Update: 2013

I can't believe I haven't written here since last August.

Well, yes I can. I've been busy in other areas of my life, so the "Missing Man," by necessity, had to stay missing, apart from twitter.

I had wanted to write a DVD review of Skyfall (2012) but then time passed and I didn't have the film in the forefront of my thoughts to be able to write a credible article. I've seen The Avengers (2012) and The Dark Knight Rises (2012) again, but what would I say about these films that I haven't said before. The same is true of my recent viewing of Man of Steel (2013).

On the other hand, I've avoided viewing Star Trek Into Darkness and Iron Man 3 (both 2013) on DVD because although they were entertaining films, I didn't feel like spending even a little of my cold, hard cash on reviewing lukewarm experiences.

On recommendation of a friend, I did watch and thoroughly enjoy Red (2010). It was a fun romp with a bunch of aging badasses and on that theme, a better viewing than The Expendables (2010). Not enough new, young action heroes so we have to keep recycling the old ones.

And then, just the other night, I watched Taken (2008) for the first time. The young woman at the rental place said she watched it with her Dad all the time as the "perfect father-daughter movie." All I knew was the famous line parodied in all the memes:

Brian: I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.

And kill them he does. I don't know about the "perfect father-daughter movie," but it was a watchable action film. Bunch of plot holes such as how he and his daughter make it out of France without being arrested since Brian kills something like 35 people through the course of the film. Or what about his daughter's traveling companion? After Brian finds her dead of an overdose, that's the end of it. No one cares about her. No one worries about telling her parents she won't be coming home. Who takes care of the body count?

I'm finally in the 10th season of my Smallville (2001-2011) reviewing. I have to say that at this point, I'm getting ready for it to end again. On the other hand, I find that I've gotten very used to Clark and Lois together, now that Clark's secret is out. But the story arcs are uneven, Ollie's whining about Chloe is getting on my nerves, and I just don't buy that Tess, who has murdered more than a few people in cold blood, just gets a pass and is now one of the good guys.

I'm considering watching The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) tonight (never seen it before) even though I have to get up early tomorrow. I watched Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2005) last night because it was the shorter of the two films and I was tired. Not bad on the subsequent viewing, but I kept thinking how much Angelina Jolie looks like her Dad Jon Voight when she makes certain facial expressions.

I did have a lot of fun watching the first two seasons of Batman Beyond (1999-2001) as well as the first season of Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1995). They were more a trip down nostalgia lane, but Kevin Conroy still is the voice of Bruce Wayne and Batman. In a way, I like Conroy's old Bruce in "Batman Beyond" better. He's more vulnerable since he's an old man, but his emotions are much less transparent, which makes him more like Batman than ever psychologically.

That's about it for now. Just a few weeks left until 2014 and a whole new year of films to look forward to, though I'll watch only a small number on the big screen.

Batman: Year One (2011) A DVD Review

Two men come to Gotham City: Bruce Wayne after years abroad feeding his lifelong obsession for justice and Jim Gordon after being too honest a cop with the wrong people elsewhere. After learning painful lessons about the city's corruption on its streets and police department respectively, this pair learn how to fight back their own way. With that, Gotham's evildoers from top to bottom are terrorized by the mysterious Batman and the equally heroic Gordon is assigned to catch him by comrades who both hate and fear him themselves. In the ensuing manhunt, both find much in common as the seeds of an unexpected friendship are laid with additional friends and rivals helping to start the legend.

-Written by Kenneth Chisholm

That a summary of the video Batman: Year One (2011) which I saw on DVD a couple of weeks ago. I saw and subsequently reviewed the 1989 Keaton/Nicholson Batman film on the same weekend, but I couldn't summon whatever I needed to write my "Year One" review at the same time.

Maybe that's because the video reminded me so much of the Batman: Year One graphic novel (2007 -- originally published February through May 1987 in the regular Batman comic book series) by Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli. The graphic novel gained rave reviews if you can believe Amazon (and most people do), and I remember the work favorably as well. Why do I feel so "cold" about the video based off the graphic novel?

