E-MAIL RYALL | ARCHIVES

MAIL SHOOT

May 2, 2005

COMICS 101 is in Session

Brent F. writes: Thanks for your latest article on the Countdown prelude. It's good to know that other people were as annoyed with it as I was. I knew where they were going with it when I read the five page preview online but I still hoped that I was wrong.

On one hand, I've heard from a few non-comics fans who have read it and liked it and seem interested in giving comics a try, but I still feel cheated. Like a lot of comic book characters, Beetle's only real problem was a lack of exposure. Nothing Giffen and DeMatteis did during their period on JLA was so damaging that it couldn't be solved by grounding the character a bit and making him an underdog. Winnick, Rucka and Johns spent 80 pages making Ted Kord interesting to casual comic fans and then pissed it away on a cheap shock tactic.

Unlike a lot of other more optimistic comic fans, I can't see them bringing him back anytime soon... if at all. His death serves a purpose, bringing him back doesn't. (Then again, I used to say the same thing about Jason Todd...) And damned if this doesn't make DC's decision to publish the sequel to "Formerly Known As..." all the more morbid. It can't be a coincidence that the this month's cliffhanger in "JLA: Classified" was the gang getting transported to Hell.

I really hope that this isn't DC's new yearly trend. Kill a little-used-but-well-regarded character for a quick sales spike.

Anyway. Instead of a full blown Blue Beetle history, what are the chances we could get the Reader's Digest version in next week's article? I didn't start reading about Blue Beetle until "Formerly Known As..." and I would certainly like to know more about him and this Scarab he's tied into.

At any rate, I look forward to your next article.

Jake writes: I have two completely unrelated questions-

1) How exactly do folks like Green Arrow and Robin keep their masks on, anyway?

2) DC or Marvel?

Also, thanks for convincing me it was a good idea to buy the DC: New Frontier trades, because they were FANTASTIC. I've loved Darwyn Cooke's art ever since I saw him in Catwoman, and he just did an unbelievable job. It's become much more common to find the dark stories, the stories that are just kind of depressing tragedies (I don't think we need to name names, but hey Identity Crisis). So to find a story that was an old-fashioned celebration of doing the right thing and the good guys winning in the end was a real treat.

Tipton: 1. Spirit gum. It's a strong but easily removable adhesive that stage actors use to attach makeup, wigs, beards and so on.

2. Depends on when. Right now? DC. 1997? Marvel. 1985? DC. 1978? Marvel.

Glad you dug NEW FRONTIER. Awesome book.

Rynan writes: What is DC doing? Trying to make quick sales by deploying idiotic story gimmicks while they wait impatiently for Batman Begins to hit theatres so they can make even more quick money. Lame.

Why does DC do this? Really I don't know. More than often, these stories usually implode on themselves, like HUSH( which I think was a relatively dumb "who-is-it?" story, which left us with the boring HUSH character and further hammered in the fact that DC has all but destroyed the Joker as a character. True shame, he used have such great schemes) and Identity Crisis. Why do they kill? Why do they write bad stories? This is what turns me to Manga and Independent Comics, because you at least know that the author probably won't do anything stupid without a Damn Good reason.

Why does DC copy other companies? If you look at comic book movies(like Spider-Man or the super hero based The Incredible) and their sales, you probably would begin to see that all people want is Heroes vs. Villains. Sure you can add a lil' problems, but nothing to really obstruct from the fact that Hero is going to defeat an evil Villain. Heck, I would be happy if it would be as simple as that. But that's not what DC's doing. Heck, they're also copying and admitting they screwed things up with there All Stars series that's coming out.

All I'm left with is "Why".

Sean Burns writes: Just had a question & was hoping you could help me avoid having to shift through a lot of recent DC history to find the answer. I’ve seen mention in recent Comics 101 columns & the Mailshoot about Captain Atom’s death. I was wondering when & how this happened. I was a big fan of his post-Crisis DC solo book & thought Bates, Weiseman, Broderick, Smith, etc did an excellent job of creating an interesting character & an engaging continuity over the first 40 or so issues of the book (things started to go a bit off kilter shortly after the origin of the alien “space ship” that was the source of his metal skin). I could never quite ignore the big differences in his personality & appearance in JLI, but I found the character enjoyable there as well. I just hope the death actually served some purpose and made sense & wasn’t just another example of shitting on tradition for the sake of a cheap shock. I’m hoping that, but given DC’s recent track record, I’m not that optimistic. Any light you can shed on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Tipton: Captain Atom was supposedly killed in an explosion in the first story arc in Jeph Loeb's SUPERMAN/BATMAN series, taking Superman's place in piloting a rocket that would blow up a giant Kryptonite meteor headed for the Earth. It was pretty well done. However, since in the past, giant explosions have triggered Atom's quantum ability to jump through time, I'm not convinced of his death. (In fact, I think he was shown at Sue Dibny's funeral in IDENTITY CRISIS, but maybe that was just an editorial slipup.)

Jason K. writes: I've been a longtime reader of Comics 101, but I've never previously sent in any comments. I wanted to break the silence in response to your "Countdown to Losing Interest" column to say: Thank you. I know that you are probably going to take a lot of flack from the comics fans who feel differently on this one, but I'm not one of them. I agree with almost everything you said in the column, and I'm pretty much just going to ramble for the rest of this email.

I'm 30 years old now, and I feel like I'm becoming more and more like that scary bearded fogey who lurks in the corner of the shop pawing through back issues trying to complete my collection of Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen and barking angrily at any young kids who are reading that modern crap. I don't have a beard yet, though, so at least I've got that going for me. I understand that people have different tastes and that, as commercial properties, comic book characters are going to change to suit what sells but I can't help but feel a little hurt and a little sad when books like "Countdown" and "Identity Crisis" come along and kill off characters that I grew up loving.

It's a little silly, but the Giffen-DeMatteis Justice League really changed the way I looked at comic books. I was in junior high when the book started and I wasn't a real sophisticated comic book reader at the time. I was only vaguely aware of non-superhero books; I got a pile of "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos" books from one of my cousins, I had some "Archie" books but I didn't think of them as comic books. Heck, at the time I was getting all of my comics from the 7-11 a few blocks from my parents house.

