Rewriting the Male Gaze: How Widespread Is This Problem And Can It Be Fixed?

 

Hollywood producer Ross Putman is generating some buzz by putting intros of female characters in scripts he is reading on twitter @femscriptintros. The point, it seems, is to highlight another aspect of the “male gaze” in film and television, in effect, men writing for other men about women. Some of the tweets Putman has already put up include (he changes all the character names to Jane to protect the writers’ anonymity):

JANE (30s) -- Beautiful, but pissed.

JANE, late 40’s, naturally attractive, is having a glass of wine on the island of her spectacular kitchen.

As we get closer we see that JANE is an attractive girl, but a little worn out looking at the moment.

Across from him, his wife, JANE. Also 40, still a knockout. The soft candlelight makes her beauty glow.

JANE pours her gorgeous figure into a tight dress, slips into her stiletto-heeled fuck-me shoes, and checks herself in the dresser mirror.

JANE (late 20s) sits hunched over a microscope. She’s attractive, but too much of a professional to care about her appearance.

His wife JANE is making dinner and watching CNN on a small TV. She was model pretty once, but living an actual life has taken its toll.

A gorgeous woman, JANE, 23, is a little tipsy, dancing naked on her big bed, as adorable as she is sexy. *BONUS PTS FOR BEING THE 1ST LINE

I think the issue may be nuanced than it appears. I could see many writers worrying that if they don’t describe their female characters as attractive, a producer will assume she’s not supposed to be, won’t think of a pretty leading actress for the role and it’s the trash bin.

That having been said, as a writer, I want both my male and female characters to read as realistically as possible, so I asked myself, “how guilty am I of Putman’s complaint?” I like to think of myself as pretty even-handed when it comes to gender. My scripts are about 60-40 male protagonists to female protagonists, and my script “Jen-16” which just won the Other Worlds AustinScreenplay Contest, features a female protagonist (although to be fair, it may have been judged exclusively by men, I don’t know). That being said, some introspection is definitely called for.

From reading his account, I infer that Putman’s issue falls broadly into three categories:

1) Always describing women as “pretty” or “attractive” as their first or most important attribute. 

2) Descriptions that purely sexualize the female character (like tipsy bouncing on the bed lady) 

3) The dreaded “attractive, but,” an apparently clichéd way of giving a woman dimension while still making it all about her looks. Pretty, but life has taken its toll, attractive, but not too concerned about her appearance.

I decided to go through my scripts comparing a random sample of both male and female descriptions to see how guilty I am of this particular form of chauvinism. Mostly what I found is that my descriptions of characters tend to be pretty sparse, as I prefer to leave that kind of thing to the casting director. But I also made some other observations. Here are some descriptions from some of my scripts and my notes regarding this issue:

From A Christmas Survival Guide to the Modern Vampire

Into this picture steps VICKI HARDING, late 20s, attractive,

slim, and right now, disheveled, as she stomps into the

bedroom in her pajamas holding a large bowl of cereal.

I’ll give myself a C+ on this one. I lead with “attractive” and it’s sort of an “attractive but” but not really. Also, I don’t think I could be accused of oversexualizing with stomping into the bedroom in PJs with cereal.

Vicki’s sister NICOLE, late 30s, similar in appearance to

Vicki but more put together.

Not the most evocative description but nothing offensive, I think.

Nicole’s husband RICHARD, early 40s, attractive, fit.

For the record, here’s a male character that I describe entirely based on his physical features and I lead with attractive, so some evidence here that I’m an equal opportunity offender.

In front of the store window stands BRENDA, mid 20s,

approachably pretty.

I think “approachably pretty” is well-known shorthand for “she’s not going to overshadow the main character, but she won’t be hard for audiences to look at either.” It probably shouldn’t be.

Vicki looks past Bob to see STEFAN standing the corner.

Stefan is tall, dark and handsome. He lights up a cigarette.

He shoots Vicki a glance and smiles, cool as can be.

I use handsome instead of attractive, but this is a somewhat "sexy" male character intro, I think.

From “TRAP”

On one side of a steel table sits KARL DUNCAN, 55, but in

killer shape, like he could take out someone half his age

if he needed to.

Male character, described in terms of physical fitness, although I frame it as a clear self-serving attribute rather than something that would, for example, help him attract a woman.

LISA BRYANT, 21, lies on the couch, her head propped up

with one arm, reading an Art History textbook.

Points! Not only do I not mention Lisa’s physical attractiveness level, when we meet her she is engaged in a completely non-sexual activity.

From “Jen-16”

Within another glass-walled unit stands ALEX-17, 20, handsome,

fit, he does appear as if he could be a perfect specimen of

humanity. He stares coldly at the men.

Inside the unit is JEN-15. 18, beautiful, fit, she really is

just about the perfect specimen of humanity.

I put these two together intentionally. If viewed on its own, the depiction of Jen could definitely be flagged as being all about how hot she is. But I describe Alex in almost exactly the same way. It’s actually central to the plot that these people be almost perfect. While many of Putman’s tweeted intros may be legitimately sexist, it’s hard to know out of context which ones are gratuitous and which ones aren’t.

