producer requirements: more action, more villains, more characters, and bigger action, and bigger villains. Other films, like the ones mentioned above had dealt with the same sorts of things, and come off badly. Iron Man 2, while it handles them well, doesn't rise to the same level of entertainment as the first film did.

First and foremost, the film is split between stories - numerous subplots reference what has long been seen in the comics: the extremis storyline is touched on, as is the Demon In a Bottle, but in both instances, they're just minor storylines, ones that could really stand to be fleshed out for their own film. In this instance, Extremis leads to the Demon, which worked really well, but there could have been quite a bit more that would have made the film stronger. Where Iron Man 1 was largely a film about warfare and the industrial military complex, Iron Man 2 is much more of a personal story around Stark, one that is diluted quite a bit.

Additionally, where Iron Man 1 really looked to the war in Afghanistan for a good place to lay down its story, this sequel largely looks to some more modern elements: the military industrial complex at home, and some of the reactions to Stark's coming out at Iron Man. What's interesting is that some similar Cold War themes have been applied to the present day - not necessarily unexpected with a new sort of technology. There's something of a robotic arms race going on amongst numerous militaries of the world right now - with an arms race of military power suits in Iran and North Korea. This element nails things right on the head, but likewise, doesn't really gain traction, but merely remains an underlying plot element, rather than something that could have been fleshed out quite a bit more. In either case, with the personal or military storylines, these would have really made the sequel just as good as the first film.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with what is in Iron Man 2. There's a fairly good balance between the two in the first half of the movie, before rather abruptly cutting to the second half where everything gets into gear and moves towards the finale. Vankov, now under Hammer’s wing, turns to making drones, and with the capture of one of Stark’s suits, another version is created, and unveiled at the Stark Expo, where the Russian takes control and attempts to kill his enemy. The last hour of the film is quite a lot of fun, with action and humor to that brought me to edge of my seat before ending fairly abruptly. Coupled with the other storylines, the film largely feels incomplete, like there are some chunks of filler material that would have helped with this a bit, and will no doubt make the DVD an essential purchase for anyone who really liked the film.

One of the film’s strong points is not only how it balances these elements, but also how it sets up, rather nicely, four additional movies: The Avengers, first and foremost, but also Captain America, Thor and eventually, Iron Man 3. Most films have quite a bit of work with just a single thing, but as Avengers comes closer (now with Joss Whedon at the helm!), individual stories are coming together nicely, and like the comic books, the crossover makes for an interesting move when it comes to franchised films and their audiences. It’ll mean a good investment for Marvel studios (who raked in quite a bit of cash with Iron Man 2 already) but also allows for a good way to tell a larger story over several larger films. Already, I’m interested in what will come of the upcoming Captain America and Thor films, which have recently seen a lot of casting news.

At the end of the day, the film medium, like any form of entertainment, is intended to entertain, and Iron Man 2 certainly met with that standard from early in the film. The first film really didn’t take itself seriously throughout most of the film, and the story fell into place, making it one of the stronger films that’s come out of the Marvel universe lately. Iron Man 2 builds on what really worked for the first, but lags behind just a bit. But, as the bullets and guys in armor start flying around, it’s what everyone intended: a fun, exciting film.

Adaptability

I saw Watchmen on opening night in Williston. Over the past couple of weeks, genre media has been talking much about this film. Advanced reviews, speculation, talk on forums and everything else has been booming, and much of this discussion has been focused on the comic's creator, Alan Moore, and his stance towards the film. Moore's attitude towards filming of his materials has been extremely negative, and for good reason; prior adaptations, such as League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, From Hell, Constantine and V for Vendetta have all been fairly poor adaptations (although V wasn't too bad, comparatively), and Moore has disavowed any part of the film process. It's an understandable thing, but I think that it is a bit misguided and arrogant. In reality, it really doesn't mean much. The film was made, and I for one largely enjoyed it.

Watchmen has been called the world's most celebrated comic of all time. It made Time Magazine's 100 best book list, and it's won numerous awards. It is a fantastic and compelling read. The movie, in my opinion, is a faithful adaptation, but will never gain the same status as the book. Rather, it plays out like an homage to the comic book, celebrating, rather than telling the story. I think, given the circumstances, this is probably the best that could have been hoped for. Watchmen, like most print stories, is a comic that is incredibly difficult to adapt to film. The sheer volume and density of the story makes it a challenge at best. The film is a good one, but it is almost too much like the comic book, to stand on its own as a movie.

Comic books are a huge thing for the movie industry. They have accounted for some of the biggest blockbuster hits in the past decade, and after Spiderman, studios realized that with the advances in computer imaging, there was an entire backlog of stories and characters that could be adapted for the big screen. And as such, we've seen a number of very good and very bad comic book movies, ranging from Spiderman 1-3, Iron Man, The Hulk, X-Men 1-3, Hellboy, Hellboy: The Golden Army, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Superman Returns, Fantastic Four, Fantastic Four 2, Sin City, and others. There's a number in the works, from Wonder Woman, Iron Man 2, Justice League, Green Lantern, and I'm sure many more.

Comics are both difficult and easy to adapt, based on the many differing results when it comes to quality. Films such as Batman Begins, Iron Man, Spiderman and Sin City have been absolutely fantastic to watch, while things like the Fantastic Four, Superman Returns, The Hulk and Spiderman 3 have largely been failures, although not necessarily at the box office.