I hadn't imagined that when nobody was looking J'ohn J'onzz might have a sense of humor, that he might like Oreo cookies. It hadn't occurred to me that someone like Guy Gardner wouldn't really like Batman or that they could come to blows (er. . . blow) over something like who was the team leader. I was only familiar with Captain Marvel from a couple of team-up books. I knew his backstory but Billy Batson never really seemed to be written like a kid; it wasn't until reading him in Justice League that it really clicked for me that he was just a dorky kid with almost as much power as Superman. The little touches just seemed to make the characters come alive and make them more like real people.

I wanted to be Ted Kord. I wasn't a strange visitor from another world, I didn't have my parents brutally murdered and I certainly wasn't my peoples only ambassador to Man's World. I was a nerdy seventh grader with a decent sense of humor who liked reading books and messing around with computers. I didn't get all of Blue Beetle's references (Gogol's Overcoat?) or have the physique (let alone the snazzy duds) but if I was going to be a superhero Ted was the kind of superhero I wanted to be. I wanted a friend like Booster, I wanted a boss like Maxwell Lord and I wanted to have the confidence to annoy Batman with my Star Trek jokes. They say that everybody is someone's favorite character, and Blue Beetle was mine.

To this day, I still buy almost any comic featuring one of the characters from that era of the JLA.

I don't know that DC has any grand plan to write out the happy moments in its history, but I know that it looks like we're headed in a direction that I don't want to go. I read blurbs for books like "Villains United" and hear people talking about how much cooler Ultimate Captain America is that regular 616-Cap and I feel like I'm back in high school again listening to my friends talk about how great Cable is and how awesome "Wetworks" is going to be. I've never been into the darker, grittier heroes and I don't think that I ever will be. I just hope that DC doesn't forget that there is a market for fun lighthearted books, too.

Anyway, thank you for all the great columns.

Tipton: Yeah, I also had a real strong connection with the Ted Kord character, which no doubt fed into my dislike of the story. Just re-read the JLI stuff, and especially in the early run, Beetle was awesome.

Jeff R. writes: I just wanted to write to you about Plastic Man in order to give you a breather from all the e-mails you've been getting about Countdown to Infinite Crisis. Recently, I discovered that my local library has a rather impressive comic collection, including the six volumes of the Plastic Man Archives and all of the published Spirit Archives. I've read some of the Spirit stuff, and while I respect Will Eisner and what he did with this series, I just don't like it all that much. It just didn't speak to me. Maybe it had something to do with the character of Ebony and the massive stereotyping that went into the character. I can't put my finger on it. I recently read Fredrik Stromberg’s Black Imagines in the Comics, so I’m a little sensitive about this. Anyway, after spending some time with the Spirit, I started reading the Plastic Man Archives and fell in love.

Goodness, but Jack Cole was great. I'm not sure if this is a fair analogy, but Cole's work reminds me of a cross between Eisner and Carl Banks. It's just so flat-out fun. If the Archives weren’t so expensive, I would go out and buy the six volumes myself.

But on to a few questions about Plastic Man. Having been born in ‘82, I first encountered Plas when he guested in a Roger Stern written issue of Action Comics in ‘91. He wasn’t on my radar again until he popped up in Morrison’s JLA run. My question is this: has Plas’s origin ever been updated after the Crisis in the 80s? Thanks to Joe Kelly, we know Plas is basically immortal, so is his origin still that in the 1940s he was a gangster who was doused in chemicals and left to die or has the time period been shifted forward in time to, say, the 1990s? Was Plastic Man a member of the All- Star Squadron? I bought the first six issues of Kyle Baker’s Plastic Man run, but the time period was indeterminate. I’m just curious if DC has made any decision on this.

Also, I noticed that the Spirit and Plastic Man both appeared in Police Comics for a while in the 40s, as they shared covers together for a while. Was this like the early days of World’s Finest Comics where the heroes met on the front cover but never inside? Did Plastic Man and the Spirit ever truly meet?

Thanks for reading this e-mail. Thanks again for the Comics 101 page and thanks for covering the JLI. I bought the entire run two years ago at the San Diego ComicCon and haven’t regretted it once since then. I just need to get all the JLE comics. Maybe it will happen at this year’s ComicCon.

Tipton: The thing about the Spirit is that almost all of the best stories come from after 1947 or so, and we're only just now getting there in the Archives. Ebony disappears and the series gets much more experimental. Keep reading, and you'll see how they improve in leaps and bounds.

Yes, the Jack Cole Plastic Man stories are a joy.

As for Plas's timeline, it's still a mess. There have been two or three post-Crisis and none have stuck. Zero Hour said he debuted in the Silver Age, while post-Crisis All-Star Squadron still included him as a member.

I don't think there was ever a Plastic Man/Spirit team-up. Much like Superman and Batman on the cover of WORLD'S FINEST for years, their meetings were only on the cover.

You definitely need to get those JLE comics; i just re-read them for the column, and they're great.

Jeremy H. writes: I have to agree. I've ridden through a lot these past 3-4 years, with what you call "the darkening". Sounds nice. I'll bet that will be next year's Blockbuster Summer Event from the folks at Dull Comics. Wanted to share with you the email I sent to DC about Countdown.

I left comics when I was about 13, only to return a few years later with issue 3 of the only good JLA. Yeah. Beetle, Booster, Guy, Mr Miracle, lil Oberon, Sue and Ralph... I'm proud to own every issue of JLA/JLI/JLE and JL Task Force, including the annuals and quarterlies. I mean, I bought those cheesy 3 hole binder Who's Who comics for the JLA pinups. The 3 issue Secret Files featuring the JLA? I own them. I actually became disinterested in the JLA following the shake up and the important (read:commercially viable) return to the Big 3 leading the JLA. I only own the first 12 issues, but still leaf through them at my local shop. Nothing terribly interesting.

Then came Formerly Known as the Justice League. Sweet! Started buying DC again. Then came Identity Crisis. And I admit, even though terribly upset, I bought the whole set. Watched Firestorm go down. And still bought them. And continued buying your comics, falling into different titles easily, enjoyably. Until today.

This is disgusting. Countdown to Infinite Crap wasn't even worth $1.00. I am informing you that I have BURNT my copy, and will never buy another issue from DC. Don't you people (and by you I mean Marvel as well) learn that killing people is the cheap, unimaginative way out of telling a good story. I look forward to letting my son, who's learning to read, bite his literary teeth on your comics. How can any responsible parent allow their children to read a book where someone is raped on panel? Where someone is stabbed in the chest and Blows UP? Where someone is shot point blank in the head by their former boss? Who's next on your list to axe?