Maybe because it was so similar to its 136 page source. I mean, having read the graphic novel, why did I need to see the 64 minute video?

Don't we want films made from books to be true to their source? Well, yes and no. If I were talking about a text-only novel, there'd be no visual component except what was generated in my head as I was reading. With a graphic novel, you get words and pictures. With an animated video you get spoken words and moving pictures, but it (in this case) looks pretty much the same.

It was as if the makers of the animated film said, "Let's make the graphic novel story again but make it move." In other words, I didn't learn anything new or have much of a different experience than when I read the graphic novel a few years ago. Any film should be more than just a moving, talking version of its source. I want to have a different experience, related enough to the original to recognize it, but different enough to be worth my while.

If I had a choice, I'd probably just read the comic book version again because print typically includes more story detail that's cut for time in a film presentation.

This isn't to say that I didn't enjoy the animated film. It was watchable and entertaining. I could certainly see the portions that linked into Batman Begins (2005), such as Batman "calling for backup."

You see the less than honorable side of a relatively young Jim Gordon, cheating on his pregnant wife, struggling to rise above his failures, fighting criminals with almost the same darkness as Batman. You see a young Bruce Wayne donning the mantle of the Bat for the first time, making rookie mistakes that almost get him killed, nearly killing the legend along with him. You see a different "Catwoman" with a (apparently) lesbian twist (it's only hinted at, but you get that vibe).

If you've never read the graphic novel or the original series of comic books, you'll enjoy the film. If you've read the graphic novel, seeing the film will be like deja vu. It's that simple.

If I watch Batman animated films, I'll try to pick those that don't follow the print material so closely. I want to be surprised as the story unfolds in front of my eyes.

DVD Review: Batman (1989)

Sometimes I revisit older movies even though I know they aren't as good as what replaced them. I saw the DVD of the 1989 version of Batman starring Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson at my local library and figured "what the heck". At the time, it was the only live action film made about the Dark Knight (the 1943 Batman movie serial doesn't count). Just because Heath Ledger totally owned the role of the Joker in The Dark Knight (2008) doesn't mean I can't appreciate Nicholson's interpretation.

It wasn't bad. It wasn't great. I remembered all of the controversy about Keaton being cast at Bruce Wayne/Batman (and my own confusion about why Burton would go with Keaton). At the time, Nicholson's Joker was just menacing enough without being truly frightening for younger audiences. Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger) was a Lois Lane copy, both in the comic books and in the film. Michael Gough competently played the faithful Alfred, always there to pick up after Bruce, but I missed the chemistry between Christian Bale's Bruce and Michael Caine's Alfred.

I'm trying not to compare this Batman against the Dark Knight Trilogy, but it's tough.

In the 1989 film, we come across Batman who is already well into his career. The origin story, the death of Bruce's parents, are shown in flashbacks, but we don't get the full treatment of how Bruce "develops" Batman as we see in Batman Begins (2005). Keaton's Bruce is absent-minded and distracted most of the time, like a child with an attentional disorder. I suppose this was to "disguise" him so he wouldn't be suspected of being Batman, but one wonders who is making money at Wayne Enterprises if Bruce isn't in that game (not that Wayne Enterprises is ever mentioned in the film).

Much more attention was paid to the origin of the Joker and his original relationship to crime syndicate head "Boss" Carl Grissom (Jack Palance). Feeling the heat from the new D.A. in Gotham, Harvey Dent (played by Billy Dee Williams in a role that was a waste of his time and talent), Grissom orders Jack Napier (the Joker's "real name") to break into a chemical company and destroy records that implicate their gang in some sort of crime (just exactly what the threat is to Grissom isn't made clear).

Jack and the boys find out that there are no records. It's a set up. Grissom has used his connections to corrupt cop Eckhart (William Hootens) to arrange a police raid of the plant with orders to shoot to kill. All this is over Grissom's girlfriend Alicia (Jerry Hall) who is two-timing him with Jack. The old man doesn't like his "sugarplums" being "sugarplummed" by another man, especially his "right-hand man".