BLAKE TRUDEAU, 20s, fit, American, sits in a prison cell.

Think this one would have been flagged if Blake were a woman.

Inside it crouches KATYA-9, 16 years old, slim and feline. She has cat eyes and a perpetual snarl.

Nothing objectionable here, I don’t think, unless you believe that the trope of comparing feline and feminine is in and of itself objectionable.

From “Coldwater”

PIGGY’s name is well earned, as his round face and protruding

belly seem more suited for a farm animal than an SS Sergeant.

BLOOMFIELD, late 20s, has a physique that is the opposite of

Piggy’s. A U.S. Air Force Captain with a confidence that won’t easily be beaten out of him.

Here are two male characters basically introduced according to their physical appearance, although Bloomfield’s intro does give him credit for supreme confidence.

ELSA DANZIG, 30s, quite attractive, powerfully self-confident.

I did the same thing here that I did with Bloomfield! If taken by itself, would Elsa’s description be okay or sexist?

From “Hereditary”

Hereditary, a TV script that I am actually rather proud of, is the most problematic when it comes to Putman’s complaint. I know this, because some of his Twitter intros match some of these intros almost exactly. It’s disheartening, but in the interest of open, honest, conversation, let’s have a look.

JASON CLAY, 27, attractive, confident, stands in the wings as

a nervous NOAH TIBER, late 50s, gray, distinguished, clad in

a five thousand dollar suit, gives him instructions.

On Jason’s other side is MARTIN LOPEZ, 40, shorter and more

rugged than Jason.

I do describe these male characters based on their appearance, leading with the male protagonist being attractive, but there’s nothing sexual here, so it’s not quite the same thing.

Sitting next to each other at a kitchen island, enjoying a

bottle of wine, are STACY MILLS, 27, conservatively

attractive, and her friend DEBBIE FLYNN, 26, blonde, a bit

more relaxed in appearance and demeanor.

Ouch. One of Putman’s tweets looks just like this one. However, while two women drinking a bottle of wine at a kitchen island might not be the best choice because it’s cliché, I don’t know if it’s necessarily sexist. Women do drink wine in kitchens, I think, and there’s nothing wrong with it. Is it okay that I made one conservatively attractive and the other more relaxed as their introductory descriptions? Was it wrong for me to make the more “relaxed” one blonde? It seemed innocent at the time but not as much anymore. Unfortunately, it gets “worse.”

Martin opens the door to his home, a typical suburban duplex,

nowhere near as upscale or roomy as Jason’s home, and seeming

even less so due to the four children racing around the

kitchen as Martin’s wife, VERONICA, 37, pretty but tired,

attempts to cook dinner.

The computer belongs to one SPECIAL AGENT ALYSSA BRATTON, 30,

attractive, but clearly not too concerned about her looks,

with hair unkempt and a bare minimum of makeup.

Aaah! Two clear examples of “attractive, but!” I have an instinctive sense that this is wrong, but I’m not sure exactly why. Is it the implication that women should make every effort to make themselves pretty even if they’re tired, or job-focused, or whatever? Is it that I mentioned pulchritude at all when the point is that she’s an overworked mom or a hard working FBI Agent? It's probably both. It it more than this?

Walking behind Drew in a string bikini is MARY TOWER, 30, but

looks 40. Still pretty enough to get away with having breasts

that aren’t quite as big as they should be for this job.

I hit the trifecta on this one. I lead with her physical appearance, she’s sexualized, and there’s an “attractive, but.” I’m sure this one could easily make Putman’s list. However, it’s my only stripper, and her being one is not gratuitous, it’s a part of the plot. Also, I kind of feel like I can get away with some of these descriptions because I know these characters get fleshed out as complete human beings later in the script (or the series), but maybe that's a cop-out.

The point I’m trying to make is that while I know I can do better, I don’t think this kind of thing boils down purely to male chauvinism or a desire to objectify women. Like women, male screenwriters have the expectations of society (and Hollywood) to deal with. Also, as hard as good male writers try to view things as women would, or, more accurately, as anyone should regardless of gender, we are still men, and while hopefully we have women helping us out, a mistake from time to time is inevitable. I’m afraid Putman may paint male writers with too broad a brush, and I’m hoping that his observations, and others like them, are engineered to educate, rather than to shame.

Out of This World!

I won the inaugural Other Worlds Austin Science Fiction Screenplay Contest for my TV Pilot, "Jen-16"! Yay!

You can read more about it here:

http://www.otherworldsaustin.com/news/2016/1/1/2015-screenplay-contest-finalists-and-winners

Now when I blog to you about science fiction, you can be confident I know what I'm talking about!

Team Echo

A year ago, I had a dream. To tell the story of a team of superheroes who saved the world from a zombie apocalypse, and then couldn't be found when the world needed them to do it again. Now, with the help of gifted Australian artist Jonathan Munro, that dream has been realized.