Comic books provide a fantastic medium for stories. They are highly visual, and can pretty much accomplish anything that can be drawn upon a piece of paper (or now, a computer screen). In a way, they are an entire set of story boards for a film that allows a storyteller to tell a fantastic, visually stimulating story in a way that a novel really can't do. And comic books are extremely popular - it isn't all the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons - there is a huge and growing audience for comic books.

Therefore, adapting a comic book for the silver screen presents some different challenges for screenwriters. They don't have to imagine how characters look and interact with one another - that element is already present on the pages. Obviously, because of this, and a large fanbase, there is much pressure on the part of the production team to get things looking right, just like in the comic.

This is really the case with Watchmen. It looks fantastic, and it positively oozes from the comic's pages. The characters largely look just as I imagined them (and I’m not really one to nitpick over some of the minor differences in costumes and appearance), but the team that worked on Watchmen did a fantastic job, getting the backgrounds right, shaping the overall look and feel of the comic. This is essentially how I imagined it would look.

Another film that I've really enjoyed did the same thing - Sin City. Frank Miller's comic was presented in a neo-noir style that was excellently replicated by the film team, who used CGI to get the colors (and lack of colors) to essentially match that of the comics. Sin City, I maintain, is not so much a movie, but a moving comic, one that has jumped from the pages to the screen almost seamlessly. The stories are largely intact, the same outrageous and ludicrous characters and situations, and it looks good.

But to what extent is a direct adaptation, or even a copy, a good thing for film

s? Critically, Sin City made a splash because of the unique nature of the comic books, and how that translated right over to the screen - it looked different. But other comic book films, such as Spiderman and Ironman, which enjoy very long lineages in the print world, had to be adapted to tell the origin stories of their title characters, and that worked excellently. Both were updated - Spiderman for 2000-era New York City, rather than the 1970s when the comic first came out (although, a period piece of Spiderman in the 1970s? That would be cool), and featured a far different story than what might have been featured in the comics originally. Ironman was updated from the Vietnam War origin to the current conflict in Afghanistan to give Tony Stark a start, which worked very well, and proves that a literal translation from page to screen really isn't necessary all the time for the story to work. Spiderman and Ironman are aided by having good scripts, where the writers seemed to understand the characters and the thematic elements of the stories. There are examples of where this hasn't really worked, such as Hellboy, where the production team went in a different direction from the stories of the comics, creating a fairly different entity. The comics are fantastic, and stand well on their own, but so does the movie, which is not nearly as good, but captures much of the feel, although not the story, of Hellboy.

Other films just fail utterly. Fantastic Four, the Hulk, Spiderman 3 and X-Men 3, all failed to really capture the essence of the characters and opted more for a CGI type of film that had a transparent storyline, weak characters and overblown effects. The translation process here essentially went for the glamour and exciting points of the films, but not their story core.

DC comics in particular are hard to translate, and the Batman franchise has had an extremely mixed history. The first major Batman film went more towards the darker story that really exemplifies the story, while later installments went for the visual elements. This has largely changed with the release of Batman Begins and the Dark Knight, where the creators fully understood the characters, but also how to make the film look good. Neither Batman Begins nor The Dark Knight are perfect films, but they do stand very well on their own, and are a good demonstration of a good adaptation.

Superman is a harder one to adapt, because of the nature of his story. I haven't seen the original Superman films, and intend to, but when I watch Superman Returns, I leave feeling very unsatisfied. Clearly, the production team liked the comic, and it looked very good, but the story was a rather poor one that was predictable, and didn't present the same depth as something like Batman Begins. This, I think is true with Watchmen. The creators, essentially, were too in love with the story, and essentially focused on getting it perfect to the comic. While this is admirable, it is flawed because the comic really can't be adapted, not in its full nature, and when things are dropped from the story, there is no work done to try and tie together the remaining parts. While I'm not nearly as familiar with Watchmen as some, I did see that there were parts that had been eliminated, while other parts were kept in, that probably shouldn't have. The film moves fairly slowly, going from point A to point B at a pace that allows you to take in the story, but it is at times hard to keep the entire thing in perspective. Some parts were changed, such as the ending, to the point where I felt it worked better for the film, as it simplified and clarified things for the audience. While this certainly would get fanboys annoyed, it just goes to show that a movie generally needs to be simplified for a mainstream audience.

So, should comic books be adaptations as is the case with Ironman or Spiderman, or motion comics, such as Sin City and Watchmen? I think the answer lies somewhere in between. Film and comic books are both separate mediums, and because of that, there are far different expectations and differences in how they are presented. Screenwriters certainly did a good job changing the dialog in some of the movies based off of the older comics, because expectations have changed for modern audiences. Watchmen was a difficult story to carry over to a film, and I think that the few changes that they did make helped it along, while the rest is a couple hours of the Zack Snyder fanboying the film. The results are absolutely fantastic, and we have an adaptation that looks like the comic, but feels a little off as a movie. It's certainly something that I'll watch again, but with all the hype that this movie has brought on itself, it is a bit of a letdown. But then again, anyone expecting a perfect film out of Watchmen is quite a bit unrealistic.