Batman gets wind of the raid (Commissioner Gordon was at a party at Bruce's mansion earlier and had to "leave suddenly" because he finds out about Eckhart's raid) and shows up to help out. Batman and Napier tangle and one slip later, Jack falls into a vat of toxic chemicals and is flushed out to a nearby river (Gotham must have a horrible environmental safety record).

The Joker kills Grissom, takes over the mobs, invents Smilex, a chemical that kills through inducing laughing seizures, and competes with Bruce over the attentions of Vicki Vale.

I used to watch this movie a lot, so I can't tell if it feels predictable because it was written that way or because I remember it so well. The movie was a "so-what" at the theater (really, that's all there is?) but plays better on the small screen. Maybe it reminds me more of a made-for-TV movie than a major motion picture release. That doesn't say much for director Tim Burton, but then he was early in his career, and even Jack Palance became irritated with the young and inexperienced Burton on the set.

Batman was made in an era when Hollywood still hadn't figured out how to take costumed heroes seriously. It wasn't exactly "campy" but it didn't feel "real" either. The film tries to be dark and gritty and styles mimic the 1930s and 40s to some degree (Batman's natural habitat apparently) but in the end, the costumes and sets still look like a comic book come to life.

I have to remember though, that if it wasn't for this film, the Batman animated series of the 1990s probably wouldn't have happened. Up until Christian Bale's performance of Batman, I considered the animated series the best presentation of Batman not in a comic book or graphic novel. A fact I was reminded of in the first few minutes of Burton's Batman film when Danny Elfman's opening theme plays and I recognized it from the animated series. If that was the only legacy of Burton's Batman, then it did it's job.

I'm probably being too hard on Burton's film. It has the benefit of being the first serious film on Batman and it sailed uncharted waters. There's even this:

In an interview with About.com, Christopher Nolan (director of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight) described this film as "...a brilliant film, visionary and extraordinarily idiosyncratic...".

 I think it was for its time, though it was certainly flawed as I've already described.

Tim Burton's Batman has a well deserved place of honor in the history of the Dark Knight in film, but it was somewhat "damaged goods" when it was new. Now that nearly a quarter of a century has passed since its original theatrical release, it has aged, much like "Boss" Grissom. Another Batman has come to Gotham and it is his time to reign.

And should Warner Bros. decide to pursue a Justice League film, they'll need yet another Batman. Who will inherit the mantle of the Bat and how will be wear it in comparison to Keaton and Bale?

Review: The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight Rises. The Dark Knight Descends. The Dark Knight Trilogy is over.

No, it wasn't the best of the three films by far and indeed, it may have been the worst. That's not to say that it was "bad," just that it didn't amaze and enthrall me like the first two films.

Batman Begins (2005) amazed me just because I've always been disappointed with all of the live-action Batman films prior to this one. Up until "Begins," I thought the best screen version of Batman was the WB animated series from the 1990s. After seeing Bale's Batman, the animated series (still quite good) seemed like just a cartoon.

"Batman Begins" showed everyone that superheroes could be "adult fiction" and reminded us all that Batman was supposed to be "dark".

The Dark Knight (2008) totally blew away "Begins." Part of it was the more realistic cityscapes. Chicago was used instead of a fictionalized Gotham and I absolutely loved the Hong Kong sequence. Nolan totally expanded Batman's universe from his first film and the Dark Knight became infinitely more "real." Of course, Heath Ledger's "Joker" completely stole the show, making his performance and this film a legend in fantasy film making.

That's quite a build up to "Rises" and there's always the danger that when you fly so high, there's a big fall is coming.

I wouldn't say "Rises" crashed and burned, but it had really big boots to fill after "TDK" and it didn't fill those boots.