Team Echo #1 is complete, and is available now in digital form: here: https://gumroad.com/l/teamecho1

I plan to sell the book digitally through other venues, and eventually, to make hard copies available. Without an established publisher, this may take some time though, and I wanted to make sure the story is available now. Whether or not an issue #2 will be published is heavily dependent upon the reception of this first issue. I have the entire story planned out, so there's no question that the series will be there if there is interest.

I'd love it if you would head on over to gumroad and buy a copy, and if you have any ideas on how we can make the publication available to a mass audience, I'd love to hear that too. Thanks!

What Is Humor?

I was watching a recent episode of the Big Bang Theory where Sheldon attempts to create a unified theory of humor. The joke in this idea comes from the fact that Sheldon has little to no concept of humor or sarcasm. Inherent also, however, is the implication that humor is just “what’s funny,” and can’t be quantified. However this is completely untrue.

Humor of all kinds can be boiled down into one simple concept: Subversion of Expectations. That is the essence of humor. A joke or a funny situation sets up a given expectation with its premise, and subverts that expectation with its punch line. For example, take the following joke: (Note: To see the joke answers, please highlight the area next to the A:)

Q: What’s worse than two hangnails on the same hand?

A: The Holocaust.

We’re given an expectation that the answer will be of a similar degree to the question. We would expect an answer like: a hangnail on each hand, or three hangnails on one hand.  But the true answer is completely out of proportion to the question. Thus we are surprised, and we laugh.

Maybe.

This particular joke is complicated by the fact that it is completely bereft of cultural sensitivity. Thus, if you are connected to the culture of the answer, you may find it offensive, rather than funny. Or you may find it funny, but feel guilty. However, this guilt and discomfort is also a part of humor. The famous line “Comedy equals Tragedy plus time” has its basis in truth. We laugh to protect ourselves from our existential terror, the so called “Morbid humor,” but when a tragic event is far enough away that we can assuage ourselves by parodying it varies depending upon the event and the audience. And, as a friend of mine once said: “Every joke is at someone’s expense.” 

Note that humor comes from subversion of expectations, not destruction of expectations. For example.

Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?

A: To use a washing machine.

To be sure, this is not the answer we expected, but it’s also not one we could have arrived at by any permutation of logic, so it’s not funny. The true answer to this joke, “To get to the other side,” is also not funny, but only because every child has heard the punch line, so this answer meets expectations. If you had never heard the joke before, you would expect a more deterministic reason for the chicken to cross the road, so the simple answer “to get to the other side,” would be surprising and funny. It’s a diminishing of expectations, the opposite of the humorous technique in the first joke. The point however, is that it’s an answer that can make sense in the right context, even if it’s one we didn’t expect.

Jokes can also use subversion of expectations to build an increasingly complex network of humor, setting up new expectations with the first subversion, and then subverting the new expectations, as in the famous “Monkey Routine.”

Q: Why did the monkey fall out of the tree?

A: Because it was dead.

Subversion of expectations. The answer makes sense, but it is the most out of proportion of all the possible answers.

Q: Why did the second monkey fall out of the tree?

A: Monkey see, Monkey do.

Our expectations are subverted once more. We expect an extreme answer and get a simple one.

Q: Why did the third monkey fall out of the tree?

A: Peer Pressure.

By this point, our expectations are so tangled we don’t know what to expect, and so an answer that is neither simple, nor extreme, but still meets the parameters of the joke, that it is unexpected and can still be arrived at logically (even though it almost certainly never would) is perhaps the funniest of all.

This joke also observes the Rule of Three, which states, for reasons too complicated to go into here, that no more or less than three permutations of the same joke provide maximum humor. You will find that sitcoms that employ runners, or a joke that repeats, will generally do it no more than three times: the first to establish the joke, the second to establish that it is a running gag, and the third to finish off the joke before it becomes expected. The idea of a runner, or a stand up comedian’s “callback,” both follow the idea of subverted expectations. We expect that the joke is over, so when it returns later and somewhat out of context, we are surprised and amused.

What about something like slapstick? When we see our clown walking carelessly towards the banana peel, we know exactly what is going to happen. He’s going to slip and fall. It’s exactly what we expect, and yet we laugh. Why? In this case, it is our visual expectation that is subverted. That is, every day, we see people walking down the street. It’s very mundane and boring. When someone suddenly stops that activity, goes flying, and takes a tumble, it subverts our visual expectation, if not our cognitive one. As Krusty the Clown once remarked regarding the “pie in the face” gag, “It only works if the schmuck has some dignity to begin with!” We know the pie is going into a face, what’s funny is the subversion of our typical visual experience that a dignified person won’t appear with a face full of pie.

I believe if you analyze any kind of humor, be it slapstick, political satire, joke, situation comedy or standup routine, you will find that at its heart lies the subversion of expectations. If your joke isn’t getting a laugh, you probably haven’t set up the expectation well enough or subverted it effectively. Take my Blog….

