Showing posts with label Comic Books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comic Books. Show all posts
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Batman: Year One - Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli with Richmond Lewis
The opening page has something very titillating:
THE CRIME BLOTTER
by Slam Bradley
OOPS! SHE DID IT AGAIN!
Gossip diva Vicki Vale got her legendary, notoriously firm, shapely fanny tossed into the hoosegow yet again after trying to lift an estimated $11,320.00 worth of merchandise from the Sprang. The cutie klepto pled guilty. After paying for the loot and promising on a whole big heap of bibles to seek counseling, she got off with a wink and nod to the judge.
Leave us say the dame knows how to wink.
One juror says she even blew a kiss to the horny old fart.
You can't make this crap up!
It is with something of a heavy heart that I cannot recommend Batman: Year One as highly as some of the previous comic books reviewed here. Make no mistake--Year One is a good read--but I came into it expecting The Long Halloween to get blown out of the water. Now, Year One may be a "more perfect" and "concise" work than The Long Halloween (and indeed lacks the "triple-twist" which perhaps undermines the rest of the story of Halloween) but it is not as creative or imaginative as Red Son, Watchmen, or The Dark Knight Returns. In short, the last review (of The Long Halloween) included a statement by Jeph Loeb that Year One was the true masterpiece in the Batman graphic novel world (even though The Dark Knight Returns possessed the greater cultural cache). I cannot agree with him.
There is really very little to complain about here, and so this review will likely be short. The story opens and closes with Lieutenant Jim Gordon. He and Batman share equal billing in this volume--Gordon may even get higher billing. This could be a flaw of the book--that Batman's character is not as well-developed as you would expect for his "origin" story. Bruce Wayne does appear, on the second page, returning to Gotham City after 12 years "abroad." He has not yet become Batman, and (while I do seem to be dismissing the praise this book has received) there are a few excellent scenes where he takes his first stabs at crime-fighting.
Bruce Wayne appears in public as a "playboy" who is given to drunken excess and womanizing. This is all a ploy to detract attention from his new role. In his first "fighting scene" he walks through Gotham's red-light district and gets solicited by a very young looking prostitute, who is also not very experienced. Her pimp explains that she is doing it all wrong, and that she is picking out the "wrong" type of client--that Wayne in his disguise (which is really just a scar he makes across his face) could be "vice." Selina watches from a window above, making catty comments: "Oh. Geez...Can't be Vice. We're Paid up. Just some idiot out to get himself killed....You know what I hate most about men, skunk? Never met one." (11)
Selina (or Catwoman) makes a couple appearances and, as usual, establishes herself as neither an ally or enemy of Batman--though certainly leaning towards the former.
This book is not really about Batman so much as it is about Gordon and the corruption of the Gotham City Police Department. D.A. Harvey Dent does not get a much bigger role than a few choice scenes. The Mayor of Gotham and the Commissioner are corrupt. Many police officers are just as bad as the criminals, and are in fact in cahoots with the criminals (Carmine "The Roman" Falcone--who is a major character in The Long Halloween, makes a brief appearance towards the end of this story).
It is mainly about Gordon fighting corruption within the Department, but also about Batman's fumbling first attempts, which are quite entertaining:
"The costume works--better than I'd hoped. They freeze and stare and give me all the time in the world...I come in close on the one who looks the strongest--throw him a growl I've brought all the way from Africa----and suddenly everything falls to pieces. The one to my left calls for his mother----to my right the other collects his senses and leaps to position--he'll be trouble----the strong one gets scared--too scared--No----I'm no killer----he screams like a girl----can't be older than fifteen----a child--just a child----the one I was worried about takes his shot----he's trained--kick's got power--" (31)
Probably the strongest part of the book is Chapter Three: Black Dawn, in which Batman is trapped in an enclosed area and surrounded by cops who are intent on killing him. He uses a device that he has not yet tested out on these conditions. This is probably the best scene in the entire book, in terms of Batman action. And that is a lot of what this book is about--action and fighting sequences. I would have liked to see more character development.