We've already offed Superman, Barry Allen, Oliver Queen, Hal Jordan, poor Ice, Jason Todd, Sue Dibny, Firestorm, Ted Kord (who you also put in a coma during the Doomsday "saga") and paralyzed Batman. And I know I've forgotten loads of others... you know, the second tier ones that "no one cares about". Well here's a little surprise. We do care. I liked Dawn Granger (yeah she's back... big whoop) and the original JSA (I liked the current JSA book back when it was called Infinity Inc and the JSA wasn't killed off) and Hawkman. LEave that poor guy alone! Or at least figure something out and stick with it. I am not reading any of your four miniseries. I am not reading Infinite Crisis. And, fine sirs, if you DARE make Ted Kord the Spectre, I will vote with my wallet and never, ever buy anything put out by DC, no matter what "hot" writer you hire.

By the way, tell Mr Grant Morrison that Seven Soldiers was good thus far, but I refuse to continue buying his book because of this idiotic decision by Mr Didio.

Tipton: Nice. Best way to let DC know how you feel -- send an e-mail and only buy the comics you like.

Terry L. writes: One word, Mr. Tipton: AMEN!

I feel personally insulted by crappy writing like this. And not because I don't agree with the decision that was made. But to take a character that I'm invested in and portray him in a manner inconsistent to previous behavior? And to support this decision by making the rest of the character's behavior inconsistent, as well? It smacks of sensationalism, without a true regard for the source material, or what other writers have done. It's a shame that writers this talented have seemingly missed this rather obvious point.

I also agree with your point that DC seems hell bent on removing all of the light-hearted stories from continuity. I disliked the first Crisis. I'm guessing that I'll loathe the second one. I personally feel that it shows a lack of imagination when you feel the need to cannibalize your own history. Yes, it's one thing to "forget" that the original Batmobile had a big face on the front - it's quite another to wipe out entire story arcs that people have worked on for years and decades.

Thanks for your column. I never miss it, and usually think you're right on the money. Today is no different.

Fredd H. writes: I've read very little DC mainstream stuff, most of what I know comes from your (excellent) columns. But from my understanding of the DC and Marvel universes, J'onn J'onnz is right in saying that "people try to kill us all the time". In his opinion, even if Beetle has found a possible threat, the other superheroes are just as busy with similar kinds of threats, often more obvious, and these should be dealt with first. Consider how many titles Batman and Superman appear in, and how they must fit within their timeline. They seem overwhelmed by the number of foes they have to face. Perhaps they just feel that Beetle should resolve this case on his own, as they do so frequently in their solo books.

I have a feeling this is supposed to be one of the necessary suspensions of disbelief that with so many books published in the same universe, the world must be completely saturated with secret plots and threats. To have more than one person spending a disproportionate time solving one of them (one which doesn't have a known enemy, and therefore less important than a specific supervillain) is considered unnecessary by the more experienced superheroes. This may be out of style right now, but isn't the main modus opperandi for the JLA (if not more groups or individuals) to take a reactionary stance? To wait until the supervillain's plan produces obvious attacks on the general population, and then defeat them?

Admittedly, such attacks on companies should surely warrant at least a consideration to Batman (although he might not get that involved with the running of Waynetech). It's not a full explanation - J'onn's outright objection is still too extreme. But I think it largely accounts for how the superheroes encountered may not be entirely out of character - at least to me, who doesn't know them very well.

Tipton: Yes, but J'onn has always been characterized as compassionate and loyal, despite seeming emotionless and remote, and for him to be such a jerk to Beetle, particularly after an attempt on his life and with Booster critically injured, just doesn't ring true.

Doug M. writes: I'm a longtime admirer of MPS. Very good stuff, and I'm grateful for the obvious love and effort you put into it.

That said, I'm sort of wishing you hadn't written the last column about Countdown.

Partly this is because I've been looking forward to the conclusion of your series on the JLA. I suspect we'll disagree on some points (I hated the JLI) and agree on others (Grant Morrisson's stuff: often rushed, sometimes garbled, but so bloody brilliant so often) -- but I always find your historical columns well worth reading, even when I'm mentally arguing with you as I read.

But I don't much like it when you use the column to critique /current/ events. You only seem to do this when you're very annoyed or upset -- the "Open Letter to J. Michael Stracynczki", most obviously -- and while I can understand your motivation, it's really jarring.

Three points, I guess.

One, the column is usually -- 95% of the time -- about comics history. That's what we have come to expect. Reasonably enough, no? After all, it's labelled "Comics 101", not "What's Bugging Me". So it's kind of offputting to click over, all on a fine Thursday morning, and get a rant... even a well-written, thoughtful rant. To put it in comix terms, it's like turning on the TV for this week's episode of Justice League and finding that it's been replaced by Courage the Cowardly Dog. Even if you like Courage -- and it has its surreal moments -- you're going to be at least mildly annoyed.

Two, you only seem to do this when you're really annoyed or upset. If, every couple of months, you broke in with "Okay, I was going to talk about the Justice League this week, but I just read We3 and it's incredible" -- then it would be less irritating. But it's only when you really hate something. The meta-message thus becomes, "I have been pressed past the limits of my patience! This has become so important to me that I will now use this week's column on it, whether you like it or not!" This is, in and of itself, a little annoying. It may be wrong of us to feel this way, but that's how it comes across.

Three, we can get reviews of current comics anywhere. How many comics blogs are out there now? How many review pages? Dozens of people are doing illustrated reviews of current comics. Nobody else is doing what you're doing with comics history.

I can understand your irritation with Countdown. It looks to me like DC got some good buzz and/or sales from Identity Crisis, and has decided that "provocative" comics sell. I agree that this is a dumb and bad idea, and will probably backfire in the long run. That said, it's not like this hasn't been done before, albeit on a smaller scale. (Remember the awful, awful Byrne Avengers run? The evil Scarlet Witch going down on Wonder Man? Or the Byrne issue of Superman where it was strongly implied that Superman had done a porn movie with Big Barda?) The medium is incredibly resilient, and these things seem to come in cycles.