….PLEASE!

In Which the Sandman Returns; and Matters of Interest to Lunatics Are Discussed.

As I’m sure is true for almost any comic book fan of any longevity, I responded to news of a new Sandman series, with unfettered delight. No “Before Watchmen” this, no ghoulish exhumation of a completed story best left to rest (although that turned out better than anyone could have hoped for, I think). Nor did we need to expect comparisons to an aging rocker, hoarsely belting out classic hits to middle aged moms and dads reliving their youths. For this Sandman series would be penned by its original creator, Neil Gaiman, who by all appearances is at the height of his powers, having continued to produce quality work consistently since the tale of Dream of the Endless first ensured Gaiman's place among the Pantheon of Comic Book Gods such as Moore and Miller twenty-five years ago. We have every reason to expect that this new Sandman series will be everything we could have hoped for.

Having just read issue number one of The Sandman: Overture, I feel confident in saying no one will be disappointed. The story picks up just where the original series left off… and just where it began, in true Endless fashion. All our favorites seem to be in play, including Death, the Corinthian, and of course, Morpheus himself.

No spoilers here, I’ll only say the story opens with a reminder that there are truly infinite worlds and infinite stories to tell, and the first chapter closes by reinforcing that fact in what may be described as a fairly staggering way. Although I didn't do this myself, too eager to get to the new story, I suspect an evening or two dedicated to re-reading the original series in its entirety before digging into this fresh tale will be quite rewarding. In any event, if you are a fan of comic books, Gaiman, or literature, there’s no question this series is not to be missed.

While picking up Sandman, I also stumbled upon the latest offering by Jonathan Luna and Sarah Vaughn, entitled simply, as is the Luna wont, “Alex + Ada.”  Luna, of Luna Brothers fame, has been co-creator of such unforgettable works as Girls and The Sword, and his artistic style has a kind of haunting realism that is perfect for the type of stories he chooses to tell. “Alex + Ada” is no exception in this regard. The premise is hardly original; it’s probably one of the most classic science fiction tales: In a world where technology has advanced to the level where Artificial Intelligence and robotics are the order of the day, a lonely soul is presented with a robot clearly designed for companionship purposes and all that implies.

Although the scenario is familiar, there is something about Luna and Vaughn’s approach to the story that makes it feel entirely new. There’s that artwork of course, and hauntingly lifelike is naturally perfect for a story about android love. There’s the fact that Alex, although pining away for his lost girlfriend Claire and seemingly despondent, is an unwilling participant in the experiment, his robot having been a gift from a wealthy and well-meaning grandmother. There’s also a foreboding sense of doom foreshadowed by a news report of Artificial Intelligence run amok with disastrous consequences a year before. Little is revealed in the first issue, but it’s more than enough to have you wanting to learn more about Alex, his strong connections to the technology that no longer seems that far beyond our own, and what his relationship with his new potential robot paramour will be.

In my estimation, if you’re looking to get into comics, back into comics, or just add two new quality books to your lineup, these two are a great place to start.

800 Things Wrong with "In Time"

I recently saw the movie “In Time” starring Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried. It wasn’t the worst movie I’ve ever seen, but it was far from the best. It was way too long, especially for a movie about two people who essentially become Sci Fi Robin Hoods/Bonnie and Clyde. Also, the conceit of the film does not seem to have been thought all the way through. The concept is sort of a modern day “Logan’s Run.” Everyone is genetically engineered to stop aging at 25. The catch is, you then have a year to live. You can “earn” more time the same way people earn money in our world, but you also have to pay for everything with your time, so a sudden jump in your rent can literally cost you your life. A cup of coffee costs a few minutes, whereas a night in a nice hotel might cost you a whole month or more. People are confined by toll booths to different “time zones,” where the people in the ghetto rarely have more than a day in the bank (actually, on a clock genetically built into their arms) and people in the highest zone (New Greenwich) are essentially immortal, with hundreds or even millions of years to spend according to their whims. When Will Salas (Timberlake) is suddenly gifted 100 years by a suicidal New Greenwich citizen, he decides to use his new time to go on a crusade and collapse the system from the top on down.

This is kind of a clever idea, and an obvious allegory for the vicious class system that are own nation enjoys, but as I said, all the details don’t seem to have been worked out. To wit, I present the 800 (and by 800, I mean five) plot holes in “In Time.” SPOILERS AHEAD!

1. Short Timers

The stride in which people in this society take having hours or minutes to live is completely unbelievable. Sure, it’s all they’ve ever known, but this is essentially like watching yourself bleed to death and thinking “oh, it’s cool, I’ll figure something out.” In this world, the ghetto is littered with people who “time out.”  What’s important to understand is that there’s no way to protect your time. Anyone can take time from anyone else simply by grabbing their arm. The person can resist, of course, but if you’re strong enough, they can’t stop you. Yet there is only one small gang that ever goes around stealing time. In reality, if you had five minutes to live, you’d grab the next person you saw and beg, threaten or beat them in order to get a few more minutes. Yet in this ghetto where everyone has less than a day to live, there is virtually no violence. It’s implied, but we never see it, despite the fact that it should be happening ALL THE TIME.