Lieutenant Gordon, as noted, gets the majority of that. In fact, there are a few nice panels that certainly bring the paintings of Edward Hopper to mind (and are referenced accordingly) and show that Gordon is certainly not perfect, either. This is the first time (maybe the only time) that he takes a somewhat immoral tack, and for that alone it is significant. By the end of the story, Gordon has made a few strides in his war on crime, and has befriended Batman (at something of an arm's length) and is waiting for help because someone named the Joker has poisoned the Gotham reservoir.
So, the opening page, which seems to identify this book as The Dark Knight Returns Pt. 2 sadly does not come to pass. Vicki Vale is just a name, not a journalist as in the Tim Burton film. We don't get to see her, or her apparent fall from grace. There is no Robin, male or female. There are no bad guys who are trying to hide their identity. There is just police corruption. So in one sense this book is the "most realistic" of the Batman comic books, but that quality also makes it the most mundane. It is well-done on the whole, but lacks the sort of excitement and imaginative excess that the other pieces boast. It is not long and it is probably worth reading--many others seem to view it as the epitome of the "Batman renaissance" in the comic book world, so I suggest you check it out before buying into my view. But I can't help the way I feel--for my money, The Dark Knight Returns is the book that will really "knock your socks off"--Year One will just serve as a nice ottoman as you relax by your fire.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Superman: Red Son - Mark Millar, Dave Johnson, Killian Plunkett, Andrew Robinson, and Walden Wong
Superman: Red Son is a three-part graphic novel/comic book that is on par with The Dark Knight Returns or The Killing Joke, and nearly rises to the heights of Watchmen. In short, while I hasten to note that my education in comics is still pretty elementary, this must stand among the best comics ever done. It may be that I am more obsessed with Batman at the moment and so have not given Superman my fair attention--but it seems to me that Red Son is not as highly-touted as either of the above-two mentioned Batman comics. This is a mistake and more people need to know that this is out there (of course I may be extremely ignorant and this may be common knowledge to even the most casual reader of comics--but I have to believe I am more objective than that and have a realistic understanding of the common knowledge of mass culture: if this story was part of it, then it boggles the mind that it had not been turned into a movie--there were rave reviews of the new Man of Steel trailer and one hopes the film will incorporate elements of this book's tone).
Where Watchmen has an alternate version of 1985 with Richard Nixon still President, Red Son has an alternate version of 1978 with John F. Kennedy still President (and with Nixon assassinated in 1963). Batman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern all show up, and Lex Luthor becomes basically the greatest American hero of all time. The creativity in the book is summed up nicely in a quick conversation between Superman and Wonder Woman as they are flying through the air:
"'So, how was America?'
'Disgusting, Superman. Absolutely disgusting. It's Nineteen Seventy-Eight and children are still sleeping in the streets over there. Why does Kennedy cling to this capitalist dogma when it's quite clearly tearing his country apart?'
'Pride, I suppose. He'll come around eventually.'
'I told him he should devote more time to his crumbling economy and less to those painted movie stars he seems to pursue with such vigor. That country has never been the same since Nixon was assassinated in Nineteen Sixty-Three. I still maintain that was the beginning of the end for them.'" (75)
In the introduction to the book, Tom Desanto writes that Red Son is "a sharp social commentary on capitalism vs. communism and current American foreign policy." That gets it about right. It is really amazing what insights can be made when a classic comic book is re-imagined from the perspective of the Other. Superman basically becomes a totalitarian leader, and Batman symbolizes the underground rebellion. Lex Luthor saves America from economic ruin and re-establishes capitalism as the global norm, but all in an effort just to destroy Superman, and with the irony that his end goal of perfectionism of the human race is basically the same as Superman's vision but under a different name.
There is much more I could say about this book in terms of plot, but like the review for Watchmen, that would spoil much of the fun of reading it. It is just worth reiterating that the entire DC Universe is perfectly accommodated by the story. It is hilarious at times and profound at others, and the ending is masterfully done. Perhaps one day in the future this will be made into a movie, but I am afraid that it would require enormous resources and be difficult for a studio head to get behind--even though this subject matter is not really "controversial" anymore, it may be regarded as an extremely subversive plot line. Regardless, like Watchmen it is hard to imagine that a movie could match up to the experience of reading the book itself. I read it in about two days and it was nice to be reminded that I can still be blown away by something that hasn't been hyped to death.