I was worried that in trying to include Catwoman, Bane, Talia al Ghul and (briefly) Ras al Ghul, the film would suffer from too many villains and not enough development. That really wasn't the problem here and except for how Ras was handled, I thought the balance between all of the main "bad guys" was handled fairly well. It was just that all of the little puzzle pieces didn't quite fit together.

In TDK, all of the story elements, the characters, every little detail, fit hand and glove. Everything was in place. Nothing was wasted. The film was very "organized." That's not another way of saying "predictable" or "boring" but "efficient" and "seamless". I didn't spend any time analyzing the film while watching it, I just watched and enjoyed.

Not so with "TDKR".

All of the jumping around from place to place to place, and from flashback to flashback to flashback was distracting, distracting, distracting. I think I managed to keep up, but it was an effort and watching a story shouldn't be about trying to figure out what the filmmaker is saying, but allowing the narrative to flow over you like a dream.

The film is watchable. It's good. It just could have been better and maybe even a little shorter.

Stuff I liked (warning: Spoilers): 

Anne Hathaway nailed it as Catwoman/Selina Kyle. Smart, agile, sexy, edgy, and even just a bit vulnerable.

Marion Cotillard played Talia al Ghul after all. Good. She needed to be part of the trilogy, though I'm sorry she and Bruce couldn't have forged more of a history before the end.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Blake. He's the obvious heir apparent to the "Mantle of the Bat" and even if I hadn't read other accounts of the film before finally seeing it, this would have been obvious from the start. I think we all knew that Batman wasn't going to survive the end of this film, but the hope of a "Dark Knight" type character had to be kept alive. There is no Gotham City with out a protector in black.

The Bane/Talia connection. I more or less liked this because I didn't see it coming. I also didn't like it because the explanation of Bane, Talia, Ras, League of Shadows, and why Gotham was brought to the edge of total destruction was not only rushed and forced, but it didn't really make a terrific amount of sense.
And yet, the weirdness of this "love affair" between two cold-blooded killers abruptly made them both less than monsters and almost human.

Bruce's secret isn't invulnerable. Blake figures it out just by seeing Bruce's face and knowing there's a Batman. Of course it was also because Blake's history parallels Bruce's, so one lost, hurt, and angry child recognizes another. Bane also figures it out which is terrifying. It's one thing that Blake knows because the guy just oozes "trust me" and "I'm a good guy," but Bane! It's a horrible thing when your worst enemy knows your every secret, turns you into a cripple, and then tosses you into the pit of hell.

Stuff I didn't like: 

Ras al Ghul was a hallucination that lasted a couple of minutes tops. So what?

It is true that Bruce's initial return as Batman was supposed to be a failure. Alfred even pointed out that he wasn't actually Batman anymore, just Bruce in a costume. Bane proved this by beating Batman to a pulp and breaking his back (which was demanded because that's what Bane is supposed to do to Bruce). But it's like I didn't believe it. The tragedy of Batman's defeat would have been much greater if he had regained more of his "Batman-ness"; if we could have believed he had a chance against Bane before being destroyed by him.

Heck, the theme of the film is even hope before disaster. There was no hope when Batman first faced Bane. We all knew he didn't have a chance.

Fusion reactor can be turned into a bomb. Yawn. OK, convenient plot device (literally) so Bane could have access to an atomic bomb without having to sneak it in, but first of all, to me, nuclear fusion reactors were just too fantastic for this movie and there was no build up...just Wayne blowing half his fortune to build one, then mothballing it because it maybe could be turned into a bomb (like nuclear fusion wouldn't be dangerous enough anyway). It was just too odd. It didn't fit.

Hardly anyone seemed like themselves. Bruce, Alfred, Fox, Gordon all seemed like they were sleepwalking through their roles. All of the personality, the humor, the "themness" of these characters was missing. It was as if they couldn't wait to finish filming their scenes so they could go off and do something else. The heart of the Batman films was just plain missing.

Robin. Oh for Chrissake, Robin? Blake's "real" name had to be Robin? Yuk.

Change "Blake" to "Drake" and you already have a Robin connection without having to be obvious or dumb.