-- Hm, that brings us back to Grant Morrison again. Remember when Morrison took over the JLA, back in 1997? "I just want to put the smiles back on those bastards' faces." There was a wave of dark stuff across mainstream comics from about the late '80s to the mid '90s, and a reaction of (relatively) lighter, more upbeat, more "traditional" stuff from the mid-90s until the last year or so. The New Silver Age, some called it, at least for DC. Now it's Wave of Darkness II: The Return. Or so it seems to me.

Anyhow, point being, this one bad issue doesn't seem to me to be worth spending a column on... or at least, not now.

-- But here's a thought: why not wait a year or two, and then do a column about it /as history/? For instance, you could now do a column about Identity Crisis. You could put it in a wider context. Talk about how it's changed the DC Universe so far, how it seems to be the beginning of a new wave of darkness... you name it. (And since I didn't buy IC, I for one would be interested to read it.)

Otherwise... please keep up the good work. I look forward to reading the new column every Thursday morning, and I hope you'll keep at it for a long time to come.

Tipton: Here's the thing. I would most definitely disagree with the idea that I only write the current columns about stories I hate. You've never seen a column about AVENGERS DISASSEMBLED, which I disliked more than just about anything in the last couple years.

Like I said before, over the course of 111 columns, there have only been three times when I've discussed a recently published project. And the last time was last October, five months ago. I covered this one because the mail started pouring in the day the book was released, asking for my reaction, much like what happened last summer for IDENTITY CRISIS. And I felt strongly enough about it to delay the planned (and already written) JLI piece, especially because I would have felt like a moron to start talking about the JLI comics without even a mention of what had just happened the previous week. Think about that: to talk about how great the Maxwell Lord/Blue Beetle JLA comics are without mentioning that Lord shot Beetle in the head the week before? Not doing that.

As for your suggestion to wait a year or two to talk about it? Dude. I don’t know if I’ll still be writing this a year from now. I certainly hope so, but there ain’t nothing certain in this life.

Besides, it’s my name on the door, and I’m gonna do what it feels like people want to talk about, and what I want to write about when Wednesday comes around. I'm glad you like the history, but I reserve the right to write about what seems the most pertinent at the time. If you don't like it, sorry. Come back next week. Maybe you’ll like that one better.

Justin R. writes: I agreed wholeheartedly with your thoughts on "Countdown". The JLI was my absolute favorite period in the Justice League's history and has through no fault on the part of it's original creative team lost some of it's luster. This saddens me to no end. I know that DC are going to lose a lot of fans over this. They needn't have. This could have been done differently.

It's a shame that loyal fans have no power over the foolish decisions made by the powers that be at DC. One can only hope that this isn't a sign of things to come.

Great column. Keep it up.

Bob M. writes: Sue Dibny being brutally raped, villians being lobotimized and, now, the Blue Beetle being shot through the head by Maxwell Lord (wasn't his back story that he was being controlled by Metron's self-aware computer and he was finally telepathically scanned by J'onn J'onzz to be innocent and free of controlling evils?).

I have to agree with the sentiments you expressed in your latest column, Countdown to Losing Interest, 100%.

I rediscovered DC Comics back in 1987 when I blown away by Crisis on Infinite Earths, The Return of the Dark Knight and Alan Moore's run on the Swamp Thing (hard to get better than Swamp Thing #53). Then throught the reset of Superman, The Flash, Anumal Man, the Doom Patrol, and onwards and upwards through Legends and the Keith Giffen Justice League. I couldn't wait for each new issue of the JL, JLI and JLEÑ now there was a really fun series. The Blue Beetle and Booster Gold had amazing chemistry. I remeber in one issue, the JLI was moving into their Paris headquarters and Booster was trying to pick up.....but I digress......

And on and on through all of DC's hits and misses right up through Kingdom Come. Then I began to notice that comics were getting a bit stale, but there was always a couple of good series around, like JSA.

But, you know, Scott, in the last two or three years, something's been missing from both DC's and Marvel's comics. I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but after reading your last column, I realized what it is....they're just not fun to read any more. I really don't like them.

Like you said, they're grim. Not to mention, the stories are weak and I can't stand the endless revisionism of all the characters. It's downright ugly what they have done to Wonder Woman recently.

I'm going to stop buying new Marvel and DC comics (I take that back, I do seriously collect Superman, so I'll continue to add the three titles to my collection, but more for collecting purposes than reading). I'll just search out back issues and archive editions.

I remember in one issue of Ambush Bug (ooops, another Keith Giffen series), some grafitti is scribbled on the wall "Dead heroes sell comics." Where's Ambush Bug when you need him?

Your column is the best. I look forward to it every Wednesday.

Tipton: Yeah, there's not a lot of fun to be had in DC comics these days. I do miss wackier stuff like AMBUSH BUG.

Anthony S. writes: I just read World Without a Superman, and I think I realized why Blue Beetle's death is bothering me so much. When guys like Superman and Reed Richards were "dead" in the 90's, I don't think anyone believed they wouldn't come back.

The same can't be said for the likes of Ted and Clint Barton. The DC and Marvel Universes can just as easily function without them, and that saddens me. No one is planning to make a Blue Beetle or Hawkeye movie anytime soon, so we lose the pleasure of their company.

I suppose if Red Tornado and Jean Grey can keep coming back, there's hope for the fallen Avengers and JLIers yet.

Tipton: Actually, I'm almost positive we'll see Hawkeye again. The character is very well-liked by a whole mess of professionals, many of whom are itching to get in there after Bendis leaves and clean up the mess. Add to that the fact that Hawkeye's death was so poorly done, not satisfying dramatically and ultimately wound up just pissing off people who like the book, plus the lack of a body, and yeah, I'd put cash money on Clint Barton's return.

As for the Beetle, I wouldn't even count him out yet entirely. We'll have to see. Much less likely, though.

Simon K. writes: Hey, I dont normally write to columnists, but I just thought I would drop you a line with my thoughts on Countdown...

I'm not generally a DC fan. I dont have anything against them or anything, but its just that when I was a kid I loved marvel. There are a few DC characters/titles that I'm a big fan of however. (For example, the Question. I'm loving the new miniseries, and I like the shift from eastern mysticism to a sort of urban shamanism, even though it seems to have come out of nowhere. But I digress.)