2. The Casino

In one of the most ridiculous scenes in the movie, Timberlake faces off against Vincent Karnheiser (Pete Campbell to you Mad Men fans) in a high stakes no limit hold’em poker game. The actual hand is as ridiculous as you would expect from a poker movie scene. On a board of Q 5 6 J, Pete, holding top set, bets FIFTY YEARS, and Timberlake, who’s never had more than a day before in his life, calls with 4 8 offsuit! Naturally, a 7 comes and Timberlake wins a huge pot, but this isn’t the craziest part of the scene. The craziest part is that on the river, Pete essentially puts Timberlake all in. Timberlake calls, by putting his clock in a reader and letting it tick down to nothing. Of course, when it actually hits zeroes, he’s dead and there’s no coming back, so he’s relying on Pete to show the losing hand and for the computer to register it before he checks out, which naturally, is exactly what happens. If this were real, no casino would want players dying at the tables. Just like our world, you would exchange your time for chips and then play with those chips, so that going all in wouldn’t FUCKING KILL YOU.

3. The Time Zones

All that’s separating the ghetto from the next class of time owners is a toll plaza. No tanks, no phalanx of armed men with guns, the only way they can stop you from moving up in the world is by charging you an excessive amount of time to cross into the next zone. There’s nothing stopping you from rushing the barrier, as evidenced when it is crashed through in the middle of the movie with no consequences. In a world like this, it would take exactly two seconds for the time disadvantaged, who are nastier and outnumber the time rich, to revolt, charge the higher zones and take all their time.

 

4. The Security

One of the most unlikely things about this scenario is how easy it is to take someone’s time. Essentially, it’s like having every dollar you own taped to your body. If this were really how the world worked, someone would very quickly find a way to lock time, so no one could take it against your will. At the very least, someone would invent some goddamn armored sleeves so no one could grab your arm and “clean your clock” (from the movie, yes, very clever) in your sleep.

5. The Bus

This one was my biggest pet peeve about the movie. In the first major plot point of the film, Timberlake’s mom, played by Olivia “Thirteen” Wilde, is getting ready to take the bus home to celebrate her 50^th birthday with her son. However, she is shocked to learn that the bus fare has jumped from one hour to two, and mom has only left herself 90 minutes to get home. The charmingly sympathetic bus driver’s advice is, “you’d better run” and she does, only to fall seconds short of connecting with Timberlake in time for him to give her some life saving minutes. The two bitter ironies of this moment are 1) Timberlake has just been gifted 100 years, 50 of which he was probably all set to transfer over to mom and 2) Mom gave Timberlake 30 of her minutes that morning so he could have a nice lunch (which, idiot, maybe make him a fucking sandwich?).

But wait a minute. The cost of bus fare is TWO HOURS? This makes no sense at all. First of all, the standard of this currency is completely out of wack. A nice cup of coffee costs 4 minutes, a nice lunch costs 30 minutes, and a ride on the bus costs TWO HOURS?? Any moron who would take the bus in this kind of economy deserves to die. The second issue is that the bus fare has jumped from one hour to two overnight. This type of inflation is absolutely ludicrous. It’s explained that the rich intentionally jack up the prices of everything so that the lower classes will keep dying, because “for a few to be immortal, many must die” although why this is is never really explained. But doubling overnight? Even if such a thing could happen without an immediate revolution, you can be sure the proposed rate change would have been on the news for weeks, and there’s no way she wouldn’t have known about it. But she doesn’t seem terribly surprised, and neither do any of the passengers who have just been gouged for double the normal bus fare. I mean, why would you spend more time to ride the bus than it would take to get there on foot? You’re all 25! Get a bike!

I’m sure there are 795 more things wrong with this movie (I didn’t even get into the whole “timekeepers” concept), but my time is finite too, so I’m going to end this rant here. Good try, but I think the screenwriter should have spent a little more in time figuring out how this would all actually work.

Reviewing The New 52 - Part 6 - The Final Chapter

BATMAN

Hey, I’m a big Batman fan, but 11 Bat-Titles may be a bit much. Let’s find out.