Occupy Wall Street on steroids was another obvious element that was shoved down the audience's throat. What would happen if the "occupy" movement turned violent? Get all the 1%ers, try them, and kill them. Kill the police or otherwise get rid of them. Return the "power to the people." Really? If it actually worked out the way the film predicts, then we have some idea of why every revolution ends with the radicals becoming "the man."

Bruce has a medical exam before returning as Batman the first time. His body is shot. Given the description of his injuries, there's no way in hell he could have come back as the Dark Knight, especially after his back injury. No amount of "prison workouts" fixes no cartilage in the knees, elbows, and shoulders. Replacement surgery fixes that but he'd still never be Batman again. A Lazarus Pit fixes that too, but I'll get to that in a minute.

I sort of loved and hated the "happy ending." I guess I always wanted Bruce to survive because it creates the vain hope that if "Robin" or "Nightwing" or whoever really needs a hand, Batman would be there to back him up. I also like a happy ending just because the part of me that believes in justice thinks good guys should win in the end and "live happily ever after". On the other hand, it was also kind of sappy and given the knowledge of Alfred's annual vacation plan we are given earlier in the film, we all knew it was going to happen.

Stuff I wished for: 

Ras al Ghul really coming back. Given the plot and direction of the story, the film would have become quite a bit more complicated had Ras shown up alive, but competing with his daughter and the man he hated more than Bruce for control of the League of Shadows would have been an incredible showdown.

The Lazarus Pit. Part of me thought that Bane would actually kill Batman, that it would happen further into the film, and that a lovesick Talia (yeah, the film would have to be a lot different) would take Bruce's body to a Lazarus Pit to resurrect him. It would have been absolutely cool. The movie would have to be completely rewritten but it would have been totally awesome!

I could go on and on about the film. It's a flawed work of art. I'll be bitching for weeks about it. I'm sorry it ended this way. But for better or for worse. it ended. The ride is over.

Nolan used TKDR to try and pull together all of the perceived "loose threads" created in the first two films but particularly in "Begins." He tried too hard.

But if DC plans to make a Justice League film, the Dark Knight must not rise again, but be reinvented. What will he be like then?

The Rising of the Knight in Everyone

I really wanted to find an image of Batman being the living crap out of someone. I really wanted to give my rage and heartache a representative graphic illustrating the 12 people killed and over 50 people hurt by a gunman at a midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises in Colorado last night.

But I couldn't find something that captured my "imagination."

Instead, I found what you see posted at the top of this blog post. Maybe it's more fitting. Yeah, in "real life," Batman (if he existed in real life), would pound the bastard that shot up the movie audience into something that looks like chunky salsa, but afterward, rage would turn to grief. After all, it was the death of two innocent people, his parents, who were shot by a criminal, that created the Dark Knight in the first place. Every time some hood or madman guns down people just because they're there, it diminishes all of us. It creates, temporarily for most people, a collective drive toward justice, the need to protect the victims, the desire to punish the guilty.

But, news items being what they are and people being who we are, most of us tend to forget. We remember for weeks, months, years, what our favorite scenes are and lines of dialog from films such as TDKR, but we'll forget about the shootings in Aurora, Colorado in a few days. Something else will come along and drive it out of our memories and fractured attention spans.

For most of us, that is.

Bruce Wayne didn't forget. He never forgot. Of course, he was a kid and the people murdered right before his eyes were his parents, so you'd figure he'd never forget. But he did something more than remember. He took his anger, his guilt, and his fear, and turned it into a weapon; and incredibly powerful weapon. He turned it into Batman.

That doesn't do the rest of us much good. Batman is a fictional character. He only exists in the world of imagination. He is a symbol of our desire for dark justice and the need to not only punish the predators, but to brutalize them. He is the shadow to our light, the power to our powerlessness, the avenger to our victimhood.

He is the Dark Knight to our oppression.