The Tragic Life of Charles Schultz

I don't go to the library nearly enough to get books - my own reading list generally precludes me from this, and any book that I really want to read, I tend to end up buying. But, every now and then, I'll see something interesting worth reading, and will pick it up on a whim. This was the case with the first authorized biography of Charles Schultz, by David Michealis, called Schultz and Peanuts, which was released late last year.

The biography is wonderfully complete and extremely detailed, spanning the famed creator of Peanuts life from beginning to end. In addition to just talking about his life, this book is a discussion of how his life impacted his creation, and shows just how much of Schultz is revealed within the classic panels that ultimately defined his life.

Schultz was born in November of 1922, and was the only child of Dena and Carl Schultz. His early childhood seemed to be one of loneliness, isolation and insecurity - all themes which would be prevalent in Peanuts. He was extremely attached to his mother, and was devastated when she died when he was twenty-one years old. It was during his early life that he began to draw, through his time in the army to a course where he began to draw small cartoons. Li'l Folks began in June of 1947, to limited success, but which would slowly grow to be an enormous multi-media platform that would lead Schultz from his humble beginnings to becoming one of the highest paid entertainers in the United States.

In addition to an examination of Schultz’s life, this book serves as a sort of literary critique of Peanuts itself. Each character is examined, their personalities and lives compared to Schultz’s and storylines are looked at within the same context. I’ve never read over the entirety of Peanuts, but this look has really given me an extremely detailed look not only at the evolution of the comic, but its inspirations and the meanings behind each panel.

What struck me the most about Schultz was the degree to which he and Peanuts were intertwined. While he denied that he utilized his own life and his children in the comic strip, it is very clear that was just not the case, intentionally or otherwise. From the start, he seemed to be destined for art, and looking back across his life, Peanuts is the only accomplishment for which he was entirely dedicated to - his purpose was singular, but perfect. The end result is a cartoon that is widely considered one of the greatest works of American art/literature, certainly one of the greatest comics, for which we owe much of our nation's character to. Ironically, I have been reading about NASA and the lunar missions recently, and Schultz's influences are felt there as well, as the Apollo 10 Lander (which was the test craft to circle and evaluate landing sites for Apollo 11, which did land on the moon) was named Snoopy and the Command Capsule was named Charlie Brown. Schultz also designed the mission patch for the first Skylab mission, featuring Snoopy and the names of the three crewmen. (My review for Homesteading Space can be found here.)

While Peanuts is a widely known work, its creator isn't - this biography allows for an unparallel look at his life. In many respects, Schultz was Charlie Brown. Throughout the book, individual strips are presented, often highlighting elements of Schultz's personality at various stages of his life. Characters are examined, picked apart and revealed through their creator to largely be an extension of his own life and personality. In a way, it is extremely fitting that not only was Peanuts not allowed to continue after his retirement, the last strip and his death occurred on the same day.

Schultz's life was not an unhappy or miserable one - it was he that was unhappy and miserable for much of his life. He was self-deprecating, a little vain and incredibly insecure - not unlike his famed creation. He seemed to suffer from many phobias, and clung to people throughout his life, all the while maintaining a mild-mannered and quiet presence. His first marriage, which lasted twenty or so years, pitted him against his wife, who was far more assertive and combative, while his second was far more mutually friendly. Ironically, for a creator known for his portrayal of children, Schultz seemed to be fairly distant from his own, leaving the raising of his family to Joyce (his first wife), who dominated the house and family.

Reading through the book, I was interested to find that there are a number of elements of Schultz's personality that match my own - to a point. I've illustrated the desire to change some aspects of this, and looking at Schultz's life, one can see the effects of his personality upon the direction of his life and the people around him.

In the end, there is no doubt that Schultz had created something wonderful, tragic and heartwarming. Peanuts is arguably one the quintessential American tales, rife with meaning throughout, something that inspired generations of people around the world for its simplicity and brilliant storytelling. This was Schultz's legacy to the world - unhappy, lonely, but enlightening.

Just to add...

... to all of my geeking out this week, the Watchmen trailer was just released last night, take a look:

..

Holy crap that looks fantastic!

Aaaaaandd, the trailer for Season 3 of Heroes:

..

!!!

The new Superhero era: The Sanctioned and Enforced Era

I saw Hancock in New York City over the weekend. For all the negative reviews out there, it was actually quite a fun film to watch, somewhere between a rated R-Comedy and a somewhat serious drama about a superhero. The film follows Hancock, a drunk, lazy and pissed off super being. Appropriately, the film opens with him passed out on a park bench. Then, bottle in hand, he takes down an SUV full of gun toting gangsters, leaving a trail of wreckage in his way. When he saves a publicist, they start to work on changing his image, first with him going to jail. First half done. There's a lot of laughs here, from Walter the Grey Whale to dropping a bully from a low orbit and catching him. The second half of the film is more drama-y, as we learn that Hancock doesn't know his past. Various revelations later, we find out his backstory, and he's a changed man. I think this makes the film a little off-balance, but overall, it works. It's enjoyable to watch, and it bring up some very interesting points when it comes to the entire Superhero genre. An additional point about the movie - Jason Bateman, whom I'm a huge fan of from Arrested Development, is a real shining star in this film - he's perfect for the role that he played here, and worked extremely well with the comedy/drama nature of this film.