Where Watchmen has an alternate version of 1985 with Richard Nixon still President, Red Son has an alternate version of 1978 with John F. Kennedy still President (and with Nixon assassinated in 1963). Batman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern all show up, and Lex Luthor becomes basically the greatest American hero of all time. The creativity in the book is summed up nicely in a quick conversation between Superman and Wonder Woman as they are flying through the air:
"'So, how was America?'
'Disgusting, Superman. Absolutely disgusting. It's Nineteen Seventy-Eight and children are still sleeping in the streets over there. Why does Kennedy cling to this capitalist dogma when it's quite clearly tearing his country apart?'
'Pride, I suppose. He'll come around eventually.'
'I told him he should devote more time to his crumbling economy and less to those painted movie stars he seems to pursue with such vigor. That country has never been the same since Nixon was assassinated in Nineteen Sixty-Three. I still maintain that was the beginning of the end for them.'" (75)
In the introduction to the book, Tom Desanto writes that Red Son is "a sharp social commentary on capitalism vs. communism and current American foreign policy." That gets it about right. It is really amazing what insights can be made when a classic comic book is re-imagined from the perspective of the Other. Superman basically becomes a totalitarian leader, and Batman symbolizes the underground rebellion. Lex Luthor saves America from economic ruin and re-establishes capitalism as the global norm, but all in an effort just to destroy Superman, and with the irony that his end goal of perfectionism of the human race is basically the same as Superman's vision but under a different name.
There is much more I could say about this book in terms of plot, but like the review for Watchmen, that would spoil much of the fun of reading it. It is just worth reiterating that the entire DC Universe is perfectly accommodated by the story. It is hilarious at times and profound at others, and the ending is masterfully done. Perhaps one day in the future this will be made into a movie, but I am afraid that it would require enormous resources and be difficult for a studio head to get behind--even though this subject matter is not really "controversial" anymore, it may be regarded as an extremely subversive plot line. Regardless, like Watchmen it is hard to imagine that a movie could match up to the experience of reading the book itself. I read it in about two days and it was nice to be reminded that I can still be blown away by something that hasn't been hyped to death.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Watchmen - Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons
Who reads Watchmen?
Undoubtedly many people do.
If, for some reason, you have not heard of Watchmen, it is likely that you hang around with non-artist types,
or other assorted individuals that do not find value in the graphic novel
medium. And if you have been denied
exposure to this book, it is unlikely that you will ever read it. And if you never read this book, you will
have just avoided one of the most creative works of art of the 20th
century.
That may sound like undue praise, but the cover to the book
goes further (“One of Time’s 100 best
novels”).
Watchmen’s
two-decade legacy was tested by its film adaption in 2009. I saw that film in 2010 before I had read the
book. At the time, I felt that the film was
overlong, but that certain moments in the film exhibited striking
originality—most especially, in the sequence that tells the origin story of Dr.
Manhattan. But on the whole, the movie
cannot do justice to the book. It is not
a bad movie. Zack Snyder probably did
about as good a job adapting the book into a 162 minute spectacle as
practicable. Originally, Terry Gilliam
was attached to the project, but later dropped out, deciding that the book
would be better filmed as a five hour miniseries. I am easily tempted to agree with that
conclusion.
The two major criticisms I can make of the film are the
performances and—an accusation that no doubt holds true for all novels turned
into films—the great parts that got left out.
It is not that any of the actors are bad,
but Watchmen is a very strange work
of art in its tone. Sometimes, the book
is just flat-out hilarious. There are
moments where the cynicism is so severe that the humor branches out into territory
seldom ventured. Moreover, the
characters do not always take themselves so seriously. At the end of the day they realize they are
all somewhat antisocial recluses who like to put on costumes and run around and
catch bad guys. The movie could lead the
viewer to believe that they take themselves totally seriously, and this would
be a huge misinterpretation.
To be sure,
this book contains scenes and moments of unmistakable genius, sheer creativity,
and true profundity. The movie attempts
to engage the viewer in some of those moments that only the reader will be able
to fully appreciate, but in so doing, almost all of the humor and “radicalism”
of the book are lost in a morass self-proclaimed greatness. And while most of the major scenes (along
with the best scenes) are contained in the film, the small details that make Watchmen such a treasure of a book must
inevitably be left out in any film version.