Birds of Prey – Duane Swierczynski, Jesus Saiz

Birds of Prey opens with Charlie, a journalist trying to track down a “covert ops team run by a bunch of supercriminal hotties.” He quickly meets the first one, a tattooed, gun toting babe called Starling, as she and the Black Canary save Charlie from a bunch of ninja types who are trying to kill him. We then find out that these two have been using Charlie to flush out whoever’s behind the ninja types. They aren’t too successful, as they send Charlie to the airport and try to put him on a plane, at which point he blows up (an airplane seems to be a very bad place to be in the New DC Universe). If you like skillfully rendered pictures of hot, leather clad babes kicking ass, you will definitely like this book. If not, you may have to check out a few issues to see if it’s really going to become something worth reading. Recommendation: Issue by Issue

Catwoman – Judd Winnick, Guillem March

I’m not sure that leather clad babes kicking ass is enough to save Catwoman though. Catwoman starts with our heroine leaping from her apartment, half dressed, as skull-masked baddies break in and destroy the place. It continues with her infiltrating a Russian mob party and shredding a rapist, and concludes with her banging Batman. All in a day’s work, I guess, but not anything I really need to see more of. Recommendation: Pass

Nightwing – Kyle Higgins, Eddy Barrows, J.P. Mayer

I always thought that Nightwing, who is Dick Grayson, the original Robin, worked better as the leader of a team, specifically the Titans, and never took much interest in what he did on his own. Especially now, since it always seemed he was being groomed to be the next Batman, then he BECAME the next Batman, and now he’s back to Nightwing again. It’s a bit of an anti climax. This issue was pretty standard, Dick does some reflecting, fights some crime, visits his old circus folk friends, and fights some more crime. Nothing spectacular by any means. Recommendation: Pass

Batwing – Judd Winnick, Ben Oliver

Batwing is South Africa’s Batman, created as part of the Batman, Inc. initiative. Batwing’s secret identity is David Zavimbe, a police officer, so he really never gets a break from crime fighting, and can give Batman a run for his money when it comes to being obsessed. What’s interesting about the Batwing concept is captured perfectly in this little exchange:

I told Batman that a man dressed as a bat will not instill fear in the average criminal in Africa. They have seen too much.

He told me: “You just have to sell it.”

Need I say more? Recommendation: Keep Reading

Batgirl – Gail Simone, Ardian Syaf, Vicente Cifuentes

In Batgirl, Barbara Gordon is back. About 20 years ago, the Joker ended Babs’ Batgirl career with a bullet. Since then, she’s been confined to a wheelchair, and fighting crime as information processor supreme Oracle. (The guy who really needs to register with DC’s complaint department is The Joker. His two big coups, killing Robin and paralyzing Batgirl, have been undone. What’s a psychopath gotta do these days?) Now Barbara’s back in action, and you can tell she loves it. She takes out a group of young murderous sociopaths with giddy delight, even remarking to herself “I did? I completely did!” when one of the villains comments on how Batgirl has knocked his compatriot out cold. However, we also see the other side, when, while attempting to save a victim in a hospital bed, she freezes when a masked villain pulls a gun on her and points it right where the Joker’s bullet went, triggering a trauma flashback, allowing the villain to kill his prey. There are a lot of facets to this character, and I’m interested to see where this one will go. Recommendation: Issue by Issue 

Batwoman – J.H. Williams III, W. Haden Blackman

The claim to fame of Batwoman, a recent addition to the DC universe, is that she became the first mainstream lesbian superhero. I’m not sure if that had anything to do with the stylistic choice, but for some reason Batwoman has a very gothic feel, with lots of raven blacks, ethereal blues, smoky greys and blood reds. We start with Batwoman saving a family from some kind of creepy water spirit. We then move on to see Kate Kane, after a brief back and forth with a cop friend, hanging out in what appears to pass for her version of the Batcave, where she is offering some sage advice to her sidekick, who is not Batgirl, but Flamebird, AKA her cousin Bette. We then get a little backstory where we learn why Kate hates her father. The book feels sort of all over the place and I would wait for it to find an identity before following it. Recommendation: Pass

Red Hood and the Outlaws – Scott Lobdell and Kenneth Rocafort

This book is the Teen Titans Gone to Hell, and not in a good way. It features Roy Harper (Speedy), Jason Todd (Red Hood, A.K.A. Robin II), and Koriand’r (Starfire) as a ragtag band of I don’t know what. It starts with Jason breaking Roy out of an Arab prison, and moves to some tropical island where it seems they’re both sleeping with Kory. Roy has no personality, Jason has one, but it’s very unpleasant, and Kory seems to have been turned from a nuanced alien princess to an adolescent fantasy sex toy. I think you can guess where I’m going with this one. Recommendation: Pass 

Batman and Robin – Peter J. Tomasi, Patrick Gleason, Mick Gray

Finally, we get to the books that actually feature Batman. Batman and Robin is fun, if for nothing else, than for Robin, AKA Damian Wayne, whose father is Batman and whose mother is the daughter of R’as Al Ghul, one of Batman’s greatest enemies. The result is a Robin who is cynical, nasty, smart, precocious and alarmingly vicious. Seeing Batman try to get this little brat under control is worth the price of admission. Recommendation: Keep Reading 

Batman: The Dark Knight – David Finch, Paul Jenkins, Richard Friend

This book is fine, but I’m not sure it’s necessary. It’s a standard Batman story, with Batman having to deal with a breakout at Arkham Asylum. I assumed that one of these books would be a Batman: Early Years, the way Action Comics is for Superman, but if that’s the case, I haven’t figured out which one. I’ll probably keep reading this for an issue or two to see if it distinguishes itself from other bat-books, but if you’re not big on Batman, you can skip it. Recommendation: Issue by Issue 