The main thing that interested me here was how this film seems to represent the role in which comic book characters or superheroes now seem to play in society - this is something that I have noticed in a number of other genre sources, and it seems to be a very widespread change to the way in which superheroes are looked at - Superheroes being legitimized, generally through direct governmental intervention in said comic book universe.

The first time that I really noticed this was with the recent arc that Marvel released, entitled Civil War. This storyline, and numerous threads leading up to it, brought in the Superhuman Registration Act. This isn't necessarily a new concept in the Marvel Universe, or in comics in general. X-Men has dealt with the issue numerous times since the 1980s. What makes the Civil War arc special, at least from my point of view, is that it draws in the entire marvel community to some degree, opening up fault lines between characters. The act requires superhumans to register with the federal government, to put them under more direct control - this is sparked by a disaster when several superheroes fought several villains, killing hundreds of people in the sidelines, including children. This seems to really pull from the post 9-11 mentality of a tragedy and a huge response afterward.

This comes through in Hancock, somewhat. Hancock, a drunk and reckless superhero, seems to have caused multiple millions of dollars with his acts. In the opening scene, we see him destroy a park bench and storefront taking off, a highway directional sign, numerous police cars, a huge groove in the interstate deck, damage to several buildings before finally dropping a car on top of a building's spire. It's mentioned in in the film that this cost the city almost 9 million in damages. From there, Bateman's character convinces him to go to prison for his acts, in an attempt to appease the public, and to make them realize how much he is needed in LA. Furthermore, Bateman works with Hancock to try and get him to change how he approaches his rescues, his image in general, trying to fit more in with the public. Hancock isn't completely regulatory, but it does seem to impose some limits and realism to a traditional comic book role. It also outlines some of the basic problems with holding a superhero in prison - at one point, Hancock hops a fence to get a ball, but returns.

Two sources show worlds in which superheroes are banned by the government - The movie The Incredibles and the comic Watchmen. The Incredibles shows a sort of public outrage similar to what we see in Hancock - bystanders are injured and structures are damaged during rescues. As a result, the Superhero Relocation Program was set up, forcing superheroes to go undercover and to resume a normal life - something that most aren't really willing to do. The same thing happens in Watchmen - superheroes are likewise banned, this time via the Keene Act. Some of the costumed heroes, like Rorschach, have a difficult time returning to normal life, and continue to act in the interest of the public. There is much discussion of their return following the murder of one of their kind.

Finally, in the book Soon, I Will Be Invicible, by Austin Grossman, there is a very detailed back story to most of the heroes in the book, and a group called the Champions seems to have been a sanctioned governmental group to fight crime. The group that takes most of the action in the book, the New Champions, likewise seems to be at least tolerated, on the same level that the Avengers or the Justice League was tolerated.

Why are we seeing this switch in themes and styles since the 1980s? In part, it seems to be a material issue, especially with the Civil War arc, but overall, there seems to be far more realism pushed into comic books nowadays - and this is something that I've noticed across the board when it comes to the entertainment industry, and especially with films like Hancock and books like Soon, I Will Be Invincible, which almost blend seamlessly into 'our' world. Yet, there has always been a relative connection to the real world - World War II, Fascim, Communism, Vietnam, all events that share a connection to the real world.

Now, there's a push for oversight of the superheroes - it's almost an interesting parallel in an age of 'big government' and when the current governmental debt is $9,473,062,472,197.15. There's a lot of broad regulation in society nowadays, and logically, it makes sense that if there were costumed vigilantes, the government would work to try and legitimize them as well, in the interest of public safety. This is a pretty far cry from their origins, when heroes were largely left to their own devices, or harassed occasionally by police. (I'm speaking in broad terms here). In most cases, this government interference runs against what most superheroes stand for - some, such as Batman and Spiderman believe that the government really hasn't done their part to keep the streets clear of crime. Others seem to think that this sort of thing will hamper their efforts, and are essentially social outcasts anyway. One of the main issues in Civil War was that superheroes would have to publicly identify their alter-egos, in much the same way that judges and police officers are public figures, and face some of the same threats.

Some of this shift should probably also be credited towards how society seems to operate nowadays, turning this entire thing into a weird social commentary. The main theme with people seems to be to shift blame to someone else - "It's not my fault, it's ...." or "ADHD is responsible for my child's hyperactivity, not my poor parenting skills". Taking control of superheroes seems to be a way in which they can be used to either take the blame for when society goes wrong, where they are apparently not doing their job, much as can be argued for police and civil authorities, but also a way for governments to cover their collective butts when something, such as the Stamford, CT disaster (Civil War), the 1977 Riots in New York City (Watchmen) or the other various events. It seems that if the government tolerates the acts of costumed heroes, they themselves are responsible for their actions, sanctioned or not, and when major disasters happen, there is an attempt to rein them in somewhat. This is seen brilliantly in Soon I Will Be Invincible, where the main villian, Dr. Impossible, isn't so much evil, as he suffers from "Malign Hypercognition Disorder".

Is this sort of thing enough to consider the past couple of decades an era or sequence in and of itself, given the amount of detail and thematic distinction between this and other comic book eras?