I never got into the justice league. I guess in part because I never liked superman (I always found him dull and unengaging. I couldnt identify with him on any level). The only exposure to the JLA I really had was their appereances in the death of superman. Anyway, one day not that long ago, something in the rack at my local comic shop caught my eye. It was the first issue of "formerly known as the justice league". I bought it, because it seemed funny, and I knew a few of the characters (booster and blue beetle from death of superman, Captain atom because I picked up a few issues of his series back in the day). Laughed my ass off. Talked to one of my friends about it, who explained that it was essentially a reunion of the Giffen/DeMatteis run on the justice league.

Anyway, I managed to find a large chunk of their old justice league stuff, and I loved it. I waited for the follow-up series to "Formerly known as". And then I was told that it wasnt going to happen because of the events of "Identity crisis". (its now being published in justice league confidential, but that doesnt stop me being bitter)

And now blue beetle has been killed. I am drawing the conclusion that someone out there in DC editorial REALLY hates the Giffen/DeMatteus run on Justice League. First the rape of Sue Dibney forces you to re-evaluate all the issues that feature her in a more serious, darker light (and I know that "darker light" doesnt make much sense, but its the best way I can think of to put it), because every time she appears on panel, you read her dialogue knowing that she has been raped by Dr Light. Now apparently Max Lord was a criminal genius the whole time too? Give me a break. I dont see the need to retroactively destroy a whole section of JL history.

As for the comic itself. I thought it was fairly well written, but with a few problems. I can buy batman blowing off booster, because he is wrestling with the problem of his memories being tampered with. My reading of it was that he took boosters problem on board, made a mental note to look into it, and didnt want to make small talk. I DIDNT buy Jonn essentially giving booster the bums rush. It just didnt feel right to me that mars' premier oreo addict wouldnt give his former teammate the time of day. I was also curious why booster gold (last seen by me in "formerly known as..." married to a wealthy older woman) needed to cadge money from beetle. I can only assume that in "I cant believe its not justice league" he gets divorced or something. I really loved the blue beetle internal monologue about booster taking the hit for superman, I thought that put booster in a better light than I've ever seen him. The whole "trying to prevent past tragedies" thing works quite well as a motivation for booster. The fact they remembered boosters little robot guy was a nice touch.

The fact that max is a meta, but then refers to beetle as being one of "us" (ie not having powers), kinda says to me "Sloppy writing". It just read like they forgot max was a meta until the last minute, then quickly rewrote the dialogue to blow that off in a sentence.

To be frank, the sudden death of blue beetle really annoyed me. And not in a good way, where I'll want to buy the comics to see the villains get their comeuppance, in a bad way where there is no way in hell I'm buying the followups to this. I dont want to know what other ways they can find to screw with the stories I liked. Maybe captain atom is secretly a crack addict? Bah. (To put it like a wrestling fan, the end of infinite crisis drew X-pac heat...)

Tipton: "X-Pac heat!" That's perfect!

An explanation for our non-wrestling-fan readers out there: When a bad-guy wrestler is doing his job correctly, making the audiences hate him and want to pay money to see him defeated by the babyface wrestler, in wrestling lingo, he’s said to have “a lot of heat on him,” or “he’s getting some good heat.” However, there is such a thing as a bad-guy wrestler who’s unpopular not because he’s doing his job correctly, but because he’s either so boring, unlikable, dull or otherwise noninteresting that he makes people just change the channel. This “negative heat” is most often referred to as “X-Pac heat,” after Sean “X-Pac” Waltman, one of the most unlikable professional wrestlers to come along in the last few years. So there you go.

TV RECOMMENDATIONS

Greg S. writes: Why exactly you think Arrested Development would be popular and get renewed is beyond me. It is a funny and intelligent comedy on television. It is not a crime drama that is either one off the thousands spun off from Law and Order and CSI, or a blatant rip off of them. Nor is it a "reality program". A quick aside here, MTV should be pulled off the air for popularizing the genera with Real World, which itself is simply staple MTV television; young, spoiled, idiots who are too into being hot and getting laid to have a normal relationship and thus must act like their life is a soap opera and much more interesting than it really is.

Ryall: Rumor has it that if AD gets renewed, they’re going to add a hospital intern to the show. And bring in George Michael’s Cousin Oliver, two sure-fired way to capture mass viewers’s hearts.

Look at your popular shows, Survivor, if they just left the contestants on the island with hidden camera and wait ‘til they starve to death, quit, or begin to multiply and form a new idiot civilization, that would be good. But it is instead Fear Factor stunts and they pretend to be on an island when you know they all have trailers and what not. I better stop my reality show hate-on now before it gets to 10 pages.

It would be great if AD came back, hope, but do not expect it. The Office is great too, and this won’t be back. The healthcare episode was brilliant. The whole Assistant Regional Manager / Assistant to the Regional Manager bit never gets old, nor will the workspace / office bit, if you work in an office it is so easy to relate to. I only wish they had the guy from your office who feels the need to burden you with all of the mundane details of his pathetic life just to waste time during the day cause he hates his job.

Ryall: I really liked THE OFFICE’s short run. Steve Carrell just kept making his character more and more slimy and unlikable, which only got funnier and funnier. The last couple episodes felt like it had its own feel and identity, and didn’t just feel derivative of the British version. Which no doubt means it’s doomed. Unless they add a hospital intern and Pam’s Cousin Oliver to the show.

Your hating of Family seems a bit excessive. I think the show is funny.

Ryall: You say “funny,” I say “derivative and obvious.” To each their own. I welcome you to rave about the show in your TV column.

Smart? No. Funny? Yes. Granted I would prefer Arrested stayed on instead, and American Dad seems like everything bad about Family Guy times 100, but you seem to hate Family Guy too much. I am not saying its great, heck on Adult Swim I’d rather watch Futurama, Sealab, Aqua Teen, Venture Bros, Birdman, and Robot Chicken. But just cause it is stupid and uses easy jokes doesn’t mean you can’t laugh at it when you are drunk. Look at the movie Super Troopers, how dumb was that, but I must have seen it 50 times or so.

Ryall: Don’t get me wrong—I’m all about stupid comedy at times, I just never felt the rapid-fire pop-culture jokes that had nothing to really do with the show to be funny. Sure, I’ve smiled at the show, but admitting I find it mediocre doesn’t get me half the hate mail (and occasional death threat) that tearing into it does. And since I find that to be much funnier than the show, I stick with that approach.

I did check out the season premiere last night, as well as AMERICAN DAD, just to be fair and see if my dislike for the show was still warranted. You can read the results here.