The most glaring omission from the film is the exposition of the Tales of the Black Freighter comic
book. While honestly I felt that this
was the weakest element of the book—indeed the most striking case of the
peripheral niceties overshadowing the exciting main story—this is likely a
literary trope that is practically impossible to film without losing a viewer’s
interest or deeply unsettling their expectations. Tales
of the Black Freighter will be addressed later but the failure to account
for it is the biggest “gap” between the movie and film. Also missing are the literary interludes and
fictional documents between chapters, which, conversely, contain some of the
greatest moments in the book.
The plot deserves little comment but should be briefly noted: the Comedian (a.k.a. Eddie Blake) has been murdered. Rorschach (a.k.a. would-be-a-spoiler) investigates, starting October 12, 1985. He goes to Nite Owl (a.k.a. Daniel Dreiberg), Dr. Manhattan (a.k.a. Jon Osterman), Sally Jupiter (a.k.a. Laurie Juspeczyk), and Ozymandias (a.k.a. Adrian Veidt) to inform them of the killing and to warn them that they may be next.
The plot of the book is very straightforward, but immaculately paced. Each of the characters' back stories emerge in a complex interwoven narrative, supplanted by the interludes between chapters. It is complex in that Nite Owl and Sally Jupiter were members of the Minutemen (along with the Comedian, and other costumed vigilantes such as Hooded Justice, the Silk Spectre, Captain Metropolis, Mothman) who "passed their titles" onto a younger admirer and a daughter, respectively. The book is, arguably, just as much about the Minutemen as it is the Watchmen. The plot is essentially a search for the person behind the killing, and the meaning of it. Later, Moloch, the "arch-nemesis" of the Watchmen (or Minutemen), who is now an elderly man dying of cancer, tells Rorschach that the Comedian came into his bedroom one night, apparently drunk and babbling on about some kind of island. Later, the author of Tales of the Black Freighter goes missing, and this is where that narrative strand is finally tied together.
And this is essentially the genius of the book. Everything is perfectly connected together. Moore peppers a variety of cultural references into the book so that it all becomes a disturbing mirror of reality--an "alternative" 1985. One of the two dueling newspapers reporting on the cataclysmic events that befall the world is called Nova Express, and the influence of William S. Burroughs is apparent. He is even directly referenced at one point (I am sure of it, though I cannot find it--one of the problems with quoting passages from a graphic novel). Regardless, I have to say that Moore succeeds with the "cut-up" method in a way that I never was able to fully appreciate in Burroughs. In his books, the narratives fall prey to the weird nonsensical prose--but here, where the narrative strands are disconnected, they are artfully re-assembled in such a way that perhaps you cannot call it a "cut-up" anymore.
In any case, the writing is excellent. For example, Rorschach's "voice" is indelible, and his journal entries are always a pleasure:
"October 16th, 1985: 42nd Street: Women's breasts draped across every billboard, every display, littering the sidewalk. Was offered Swedish and French love...but not American love. American love; like Coke in green glass bottles. They don't make it anymore. Thought about Moloch's story on way to cemetery. Could all be lies. Could all be part of revenge scheme, planned during his decade behind bars. But if true, then what? Puzzling reference to an island. Also to Dr. Manhattan. Might he be at risk on some way? So many questions. Never mind. Answers soon. Nothing in insoluble. Nothing is hopeless. Not while there's life." (Chapter II, 25)
Or take a newspaper "interlude" that is dated September 1976:
"PROBE: There was Ursula Zandt, the Silhouette...
SALLY: Uh-huh. Well, sooner or later, okay, that's going to come up, so let me deal with that...First off, I didn't like her as a person. I mean, she was not an easy person to get along with. But, when the papers got hold of it, her being a--what is it--a gay woman they say nowadays, when that happened, I thought it was wrong. I mean, Laurence, who was my first husband, he got everybody to thew her out of the group to minimize the P.R. damage, but...I mean, I voted along with everybody else, but....well, it wasn't fair. It wasn't honest. I mean, she wasn't the only gay person in the Minutemen. Some professions, I don't know, they attract a certain type....