We can't put on a costume and roam the night. We can't summon the heroes of fantasy into the real world of blood, and tear gas, and torn flesh, and dead bodies. But we can do something; we should do something.

All I can do is write, so that's what I'm doing. Probably a lot of people will have something to say about all this in the hours and days to come. This is me saying what I need to say right now.

As much as I'd like to take a baseball bat and beat the shooter's head like an overripe melon, that's not what needs to be done the most (I still think I'd like to do it, though, because I'm really angry right now).

No, what needs to be done more than pulling revenge and this guy's bloody colon out of his ass, is to remember the victims, to have compassion. To not give in to anger and rage, but to instead, nurture kindness and if you believe in that sort of thing, to pray for the wounded and the dying.

Anger, violence, and revenge may make us feel better in the short run, but it's justice, mercy, and compassion that heals the world in the long run. Don your metaphorical "Dark Knight" armor if you must and scream how much you'd like to hurt the guy that did all the hurting, but remember. Remember that afterward, you have to take the mask off and be who you are, to help, to rebuild broken lives.

That's the part about being a hero you don't see at the end of the movie. That's the hero in real life and I hope...I hope it's the hero you can find in yourself. I hope I can find him in me, too.

Review: Batman and Robin, Volumes 1 and 2

I know, I know. I promised to write this review a long time ago, but things keep happening in my life. No, not anything nearly as dramatic as what Richard (I can't bring myself to call him "Dick") and Damian live through, but enough to keep me from writing a review on this blog. At least up until now.

I borrowed these two graphic novels from my local public library (I love libraries...you should, too) and read through them in a few evenings. Not exactly peaceful and calming material to go through right before bedtime, but they inspired some truly entertaining dreams. But what are they about, anyway?

The story of this Batman and Robin, starring Richard Grayson as the heir apparent to the "Mantle of the Bat" and Damian Wayne, the unlikely son of Bruce and Talia al Ghul, is set in the period of time when Bruce Wayne is struggling to return to the present after Darkseid's Omega beams sent him slamming back across the time line to the days of "Alley Oop" (almost). How will this dynamic duo fair as Gotham's protectors in the absence of the original Dark Knight?

Actually, just about as you'd imagine. Not all that great.

You'd think that with all of the experience Grayson had, first as the original Robin and then as Nightwing, he'd be a better Batman, but it seems as if he's intimidated by the cape and the cowl. If anyone could fill Bruce's "bat boots", it should be Richard, but he just doesn't act like they're a very good fit. Contrast this with Damian Wayne, all of ten years old, and yet he acts like he could be Batman right now. This is the part that was tough for me to swallow. I don't care if the little punk was raised by an assassin's league and his grandfather is Ras al Ghul, he still should have gotten his ass kicked on a more or less regular basis, right from jump street.

Actually, there were plenty of times Robin did eat the pavement and at one point, even got his back broken (sound familiar?). However, the little jerk always managed to bounce back and get into trouble again. If there was ever a Robin I wanted to see get a bullet in the brain, it was Damian. Even "Dick" wasn't this much of a "whiny bitch" when he first put on the "pixie boots". Frankly, it would have been better for Batman to team up with the Red Hood (Jason Todd).

Nobody loves this new Batman and Robin. Even casual observers on the GPD can tell it's not the "real" Batman, and Gordon tolerates them only because of his faith in the first Robin turned Batman (or maybe his faith in the return of the first Batman). Everyone was waiting for them to go "ker-splat" including me, while I was reading Volume 1. I know that Damian really is supposed to be a bad-ass, but I kept remembering myself at age ten and even if I had the attitude of a rattlesnake and the best ten-year-old body in the business, One good punch to the gut or a knife across my throat would have ended my crime fighting story before it started. It's hard to imagine Damian being ready at so young an age. He acted more like an "emo" 14 year old than a junior grade assassin. He even had the balls to call Alfred "Pennyworth" and to treat him like a "servant", which is something his father never would have done.