Jon B. writes: Can I like Arrested Development and Family Guy? Yes Family Guy is mindless and derivative (American Dad even more so, not gonna be defending that one, it was just plain bad) but it's still entertaining. I'm sad to see Arrested Development go, but that's Fox's fault for not hyping it up and the public's for not giving it a chance, not Family Guy's. Family Guy's return and the start of American Dad (I give it 10 episodes max, then it's gone) just unfortunately coincides with the end of Arrested Development. Anyways love the site. Keep up the good work.

Ryall: No, actually, all of television’s ills can somehow or another be pinned on Seth McFarlane.

Matt L. writes: I just read the Mail Shoot and was quite impressed with your defense of Arrested Development. If that show gets canceled and Family Guy and American Dad stay on-I'm going to be upset. Why Family Guy is even getting a second chance is beyond me. For the guy who said he hates Arrested, but offers no reason as to why, instead giving us only a lot of exclamation points, he needs to be reasonable. I hate Family Guy. My friends love it, but I can't stand it. My reasons are-The Simpsons did everything that Family Guy tries to do, but funnier. Family Guy goes off on too many random tangents throughout the show, and the show just has no real heart to it. I love Arrested Development for its quirkiness, for the heart that it has and the fact that it is consistently funnier than most things on TV. If DVD sales and reruns are what brought Family Guy back, then Fox needs to start reruning the hell out of Arrested Development and put out season 2 and then see what happens. Sorry about the long, ranty e-mail. I'm pretty sure that's all I have for now.

Ryall: I will admit it’s impressive that show fought it’s way back on TV—that’s a real testament to the fans’s vigorous support. Although I think the FUTURAMA DVD sets have been solid performers, too, so there’s obviously a bit more to the show returning and that one staying gone than just DVD sales. I guess Seth works cheap. Or maybe that’s just his jokes I’m thinking of.

Leonardo M. writes: Ok,now i've been coming here for a long time and i always enjoy reading your column. That is, until there's a moment when you can make fun of Family Guy or American Dad. Then i just can't stand it for a line or two, depends on how far you try to take the joke.

Ryall: As far as possible, of course.

Now i love Arrested Development and it probably is/was the funniest thing on tv ever, but i also love Family Guy and I did enjoy the somewhat flawed American Dad pilot. I realize that these are two VERY different comedies, Arrested Development is funny due to plot details and storylines and the best dialogue outhere while Family Guy is funny due to the sheer irreverence of it all and the characters stupidity and likeability. I know that not everyone is cut out to like both, some people have narrow minds and narrow perceptions of humour, some people don't have the intelligence to enjoy Arrested Development, and some people lack the care free nature to truly enjoy an episode of Family Guy. However, this doesn't mean that you need to bash Family Guy and Family Guy fans so vehemently. I realize the relatively uneducated Family Guy only fans don't write too many intelligent articles online but believe me when i say that they do exist and you are reading one of their letters. Now i'm not saying you should stop making jokes about family guy, it's not really necessary because it's what you're supposed to do. Make fun of shows you don't like, it's one job you have and the basis of one weekly column that you write. What i'm asking rather is that you acknowledge once, just once, that Family Guy isn't that bad of a show if it's your kind of humor. And if you could back off some Family Guy fans a little bit more, unless their stupidity is evident. Then fire away Captain Ryall and sink those bastards before they procreate.

Ryall: Well, I say again I was at least fair enough to the show to give it another look, and review, last night. And I’ll acknowledge that FAMILY GUY is a good show when I actually feel that it’s a good show. Well, maybe not even then—the jokes at its expense are so much more fun.

Steven K. writes: I just wanted to drop you a line (and a question) in regards to the T.V. recomendations. First, I just wanted to say that refering to "American Dad" as "the day the comedy died" was so on the money. I usually find myself chuckling at the recomendation write ups every week but that one had me laughing almost right out of my chair. That line stuck in my craw for most of the day yesterday until I got home and popped some "Futurama" in the DVD player. However, I then started to think of the returning "Family Guy" which of course just made your statement all the more revelant. I mean, how is it that "Family Guy" makes a return and "Futurama" languishes in repeats? And How does "American Dad" get to replace "Arrested Development" on the Sunday shedule? I just don't get it. The thing is though, the more I thought about it the more I realized that your comment wasn't so much funny as it was painful. Or rather more stinging than anything else. But like I said, it was right dead on the money.

Now as for my question, I was wondering if you might be able to shed some light on my favorite show "Scrubs". Now, I put "Arrested" at a very close second, but "Scrubs" continues to make me laugh the hardest, and has been doing it consistantly for the last four years. My question though is why do you think that the show is so underwatched? With "Arrested" it's easy to see that Fox is responsible for most of the blame. With "Scrubs" however I can't help but wonder how it is more people don't watch? I hope that with syndication and the release of the DVD's that the show picks up viewers for next year. Still, how do you feel about the show, and what are your thoughts as to why it's not a top ten show? Is it the competion for the time slot? Is it promotion? Is it because the show doesn't fall into a traditional sitcom formula? Or is it some other reason I might be unaware of?

Ryall: SCRUBS going largely unwatched is equally as criminal as ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT’s on-the-bubble status. I don’t get how TV viewers who were savvy enough to embrace SEINFELD’s brand of humor (eventually) haven’t warmed to this show. It’s smart, hilarious, features some great comic timing from everyone on the show and actually uses guest-stars to great effect. Unlike, say, WILL & GRACE.

P.S. By the way, looking forward to the "Shaun of the Dead" adaptation and thanks for turning me onto "The Office". I'm gonna have to check out the originals now.

Ryall: It’s cool that you had the perspective of seeing the NBC version without having the British show to compare it to. But yeah, the originals are excellent, some of the funniest comedy I’ve seen since, well, SCRUBS and AD.

Eddie C. writes: Hey, I know you're ticked about "Arrested Development" being kicked to the curb for that "American Dad" crap, but what's with the "Family Guy" bashing. It's not all Seth McFarlane's fault. "Family Guy" was hilarious the first time it was on the air. Can the new episodes be that bad?

Ryall: All I know is, FAMILY GUY episodes are used as Al Qaeda recruitment tapes, showing them everything that’s wrong with America. And Michael Jackson used to run the DVDs while he was licking foreheads. So you tell me if Seth McFarlane’s really as innocent as you claim.*

*Note: The above paragraph isn’t entirely, or even partially, true.