PROBE: Who else was gay?
SALLY: Uh-huh. Well, sooner or later, okay, that's going to come up, so let me deal with that...First off, I didn't like her as a person. I mean, she was not an easy person to get along with. But, when the papers got hold of it, her being a--what is it--a gay woman they say nowadays, when that happened, I thought it was wrong. I mean, Laurence, who was my first husband, he got everybody to thew her out of the group to minimize the P.R. damage, but...I mean, I voted along with everybody else, but....well, it wasn't fair. It wasn't honest. I mean, she wasn't the only gay person in the Minutemen. Some professions, I don't know, they attract a certain type....
PROBE: Who else was gay?
SALLY: I'm not naming anybody. It was a couple of the guys, and they're both dead now. One died recently. I'm not saying who it was, I'm just saying that we all knew, and we knew she wasn't the only one, and we slung her out just the same. When she got murdered like that...I mean, I never really liked her. Ursula. Was that her real name? I didn't know that. I didn't like her, but...throwing her out. We shouldn't have done that. I feel bad about that." (Chapter IX, 22)
I have made all of the glowing comments I possibly can about this book and will not exhort myself any further because they likely fall on deaf ears: as I said, if you have not already read this book, you will probably never read it. I came late to the party. But if you have seen it in your pseudo-artist friend's bookshelves and have had your curiosity piqued, I highly recommend you follow that urge.
Friday, July 6, 2012
The Killing Joke - Alan Moore and Brian Bolland
The Killing Joke is not a graphic novel in the same sense as The Dark Knight Returns. For one, it is about 40 pages long. It is basically like one-quarter of The Dark Knight Returns. Having said that, it's arguably better than any one of the four parts of that book.
The story is short and sweet and to the point and while I was afraid of "spoiling" The Dark Knight Returns, and therefore didn't want to even name the villains that Batman faces in that story, I have mentioned it to several people and most of them just admit that they'll never read it anyways, why don't I just tell them? I do, but I'm doing them a disservice. They don't know what they're missing.
I was going to buy The Killing Joke until I saw that it was $18 and could be read in one sitting at Barnes & Noble. One night last week en route to picking up some take-out on a Friday night, I sat down up against the window of second floor B&N in downtown Evanston and ran through the book in about 30-45 minutes. It's brilliantly written, hilarious, very sad, slightly heartwarming, and perverted as hell. Once again, definitely not a book for little kids.
What is most interesting is that the story is basically the Joker's, and Batman plays more of a supporting role. Literally!
The story opens up with Batman saying, "You know, I really, really don't want to, but one of these days, one of us is going to have to kill the other." (Note: I may be conflating this line with The Dark Night Returns, but the idea that Batman sympathizes with the Joker to a certain degree is accurate.) Batman really doesn't hate the Joker as much as he does in other stories. What he feels for him is more akin to pity. And the opening of the story certainly lends a sympathetic air to the Joker.
This is because it tells his "origin story" and it's so sad. This is what makes The Killing Joke a real masterpiece (even though Alan Moore later said that he did not think it was very good, and even though most people agree that it does not rise to the level of Moore's other 3 famous graphic novels - Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen--all of which have been turned into movies ranging from mildly disappointing to downright disastrous).
The Killing Joke is, in a sense, "turned into a movie" if one combines Batman (1989) and The Dark Knight (2008). There was much talk in The Dark Knight about how you could not be sure of the Joker's true origin--but Batman left nothing to the imagination. I think the truth is that it's a combination of the two.
First, yes, the Joker was married. However, he did not cut his wife's face. (He does disfigure Alicia, in Batman, but that is irrelevant here). Instead, he works as an engineer at Axis Chemicals, and he decides that he wants to do what he really loves--which is to make people laugh. So he quits his job and starts trying to work as a stand-up comedian--and is a horrible failure at it. In one scene, he and his wife (who has recently become pregnant) sit in a restaurant and dwell upon their impoverished life since he quit his job. Needing money, he decides to accept an offer from the Mob, who want him to help them break into a building next door to Axis Chemicals (note: I am lifting this is off of Wikipedia--my memory is not so sharp and I don't own the book--but apparently it's a "card company"--now one would assume that means credit cards, but it could actually be a card manufacturing facility, which is certainly more appropriate).