Batman: Detective Comics – Tony S. Daniel, Ryan Winn

Detective Comics might be that Batman: Early Years book I’m looking for, since in it, the police are an enemy of Batman, but that may be true in the current New Universe. It’s a Joker story, and in the fine tradition of Joker stories, it’s a disturbing one. There’s plenty of brooding, action and daring saves, so if you’re a Batman fan, you should definitely check it out. Recommendation: Keep Reading 

Batman – Scott Snyder, Greg Capullo, Jonathan Glapion

I was obviously hoping for big things from the Batman title. Unfortunately, I didn’t really get it. In fact, I think this book exposes the problem with Batman oversaturation. This issue actually borrows sequences from the other books. There’s a breakout at Arkham, just like in the Dark Knight, and there’s a Batman internal monologue that turns out to be a speech Bruce Wayne is giving to a nattily dressed crowed, just like in Detective Comics. In fact, check out the art from P. 8-9 of Batman and P.11-12 of Detective. They’re practically interchangeable. And no, these aren’t just different takes on the same scene. There are enough differences that they are clearly separate stories. I don’t know who borrowed from whom, but the net effect is originality seems to have gone out the window. I can’t bring myself to tell you to pass on Batman, so I’ll just say Recommendation: Issue by Issue

And that’s it! Of the 52, I’ve only tagged 16 as must reads, so that’s a fairly affordable $12 a week. No need to send money, even though I’ve just saved you a ton of it; your undying gratitude and admiration are sufficient. I’ll probably take a break for awhile, and then possibly move on to non comics matters for a bit, so savor these reviews! Later!

Reviewing The New 52 - Part 5

We’re coming down the home stretch of The New 52 review, covering the Superman and Green Lantern titles this time, and finishing up with the Batman line next time around. So, without futher ado…

Superman

I have to say up front that I’m a Batman guy, but I was willing to try to keep an open mind when it came to the “New Superman Family.” Here’s what I found:

Superboy -- Scott Lobdell, R.B. Silva, Rob Lean

What’s been nice about The New 52 is that each group of titles has had one surprise for me, one title that I thought there was no way I’d have any interest in that I ended up loving. For the Superman group, it was Superboy. When I was a kid, Superboy, along with Teen Titans and the Legion of Super Heroes, was one of my favorite titles. Once I grew up, the idea of Superman as a kid no longer had much appeal for me. I’m happy, therefore, to say to today’s young readers: this is not your father’s Superboy. This Superboy is the child of Superman and Lex Luthor. Seriously. He was cloned from a combination of their DNA. This new Superboy has been around for awhile, but the first time around, he basically just appeared on the scene as a “hip” cocky young Supertype. In Superboy, we actually get a “clone’s eye” view. We first meet Superboy in the tank, where an organization called NOWHERE is “growing” him. We hear his thoughts as he is observed and experimented on by a team that does not realize he is conscious. We sense his frustration as he is “educated” through a virtual reality program that we know he knows is not real, a fact his captors are ignorant to. We feel his fondness for Dr. Fairchild, the one NOWHERE agent who seems to really care about him (one of the agents who does NOT really care about him happens to be Rose Wilson, Deathstroke’s daughter). We also eagerly anticipate what will happen when he is finally released to eliminate the Teen Titans, who are posing a problem for NOWHERE. At least, I do. Recommendation: Keep Reading

Supergirl – Michael Green, Mike Johnson, Mahmud Asrar, Dan Green

I mentioned in the last blog that Animal Man has really been put through the ringer by DC. That’s nothing compared to what has been done to Supergirl. She’s been made into a blob of protoplasm, an “Earth Angel,” a supervillain, and of course, she's been killed. This Supergirl really starts from scratch, and I think it’s a good thing. We start with Kara Zor-El, Supergirl, crash landing to earth in her costume (in a cute twist on the legend, we learn that the costume is some form of ceremonial gown that she was saving for her graduation). Kara acts exactly like anyone waking up in a strange place with no memory of how they got there would act, until of course, she is attacked by giant robots and finds out she has super powers. While Kara prevails over the giant robots, she’s still a bit lost, until finally cousin Kal (Superman) shows up. What will happen next? I’m curious enough to want to find out. Recommendation: Issue by Issue

Action Comics – Grant Morrison, Rags Morales, Rick Bryant

Action Comics presents Superman: The Early Years. His powers are not fully formed, he’s the “leap tall buildings, more powerful than a locomotive, but can still take damage from being hit with giant metal things” type. Even his costume isn’t fully formed. He fights crime in an “S” t-shirt, the cape he was wrapped in as a baby, blue jeans and Timberlands. His morality isn’t fully formed yet either, and he is much more of a Batman type crime fighter, using threats and intimidation to get criminals to comply. As far as I’m concerned, that’s better left for Gotham City, and this take on Superman, while original, doesn’t work for me. I’m going to go ahead and say pass, since if you’re a Superman fan, you’re obviously going to go buy this book anyway no matter what I say. Recommendation: Pass 