Costumes and Fandom

My parents have been longtime subscribers to The New Yorker magazine. I never really read a whole lot of the issues, but I did come across an interesting article by author Michael Chabon, the author of one of my favorite books of all time, the Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, which follows the history of comics pretty closely, and has brought out a couple of comics based off of its title character, the Escapist. The article, called Secret Skin, is part biographical essay and part examination at the characters in the superhero genre, mainly in what their costumes mean and represent. It's a brilliant article, covering a number of things that I'd never really given any thought to. The first real theme of the article is how people immerse themselves into their fantasy characters. He starts with an antidotal story that a teach told him in class, about how a boy tied a red towel around his neck as a cape and jumped from a building, hoping to fly, with the explanation being that the boy could not distinguish between reality and the reality that he saw in comic books. He then goes on to reminisce about times when he dressed up as a superhero, as Batman or Superman, to some of his own superheroes that were created out of pure convenience, and he then goes on to speak on transformation. This, I feel is one of the defining elements of Science Fiction and Fantasy fandom, at least a part of it. I don't do a whole lot with costuming - only armor from the Star Wars movies, but I think that this applies somewhat. Chabon describes what he sees in conventions (which he frequents often - an audio interview with him via the New Yorker's site speaks on this) as a disappointment. He describes, in the article that oftentimes, despite extensive attention to detail and elaborate care, costumes fall short of what they resemble: "Without exception, even the most splendid of these getups is at best a disappointment . . . acts to spoil what is instantly revealed to have been, all along, an illusion." (Chabon, The New Yorker, March 10, 2008, 66) I don't believe that he intends these remarks as a criticism of fans that spend the time and effort, or of their accuracy, but rather, that they miss the point. Merely putting on a costume doesn't automatically turn one into a superhero, as the boy who jumped off the roof found. The costumes aren't real, they aren't a character, and their creators are creating a replica of an illusion. From here on, he discusses some of the elements that make up a superhero's costume, and chiefly examines them as an extension of the character. This is one of the interesting points where form seems to follow function, at least to some extent. He looks at the components, the mask, gloves, boots, suits, capes, and symbols, and most importantly, how all of these components relate to the person's identity. Symbols relate to very personal elements to the characters, to how this tells a story. In the audio interview, he describes the costume as an idea that wraps up a person in a number of sub stories and meanings, and how that translates the person underneath into the embodiment of an idea. "Now the time has come to propose, or confront, a fundamental truth: like the being who wears it, the superhero costume is, by definition, an impossible object. It cannot exist." (Chabon, 66) Not to say that it can't be replicated down to exacting details. I think that with a replication, you only get the appearance, nothing more. However, I think that it's how people perceive these characters that have come to life, rather than what the costume itself brings to the table - people around you make it more than just a costume. The costumer and viewer need to come together in order to make the illusion work. One instills wonder, and there has to be wonder, excitement, coming from the viewer. I've sort of found this when I don my TK armor. A friend of mine once told me that I hold myself much differently once it's on, almost like I'm a different person. I've sort of felt that as well. In a way, I think all costumers have a similar feeling - we don't become the character at all, we represent their ideas, that feeling that we'd get as children reading a comic book under the covers or watching Star Wars for the first time. It's a way of honoring the character or figure, not becoming them. The time and energy spent on their creation is almost a work of love, an homage to something that really inspires us. Michael Chabon isn't really criticizing fans for their efforts, I think. I think that a lot of other people do, because they don't really get this depth and this love. I don't really agree that costumes are a disappointment really - although there are some really strange ones out there - it's quite something, especially for the younger kids, to see your favorite character walking around, right there, in the flesh, and he shakes your hand. I do think that he's right when he says that when you see a character as an adult, you think "cool costume" and look at it in purely practical terms, whereas a child might see that and encapsulate that with everything that they've read and seen, not making the distinction that all you really have is a representation. Maybe even some adults. And that's what makes it all worth doing. I highly, highly recommend checking out this article if you've been to a Con, do costuming, a SF/F genre fan or even someone outside of all that. Read it, and let me know what you think, I'd be interested in hearing other reactions beyond my own. I have a feeling that this'll prompt a couple more things from me, which I'll be interested to see what direction it takes me in.

The full article can be read here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/10/080310fa_fact_chabon

Flight

I'm back on my bike, and picking my cast apart, little by little. It's getting irritating, in many ways. Doing simple things around the house is now a chore, such as buttoning up a shirt or zipping my jacket. Cans are problematic, as are keys. And typing! Such a pain now. I'm thinking that I'm going to visit the doctor to get a simple splint, so that I can continue to type.
Random other things have been going on. Picked up a couple of comics after I dropped off my paychecks and paid off part of my credit card bill. Finally, my hours at Waldenbooks will be increasing so that I'll finally be able to pay my bills and roommate. And, finally, Spiderman has come to his senses about what side of the Civil War he's on. FINALLY!