Well, anyway, good luck with the "Shaun Of The Dead" comic. Looks like it's gonna be awesome. I just saw the movie a few days ago for the first time and all I can say is, only the Brits could make a zombie comedy and pull it off. Subtlety is the key and the Brits are best at that low-key kind of humour. The scene where Simon walks out of his house that first morning oblivious to his surroundings was hilarious.

Ryall: I really do love that movie. Hope I was able to capture a lot of its humor, even without the cool visual tricks they used. If nothing else, the comic’s got some amazing art.

Joseph H. writes: I just felt the need to vent briefly about the state of television, and I know you'll understand.

I rarely watch television (as in actual prime-time television programs), and when I do it's even more rarely to watch a sit-com. When I do find a show I love it's inevitably cancelled way too soon (Action!, Freaks and Geeks, Firefly, and now most likely Arrested Development). Meanwhile shows like According to Jim stay on for what seems like forever.

Ryall: Yep, mediocrity is much more palatable over the long haul than interesting, funny shows, it seems.

Anyway, last Sunday I went to a focus group in North Hollywood to watch and discuss a new TV sitcom pilot. It was called "Joint Custody", and it was absolutely horrible (I guarantee it is an ABC show). There was absolutely nothing original about it. It was exactly like every cookie-cutter sitcom ever made in the past 10 years. Set-up, punchline, laugh track, set-up, punchline, laugh track, ad nauseam. It even had an "oooooo" track when one of the characters said something "edgy". And of course it wrapped up at the end with a sentimental scene and the character learned a "lesson". There was no actual humor, no originality, no likeable characters. It was a sitcom created by committee, or by monkeys, or by a committee of monkeys. If this was the brainchild of one person I'd be shocked and disturbed.

All of which would be fine except afterwards, in the focus group, the other 9 young men (most were in their mid to late 20s) rated the episode anywhere from a 7 to a 9 out of 10. I couldn't believe it. I don't know if they were just saying nice things about it because they were getting paid, or because they really enjoyed it, but I know there is no way any of those people would be home watching this show any night of the week. But I was basically the lone dissenter, and if the other groups were similar there is an excellent chance we will be seeing this show polluting our televisions in the near future.

Ryall: I know... focus groups scare the hell out of me. You listen to what people have to say and just wonder how you're on the same planet with them. Which is why ACCORDING TO JIM thrives, I guess. I suppose these means JOINT CUSTODY will follow HOPE & FAITH on Friday nights in the Fall…

So I'm pissed off, but I don't know with who I should be angry. How can I be angry at the executives/marketing people/show creators? Why take a chance on an original show when they can put 1/10th of the effort and money into a cookie-cutter sitcom that can get decent ratings for years and then make a mint in syndication? Should I be angry at the morons who watch this dreck instead of quality shows like Arrested Development or Freaks and Geeks? That seems rather elitist and snobby (both of which I probably am, I guess). I left the focus actually angry at the hour of my life I wasted, despite the $60 check they gave me. I need to focus my anger somewhere. Please help.

Ryall: Hmmm... well, I think at least a little anger toward people who settle for mediocrity is okay and not elitist. Like, what's so wrong with being challenged from time to time? Sure, dumb movies and TV can be entertaining, mindless fun at times, but I think the problem is the whole "fast food " mentality where ALL some/many people ever want is cheap, disposable humor. Like zoning out in front of a predictable show is somehow the balm for a long, stressful day for many people. And I get that at times—hell, I laughed at Tom Green's horrible movie—but some people never seem to want anything else. A little anger at execs is okay, too, because while I know that mass-appeal shows make money and are easy, they seem too quick and willing to cancel clever shows now. SEINFELD would probably have been taken off the air in three weeks if it were on today.

On another, completely different note, you are being really hard on FF. I understand you read the script and assume a lot of your pessimism about the film stems from that, but I haven't seen anything in the trailer to suggest this won't be a fun movie.

Ryall: Well, I have to approach this with lowered expectations. See, I LOVE the FF—it was the first comic I ever read, and still the one that I have the most fond feelings for. So while others have wanted to see a Spidey or Batman movie forever, FF is the one I've wanted. And the fact that the script was so wrong-headed (I can only hope it was an old draft) and that it's based on the lame Ultimate comics both make me think it's gonna let me down. So if I go in thinking that, if it's even halfway good, I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised.

I think the Torch and Thing sequences look great. Jessica Alba is starting to irritate me but that's a whole different issue (how can she play a stripper in a movie called Sin City and not be naked? What, is she Julia Roberts all of a sudden?). And as far as Dr Doom having metal skin, who really cares? He still looks like Dr Doom, which is really all that matters. Isn't that kind of like the "organic web shooter" issue? In the end it didnt really matter, all that mattered was that he had his webs.

Ryall: I agree on the webs—that never bothered me in the least. I'm not as bothered by metal skin as I am that Dr. Doom was, like, buddies with Reed and Sue and is dating Sue when the movie opens. I hope his name isn't really Victor Van Damme, like in the Ultimate book. Really, I guess it all comes down to me wanting to see Latveria...

Tom A. writes: Iv'e noticed you have been frequently listing "24" this season. Have you been a fan? Do you actually watch it? and are you aware of a wonderful recap site called Television Without Pity? http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/ With a motto like "Spare the snark, spoil the networks" You just gotta love it.

As a side note, I may have come across TWOP through this very site! (Or maybe it was View Askew News, hell, I don't remember.)

Ryall: I know the site’s come up here before—it’s a great little place.

I do know this: They started recapping The Contender, and when they stopped, I totaly forgot the show was on! (Yeah, I know I'm not missing much, but it is fairly amusing to watch Sly and Sugar Ray try to make the show be about something. I like train wrecks, so I do try to catch the rebroadcasts on MSNBC.

Scott R. writes: Just to show you how little they care about Tru Calling, they have pulled it completely. They are airing episodes of Simple Life in its place. I actually like Tru Calling; I think they never gave it a good chance. How unlike Fox to do that!

Ryall: What’s bad is, last season, the episodes made me feel like I was living Tru’s day—or, more precisely, Bill Murray’s in GROUNDHOG DAY—they all felt exactly the same. So if it’d gone away then, eh. But these last few weeks, I’ve caught the shows and enjoyed them much more. Jason Priestly was still tough to take in that role, but overall, yeah, it was a decent show with some unrealized potential. Add that to Fox’s hit count.