Then, the police informs him that his wife has just died in an accident. The Mob forces him to go forward with their plan even though he has been traumatized. They put a Red Hood on him apparently to disguise him (though it seems more like a trope used to reference the real introduction of the Joker in Batman comic books--in 1951 in the issue "The Man Behind the Red Hood."). Batman comes in to save the day, and the Mob is dispersed, but "Red Hood" is left standing there. Having just lost his wife and unborn child, having lost out on the money he was going to get from the job, being a failure as a comedian, being trapped in a corner by Batman, he decides to commit suicide into a vat of acid.
Second, yes, the Joker was disfigured in a vat of acid. While this does not explain his scars in The Dark Knight, this is a story that I like much better, because of how the rest unfolds. The Joker, now in present day, decides to play a "big joke" on Gotham City. The set-up for that Joke is to break into Commissioner Gordon's home.
He breaks in, and he kidnaps his daughter (who is perhaps in her late-teens to mid-twenties--it's unclear). He takes her into a room, strips her naked, cuts her, and takes pictures of her being tortured. Commissioner Gordon is also kidnapped and brought to a funhouse. He is also stripped naked and put into a "freakshow" cage and forced to watch a slide-show of the torture of his daughter. After only a short while, he goes insane. This is the Joke: if a person is just pushed and pushed and pushed--just hard enough--they can cross the line from sanity to insanity.
It is here--when Batman arrives--that the real theme of the story emerges: all it takes is "one bad day" to drive someone insane for the rest of their life. Some people can be redeemed--like Batman. And some people cannot. But Batman believes that the Joker has to have a chance. After Batman arrives and frees Commissioner Gordon and reunites him with his daughter, the Commissioner tells him not to kill the Joker but to bring him in to "show him the way we do things."
At this point the stage is set for the final scene, with the Joker taunting Batman that perhaps his madness is also attributable to "one bad day." He then claims that there is nothing worth living for and gives a short speech about the virtues of nihilism and tells Batman "the Joke."
"See, there were these two guys in a lunatic asylum... and one night, one night they decide they don't like living in an asylum any more. They decide they're going to escape! So, like, they get up onto the roof, and there, just across this narrow gap, they see the rooftops of the town, stretching away in the moon light... stretching away to freedom. Now, the first guy, he jumps right across with no problem. But his friend, his friend didn't dare make the leap. Y'see... Y'see, he's afraid of falling. So then, the first guy has an idea... He says 'Hey! I have my flashlight with me! I'll shine it across the gap between the buildings. You can walk along the beam and join me!' B-but the second guy just shakes his head. He suh-says... He says 'Wh-what do you think I am? Crazy? You'd turn it off when I was half way across!"
The ending has been open to speculation, but I think I am reasonably sure of the way it ends. Note that I would recommend both The Killing Joke and The Dark Knight Returns very highly--but that The Killing Joke should be read first. Philosophically, I think it is the most interesting story in the bunch, and since the Joker has always been my favorite character (indeed I will play him in Batman in Brooklyn) I am naturally drawn to this book. As the present-day Joker and the "pre-suicide" Joker are presented alongside one another, one feels sympathy for the character in one instant, where all he cares about is taking care of his wife and making people laugh, and one feels derision (or maybe, catharsis?) as he mutilates and takes pictures and does who-knows-what else to the Commissioner's daughter. This duality then, compared with Batman, who is psychologically "one" with the Joker, but morally opposed to his view of life--who takes his bitterness out on the world, making it a more miserable place, rather than trying to make it a better place by ridding it of such evils--makes the story something of a meditation on human existence.
I was not going to pay $18 for the deluxe edition, but I would consider getting Alan Moore's DC Universe compilation, as this is apparently included in it, and it is a story that I would like to revisit some day in the future. This has also been a very pleasurable "research" experience, as I hope to utilize some elements from both The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke in Batman in Brooklyn. I may go back to Barnes & Noble today and read some more Batman comic books, actually. That sounds like a pretty good idea, yeah....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