In the Presence of Comic Geeks

I had a good day today. Awoke in a good mood, did some things at home then went to work, only to find that I wasn't on the schedule today. Went out and bought Veronica Mars, went to my friend Blackwell's house and watched part of it with him. Great show, highly recommended if you haven't seen it yet. After a couple hours of that, we went out and watched X-Men 3, with a bunch of the Abnaki group.
I liked the movie. It wasn't great on any critical level, but it was definently a fun one to watch. It has a number of serious flaws with aspects of it. The entire thing felt very rushed, and there were about two too many storylines that didn't need to compete with each other, the Dark Phoenix saga, and the Cure saga, which came mostly out of Joss Whedon's recent comic line. The Cure storyline worked very well, stuck pretty closely to Whedon's comics, some aspects of it, but the Phoenix saga really sunk, no where near the comics, which is a huge shame. What should have happened is they should have saved it for a future film, and focused on the cure. The strength of the movie was the minor characters. Kitty, Colossus, Iceman, I was very happy to see those guys in there with some fun roles. I think that my favorite X-Men character is now Kitty, especially with her role in Whedon's comics. Some scenes were absolutely fantastic. The opening danger room scene was really good, especially with the Sentinal's head, as well as most of the other action scenes, most especially the finale battle between both sides. Other things seemed very glossed over, like Mystique's exit from the mutant world, as well as some of the newer characters, mainly Angel, who played no real part in the movie from his few scenes. At least Beast had some storyline that was somewhat explained for his absence in the last couple movies. Overall, fun movie, although not as good as # 1 or # 2. This story should have had Bryan Singer at the helm, but hopefully Superman Returns will benefit from his direction.
It's fun to go to these movies with comic geeks. I've never really been sure if I'd truely qualify as one, but I'm getting there, as my collection slowly grows each month. My friends are huge fans of the comics, and a bit more knowledgable with some of the older storylines that I'm working on learning more about. The converstation between Beep, Billy, Wells and I was fun - It's fun to debate about these things.

Okay, I'm off to bed soon. Have a good night everyone.

Maine

As I mentioned the other night, I was in Maine for the weekend, visiting my friend Sam, who I work with at camp. I had a really good time - Sam's a really good friend of mine, and it was good to see him for the first time in a while. I got to check out his campus, probably a little larger than Norwich, and with a larger town around it with some good things to have. Like a book store and movie theater.
I also got to see how they ran their games club, from which I'll probably take some pointers to our own club here at Norwich. There's some big size differences, but I got some things that I can begin to impliment. I guess we'll see how that goes in the coming week. Plus, Sam picked up the newest Age of Empires game, which is amazing. I just got the demo on my computer and I'm thinking that I'll have to find my own copy, because it works on my computer. Woohoo!
The drive over wasn't bad at all. It was a bit long, four hours each way, but it was a fairly easy ride. I basically stayed on the same route, and the only complicated part was driving through a couple of cities/large towns, navigating through some of the side streets. Mapquest was handy for that part, but downright useless for everything else. Their directions were annoying. I just used the printout map that came with it to get to Farmington.
Picked up a couple of comics while I was at it - got the first and third issues of the new Spiderman run: Evolve or Die. Still need to pick up #2. It's a long, 12 issue crossover with three Spiderman comics out there. Interested to see how it turns out. I also picked up the latest issue of B.P.R.D., following the Frog Wars storyline, that's turning out interestingly. And I picked up the second issue of Rogue Squadron, which is becoming a slightly disapointing story arc...
Now, sleep, hopefully to finish the World Before so I can get moving on 1776 and St. Alban's Fire.

Comics to pick up this week...

Gah, seems like everything has the same release date this week:

X-WING: Rogue Leader #1
In the wake of the death of the Emperor and the destruction of the Death Star II, a group of Rebel pilots are looking forward to some well-deserved R & R. Instead, they run into a deadly attack by vengeful Imperials that changes the course of all of their lives.Rev up your engines-it's time for the Rogue Squadron to fly again! Join Luke Skywalker, Wedge Antilles, and the rest of the Rogues on a mission that will define them as heroes not just of the Rebellion, but as heroes for the whole galaxy!

B.P.R.D.: The Black Flame #2 (of 6)
Abe Sapien tries to settle into a desk job as the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense's war against the frog monsters escalates. But while Roger leads the Bureau's military units from victory to victory, the Nazi head of a major U.S. corporation puts his best scientists to work harnessing the power of the frogmen, and preparing for the return of a bizarre villain from the Bureau's secret past-The Black Flame.

The Amazing Spiderman 524 “ACTS OF AGGRESSION”
What horrors do the hordes of Hydra hold in store for the sensational Spider-Man and his teammates? Will the web-head and the New Avengers stop the revitalized Hydra from bringing the United States to its knees…? And if so…at what cost? The pulse-pounding conclusion to the Hydra arc! Part 6 (of 6).

FANTASTIC FOUR #531
Hot on the heels of last issue’s shocking final page, the FF are faced with a two-pronged attack! Having completed its journey to Earth, the Entity has arrived, warning of an even more terrible threat to come! J. Michael Straczynski continues his red-hot run, challenging Marvel’s First Family like never before in the pages of the World’s Greatest Comic Magazine!

Ultimate Iron Man #4
Science fiction visionary Orson Scott Card (Ender’s Game, Speaker for the Dead) and superstar artist Andy Kubert (1602, Origin, Ultimate X-Men) continue the origin of Ultimate Iron Man. Tony Stark and Jim “Rhodey” Rhodes have their first adventure! What happens here will change their lives! Plus any back issues that I can find.. I've been looking for this series for a while now... And on top of that, Serenity opens, and the soundtrack is released this week.