SUPERHEROES AND PHILOSOPHY

Mike M. writes: Hey, just wanted to say that S&P sounds like a great idea, I've already got mine on pre-order. Anyway, just wanted to offer a suggestion if you ever have the chance to write another book on this subject: Super villains.

Ryall: I know some supervillains got touched on in the course of this book but yeah, a book focusing on them would be probably more interesting even than a book on superheroes. For the most parts, superheroes's motivations are pretty basic--to help people and use their powers for good--but villains have all kinds of motivations, from the selfish to the megalomaniacal. Like they say, every hero is only as interesting as their villains (which is why the Defenders were always pretty lame... they fought guys like Plant Man). Be a cool book, but that'd very much depend on how this one sells.

I had the chance to write a paper on almost anything I wanted to for a college class last year, and my topic ended up being "Comic book Super villains vs. The Fears of Modern Society." It was about twenty pages in length although I think I could have gone on forever. I wound up focusing on Lex Luthor, Magneto, and Dr. Doom and how each changes their character every few years to represent what then present day society is most fearful of (for example, Lex started out as a mad scientist, but evolved into a business man, and eventually president of the United States, pretty radical change for one man.)

Ryall: Nice--sounds interesting. Wish we'd been around to help on it! Hopefully thr book becomes recommended reading in colleges all over the land...

Tipton did just tell me today that he saw copies of our book at Tower Records, so it's out there already, which is so damned cool to both of us...

Anyway, at the time "Superheroes and Philosophy" would have been one of my best sources, and as far as I know there is nothing out there analyzing super villains in either a historical or philosophical context (short of Tipton, who always kept me pointed in the right direction). Anyway, congrats on the whole deal and I hope this isn't a one time thing.

Ryall: Me, too! Thanks again.

I’ve Got Red On Me

Theron N. writes: The art for the Shaun of the Dead comic looks amazing - perfect for the project. Also, From Dusk Till Shaun - Great title, man! I have to have it based on the title alone.

Ryall: I’d love to do a sequel, or at least be involved with one from Edgar and Simon, but as their schedules get busier and busier, it might be tough to coordinate. But I definitely plan to keep pushing them for it.

Thomas writes: I absolutely love the idea of the book. I was a fan almost instantly upon seeing the film. I wish you the best with it, and I’m sure from looking at the various pages you have posted, and knowing the movie so well, that if in fact people do down it, it will only be their loss. Best of luck, can’t wait to see it on the selves.

Ryall: Me, neither! Thanks, man.

For the Birds

Jeff L. writes: “The Birds 2: Even Birdier?” What happened to the long-running Electric Boogaloo joke? What’s next, a comic book movie news item with no mention of Nic Cage?

Ryall: Well, we try not to burn the same joke into the ground.

Okay, that's not true. We do. But in this case, we tried something different.

But now worries—Nic Cage will ALWAYS show up in comic movie headlines. Besides, here’s validation for this particular headline:

Chris G. writes: Just wanted to say that "The Birds II: Even Birdier" made me laugh out loud. Or, as the kids say, LOL.

Ryall: Take that, Jeff L.

Also, as one of 10 people who used to watch Tough Crowd, I'll be glad to see it back. Giraldo was always the best guy in the panel, but I hope Quinn shows up occasionally too.

Dr. Doom's Metal Skin

Robert S. writes: To give them the benefit of the doubt, the makers of the Fantastic Four film may have gone with metal skin for von Doom because they felt that people might take the disfigured villain behind a mask thing as derivative of Star Wars and Darth Vader (who of course was derivative of plenty of earlier sources like the Phantom of the Opera.

Ryall: Yeah, but... can you be derivative of Darth Vader if you were around for almost 20 years before Anakin donned the suit? Sure, maybe most non-comics people don't know that, but it just seems, on the surface, a kinda dumb change. Then again, I know the people who ripped on "organic webshooters" and were proven wrong, so I'll give it a chance. Just seems goofy.

Robert responds: I forgot to note that it's ironic that most moviegoers would think Doom derivative of Darth when it's really more the other way around. But I think even many comic-reading moviegoers still won't know that Doom predates Vader...

I didn't really care so much about the organic webshooters thing. It does leave them without one of the old Spider-Man cliches to fall back on -- the old "Oh no! I'm right in the middle of this big battle with the Goblin and I've run out of web juice!" one. Which was probably why the black suit / alien / future Venom version of the costume produced it's own webs...

May the Bat Be With You

Richard S. writes: What do you think of the new Batman Begins trailer?

I've got way mixed feelings. Looks like they're definitely going Year One/Dark Knight all the way, but the scene with Morgan Freeman troubles me. It makes Batman look like Bond, with Freeman as Q. The Batsuit and utility belt are government body armor and weapons? Wha? And the Batmobile is recognizable military hardware? Huh? Batman didn't make the stuff himself? I thought Bruce Wayne was like Tony Stark. When did he become Crimson Dynamo?

Too much Miller, and not enough Kane for my liking.

Ryall: Well, actually, the Lucius Fox character has been around, so I don’t have the same “Q” vibe as you. I’m fine with it—I mean, the idea that WayneTech had some of this technology in development and Bruce just adapted it, with the help of a guy in the know, makes more sense than this millionaire playboy designing a cool car and funky batsuit on his own. I haven’t seen anything about this movie that bugs me yet.

They get the tone right, but the rest, I dunno. The fanboys are giving the Fantastic Four team a ton of crap for using the revisionist Marvel Universe. Where's the same outrage over Batman Begins?

Ryall: I think that the past two BATMAN movies were so hard on fans that the idea of a solid Bat-movie has them not overly scrutinizing every detail, which is a good thing.

And speaking of Batman Begins and outrage, Tom Cruise is now with Katie Holmes? The man must be stopped.

Ryall: Tell me he’s not making a convincing argument for becoming a Scientologist…

STAR WARS-Related Link of the Week

The horror that is the Star Wars Christmas Special, and more!

Thanks to Alfred R. for the link

Photos of the Week

Ryall: A tease to some STAR WARS CELEBRATION III recaps coming to the site elsewhere this week:

E-MAIL RYALL | ARCHIVES