(NOTE: Since writing this review, I broke down and bought Issue #2 of Action Comics. Now that I think I see where Morrison is going with it, I'm actually on board)

Superman – George Perez, Jesus Merino

As you would expect from any book with George Perez at the helm, the book looks fantastic. Once you get past that though, it’s just the same old Superman, fighting a giant monster, and getting back in time to write it up for the Daily Planet (which has been taken over by Morgan Edge’s Rupert Murdoch-esque global media empire). There’s certainly nothing here to suddenly make me a Superman fan, although again, if you are, I don’t see how you could fail to buy it. Recommendation: Pass 

Green Lantern

Green Lantern, on the other hand, I always did like, because I thought the idea of science fiction heroes was always pretty cool. Here’s my take on the four new GL books.

Red Lanterns – Peter Milligan, Ed Benes, Rob Hunter

No, this book is not about a bunch of power ring wielding prostitutes, although that might be interesting. In fact, one of the newer developments in the DC Universe is the splitting of the Guardians of the Universe’s energies into not just green lanterns and power rings powered by will, but a whole rainbow of lanterns, each powered by a different emotion. Red Lanterns and rings are powered by rage, which makes you wonder if perhaps any of us could be chosen. Their leader is Atrocitus, who is a pretty nasty, angry fellow due to the wanton slaughter of his entire race. This book is worth getting for the opening sequence where Atrocitus’ cat, also a Red Lantern, shreds the crap out of a bunch of aliens torturing some innocent soul. Not sure where this one is going to go, although it seems a rebellion by the Reds against Atrocitus is brewing. Recommendation: Issue by Issue

Green Lantern: New Guardians – Tony Bedard, Tyler Kirkham, Batt

A bunch of years back, few will remember that DC attempted a New Guardians book, about a group that were chosen to eventually replace the Guardians of the Universe. That book was impossible to take seriously, in large part due to the cartoonish, Joe Staton art, and was quickly shelved. Now it seems that DC is reviving the idea. A cataclysm has left the Guardians wiped out, except for one, Ganthet, who tasks himself with finding a solution to this catastrophe. The solution starts with selecting Kyle Rayner, a struggling young illustrator, as the recipient of the last available Green power ring. This makes sense to those who have followed DC history, as Kyle has been the fourth official Green Lantern from Earth for some time, but it’s not really clear why he is chosen in this book. Furthermore, Kyle is given a ring for each color of the rainbow, presumably to help him find new recipients for them. Rudely, these rings have been extracted from their current wearers, while they were using them, which sucks, since ring bearers often use these rings to do stuff like fight off hordes of angry aliens or travel through space, which it’s difficult to continue to do once they are suddenly removed. While that’s an amusing idea, I’m still not clear where this book is going, and I don’t have high hopes. But we’ll see. Recommendation: Issue by Issue

Green Lantern Corps: Peter J. Tomasi, Fernando Pasarin, Scott Hanna

As a kid, I loved the Alan Moore Green Lantern Corps back up stories, so when they decided to launch a Green Lantern Corps series, I was thrilled. Imagine my horror to learn that rather than anthology stories of alien Green Lanterns in space, we were going to be treated to a team of Green Lanterns operating on Earth, saddled with that cartoonish Joe Staton art I mentioned earlier. Actually, don’t. You can’t possibly imagine. It was too horrible. Fortunately, I got over it. Even more fortunately, this Green Lantern Corps has a chance to get it right. Although we’ve got two human Green Lanterns, Guy Gardner and John Stewart, at the helm, they end up leading a team of alien Lanterns tasked with finding out why a bunch of GLs visiting a certain planet have turned up dead. And they do find out. It’s because everyone on that planet has turned up dead. What now, GL Corps? Recommendation: Issue by Issue 

Green Lantern – Geoff Johns, Doug Mahnke, Christian Alamy

I’ll give DC credit on this one. While most of the flagship entries in The New 52, i.e. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, seem to be sticking with tried and true formulas, Green Lantern went a different way, decommissioning the classic Hal Jordan Green Lantern and re-signing his arch nemesis, Sinestro, as a Green Lantern and the star of this book (although, I’m forced to wonder, with Hal Jordan out of the picture, Stewart and Gardner fighting a world killer in the far reaches of space, and Kyle Rayner forming the New Guardians, who the heck is protecting Earth’s space sector? Talk about feast or famine!). I mean, yeah, we know Hal is going to get the ring back, but it’s a nice way to start fresh. In this issue, we follow Hal getting acclimated to civilian life, and Sinestro trying to get used to the idea of being on the green side of things. Neither are too good at it, and we end with Sinestro asking Hal to work with him so that they can get back to where they belong. Should be interesting. Recommendation: Keep Reading 

Okay, that covers everything but the Batman titles, and there are plenty of them, as you’ll see next time.