Serenity #1 - #3

So I finally have the complete run of the Serenity comics now, I might as well review them as one, how it should be. First, I think that I should mention how successful the entire run has been. Despite the fact that there are only three issues, that it's based off of the little show that was cancelled, every single run has been sold out. They've sent them back for reprints and all that fun stuff, and they've been a huge success. Hopefully, they'll be continuing after the movie with another short miniseries or even a full on series.
The comic format is something that Serenity took to fairly well, which surprised me a little. It shouldn't have though, considering that a TV show is an overarcing storyline joined by smaller stories. Comics are essentially the same way, from what I've seen over the summer and my own launch into comicdom.
So the comics... first of all, Joss Whedon wrote each issue. Each issue has a comparable style of dialog to that of the series, with some fun lines and themes that we've seen in the series. The stories themselves take off after Objects in Space, the last episode of the series, and just before the movie takes place. All in all, it's a great lead in to the movies, mentioning a couple of the movie characters and actually introducing a couple.
Characterwise, we see the return of a couple of characters, Dobson, who was shot by Mal in the first episode, and Badger, a small time crime boss. Dobson was supposed to have been killed, and I'm divided on how I feel about his return. I think that it kinda detracts from the first episode a little, and I'm not a big fan of seeing previously thought dead bad guys return (Mainly from Stargate) although he does play an interesting role in the trilogy. Badger was done pretty well, and it was pretty funny to see him get stranded somewhere, as well as seeing Mal and his crew finally get a little backbone around his group of thugs. The pair of creepy guys, the ones with the Blue Hands return, which was very cool. They do their dirty work, and we learn some interesting things about them, like that they've got blue suits under their clothing, which makes me want to learn more about them. It's not explained who the hell they are though.
The crew. This is a really good transition for the crew, especially coming to the movie. We see them bicker more, we see Inara and Mal have their own problems, Jayne and Mal have problems, Kaylee and Simon, and everything else. Basically, everyone's getting a little more annoyed with Mal.The major things that happen are with Inara leaving, which finally happens here, and Book, who also leaves the ship, to where he is in the movie.
Mainly though, the trilogy is Mal's story. We really see how dark he is, much like some of the episodes, and how much of a rut he's in. That he's just moving forwards, no destination in mind, as he goes from one job to another, with worse and worse luck. Artwise, the trilogy is amazing. The penciling, colors and shading is fantastic, some of the best stuff that I've seen in a very long time. There are just some beautifully drawn scenes in here, and the art along makes the books worth picking up. I was lucky to have gotten all the covers that I had anticipating getting, Inara's, Kaylee's and Wash's. (No, that's a lie, I tried to find the copy with Jayne on the cover, but no luck...) I was divided on the cover art, with there being some really good covers, and some not so good covers, as well as some in the middle.
The main thing is that these issues have to be read together. It's hard to read just one, because you're only getting a third of the story. The entire run is essentially one or two episodes of the series, had it been running, and overall, there's a fairly solid plot and arc that leads right up to the movie.
So, if you happen to see these in stores, do yourself a favor and pick them up.

Deportation & Comics

My brother Dan went off to college today, the second kid in our family to do so. Dan was accepted to The University of Hartford down in Conn. where he's going to be double majoring in Music Education and I think Music Theory. It's going to be weird without him in the house, although I think that it's going to make things easier all around, at least for me, for a while. I'll have freer use of the car, and I found that when I went to Norwich, even though I was living in the house, I got along better with my sibblings. Probably the same thing will happen here. I gave him my contact information, AIM, E-mail and web addresses, so we'll talk during the year, that's for sure. I think that he'll enjoy college.

Over the summer, I've become more of a comic fan. I've begun to read more than just Star Wars Republic/Empire, broadening my horizons a little. The Amazing Spiderman was the first comic that I picked up, I love the author, J. Michael Straczynski, who also wrote the entire Babylon 5 series. Love Spiderman, then picked up the Fantastic Four, also by JMS, which has proven to be an interesting read as well. I've also picked up some random back issues of Iron Man, who's been a long time favorite, as well as Hellboy(Love the artwork) and Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-Men. I've also accumulated random issues of other Spidermans, Sin City and Freaks of the Heartland, among others.
I was never really into comics as a kid. I know that I owned some, although I have no idea where they ended up, but the one or two X-Men comics that I did own confused me a great deal. I didn't really know what was going on at all during the stories, and really didn't know anything about comic art and storytelling to pay much attention anyway. I was more into the Marvel Trading cards. Third through Fifth grades in primary school, man, I loved those cards, and still have them, in a box. Those were more interesting to collect and just look at, at least at my age. Me and my friends would talk about them all the time, and during Recess, we'd play X-Men on the playground.
Star Wars Republic and Empire really got me more into comics. Working with the Unofficial Clone Wars Site (www.clonewarz.com), I worked at reviewing the Clone Wars comics as they came out. Looking back over the older reviews that I wrote, I can see that I had almost no idea what I was talking about, and as I wrote more reviews, I learned more about comic art and writing. Along the way, I've since talked to quite a few comic authors, artists and editors, all really cool people.

So, anyone have any recommendations for new books and series?

Day Off, New Session

Session 1 has now ended for the summer. Overall, I was fairly impressed with how we worked and how the kids were. There are several different types of sessions at camp. The main ones that we like to get people for are the two week sessions. These are the ones that we try and put the best of our programming into, mainly because we have more time and energy for it. It's also the times when we have the most returning campers, campers who have attended camp before, and have returned for more time here. One Week sessions are the opposite. We mainly have younger, newer campers who are usually coming for the first time. Because we want people to come for the two week sessions, we don't put many of our specialized programs into these weeks. Two specialized camping sessions are First Timer's camp, which is a one week session in the middle of a two week session, designed expecially for first timers. They have slightly different programing than the rest of the camp during that time. In the week that that is not taking up, we have mini-camp, which is designed for very young kids, who only come for three days. Finally, we have Champ Camp, a special program that is designed to bring kids with severe asthma to camp, where they can be educated about their conditions, and to teach them that they can do anything that they want in life, not being limited by asthma. This is the only time during the summer that we have a co-ed portion to the camp. We're going into Session IB, which is going to be our busiest session this summer, with 153 kids coming at last count. It's going to be either a fun or horrible week, with so many people. We have four additional staff volunteers coming back, some of our best former counselors, to help us with the work load. Hopefully, we'll be able to hire a couple of the CITs who are going through the program right now to help when they leave. I really hope that some do, they're outstanding fellows. One was kicked out today, mainly because he was getting too close to the kids, and not maintaining a certain amount of professionalism, and really wasn't good at listening to directions.
I was kinda saddened to see this last session go. There are several kids that I've seen coming for several years now that I'm really going to miss having around. They're well behaved and take a certain amount of leadership in the village, something that's great to see. I was told by one parent of one kid that as long as I was at camp, they were sure that their kid would have a great time. I was kinda shocked that they place this much faith in my work here, but honored by it. I'm glad that their son had an outstanding time, as he has for the past couple years.
Staff are on time off now. I got off and into Burlington, did a bit of shopping, and got some things that I needed. A USB stick, replacing the one that I lost, 84 cans of soda, a bottle of Cranberry Juice, which will vanish within the week, mark my words, a book called Singularity Sky, by Charles Stross, whom I've read in Asimov's. The book's good thus far, although I'm not terribly far into it yet. I'm also ammasing a small collection of comics: 3 issues of The Amazing Spiderman, written by J. Michael Straczynski, 1 issue of Astonishing X-Men by Joss Weadon, Fantastic Four by JMS and the first issue of Serenity by Joss Weadon. Of all of them, Serenity I is my favorite. I wasn't able to find the cover that I was looking for, Jayne's, but I picked up Inara's, which looks pretty cool. The story's good, dialog is fun, art is outstanding. I can't wait until #2 and #3 are out. Should be a fun trip, and it's awesome to read some new Firefly material. It's been far too long.
Found some awesome news today: The John Butler Trio is going to be playing at the Higher Ground, a local concert venue here in Burlington. I'm excited. I picked up their CD last week, and have listened to their stuff for a little while. They're a newer band from Australia, and when talking with Rhet, our Australian representative on staff, he knew of them, and also enjoys their music. Looking at the ad in the paper, tickets are $3 at the door and advance, which is more than amazing, and I hope that it's not a typo. Their show is the 20th of August, and I'm definently going to that. I told Rhet about it and his jaw dropped. First words out of his mouth was 'I'm going'.

Serenity Comic Covers up!

Here's the details:

SERENITY #1
Written by Joss Whedon and Brett Matthews, pencils by Will Conrad, colors by Laura Martin.
This fall Joss Whedon makes his big-screen debut as writer/director with Serenity, the big-budget feature follow-up to his cult-hit TV show Firefly‹the story of a ship full of mercenaries, outlaws, fugitives, and one law-abiding prostitute running across the fringes of space. Now Whedon pens a three issue miniseries based on the film with Brett Matthews, whose previous credits include Spider-Man specials with Daredevil and Wolverine, episodes of TV's Firefly, an Angel miniseries, and the animated Chronicles of Riddick feature Dark Fury.
The crew of Serenity once again find themselves broke and on the wrong side of a number of very large firearms, making the first issue a case study in how to mix intense, Whedon-style character interaction with cinematic action and violence. Artist Will Conrad and colorist Laura Martin paint a rough and wild world of adventure across a strange and dangerous universe. Each issue of this series features three covers, one for each member of the Serenity crew, drawn by the biggest names in comics. Issue #1 features Mal by John Cassaday, Inara by J.G. Jones, and Jayne by Bryan Hitch.
32 pages, $2.99, in stores on July 6.

And the Covers:

Mal- The Captain

Jayne- The Mercenary

Inara- The Companion

I love these. I'm definently going to pick up one of each when they come out, because they're just awesome.

Indianapolis Bound

I just booked my flight and return flight to Indianapolis. So it's official, I'm going to celebration 3! I'm pretty excited, and I can't wait to go. I know that my mom reads this from time to time, and I'd just like to say that she's great, and a huge thanks goes to her for helping me plan this. So I next need to figure out how to get my
armor over there, after I fix it up a little bit.
And now, for homework.
Wash: Work, work, work...~Firefly

And speaking of Firefly, I found this interesting bit of news from MSNBC regarding the comic series:

Serenity By Joss Whedon
The "Buffy" creator got his fangs in this new series. Out in July. A prequel to the upcoming movie based on the canceled TV show "Firefly"—set 500 years from now. Are you lost yet?

Nice to see that Joss is writing them, and that we now have a rough release date. I can't wait to start picking these up.