As it turns out, Richard never does (at least in the first 2 volumes of this series) get comfortable with being Batman. So much so, that he tries to resurrect what he thinks is Bruce's body by putting it in a Lazarus pit. Too bad it was a half brain-dead clone of Bruce that he gets a hold of instead (remember, Bruce is very much alive and leaping across the pages of history like a dark caped version of Sam Beckett in an extended episode of Quantum Leap) of the real Bruce. The "bat thing" that comes out of the pit is just about too much for our "dynamic duo", especially since Damian is trying to recover from the experimental surgery that put his spine back together and (covertly) turned him into a remote controlled pawn of his mother.

Amazingly, the two of them, with the much needed assistance of Alfred, manage to put away "Bat-zombie" before he makes them permanent residents of the land on the other side of the Styx. Little by little the two start to meld into a team as Damian begins to see what it is to truly take on his father's values, and Richard realizes that Bruce isn't coming back to save him. Richard takes his biggest step to becoming the next Dark Knight when he realizes he must become Batman, because there's just no one else.

Damian finally turns a corner when his mother uses him to try and assassinate Richard, and Grayson turns his own corner when, by the final page of Volume 2, he demonstrates his own detective skills in discovering the true identity of the heretofore mysterious Oberon Sexton.

Oh, it was kind of "cute" when Richard tried to hit on Batwoman not knowing that she'd have more interest in Barbara Gordon or Dinah Lance. Oh well, welcome to 21st century relationships, Dick.

Graphic Novel Review: Batman, the Return of Bruce Wayne

An odyssey for one of the most iconic figures in comics stretches from prehistory to the end of time, revisiting and reimagining Batman's mythology through a complex narrative. Writer Morrison and a team of artists pick up from the end of Morrison's Final Crisis and Batman: RIP. Bruce Wayne is lost in time after killing Darkseid, a godlike being of pure evil. Piecing together the memories of his past that he's lost and slowly realizing he's been turned into a human booby trap meant to destroy the universe by Darkseid, Bruce is pulled through eras of Gotham City's history that include confrontations with cavemen, witch hunters, pirates, cowboys, and 20th-century cultists. These adventures culminate in a return to the present where he must rely on his fellow superheroes to save him from Darkseid's curse. Morrison's story is designed to add to Batman's aura as a timeless, mythical hero, but the time jumps and Bruce's amnesia sometimes create an uneven narrative. The story also asks readers to possess a wealth of familiarity with the character's decades-long history, making the book not as accessible to newer fans. Different artists—all strong, colorful storytellers—give each time period its own mood.

From the product description of
Batman: The Return of Bruce Wayne
at Amazon.com

I had originally intended to review the graphic novel Final Crisis and "Return" back-to-back, but "Crisis" had such a vast scope and such a twisted plot to follow, that I felt that reviewing it would be an injustice. I didn't like it very well. It assumed that the reader knew just about everything there is to know about the DC Universe going back decades (although I actually knew about the Miracle Machine from the old, silver age Adventure comics (featuring the Legion of Super-Heroes). For the first half of "Crisis", I had no idea what was going on, if I was seeing events on different "Earths" or just different places on one Earth or whatever.

However, reading "Crisis" was necessary to get the background for understanding how Bruce Wayne ended up in the stone age in The Return of Bruce Wayne. I love time travel stories and I love time travel mysteries. I figured this was going to be good.

It was. But it had its flaws.

I hadn't intended to read it all in one sitting, but a bout of insomnia changed my plans. My review is based on going through all of the pages of Morrison's product well after midnight and, writing this the following evening on three hours sleep, I'm still a bit punchy. But I digress.

The storyline is much more straightforward than "Crisis" but it's not completely straight. There is the little "side-trip" to Vanishing Point taken by Superman, Rip Hunter, and a few other JLA members to try and figure out where and when Batman is/was. I must have missed something, but Vanishing Point was on the verge of being destroyed at the heat death of the universe, so there wasn't a lot of...time (yeah, I know...that's going to come up a lot) to investigate.

There was mention made of the clues in history Batman left behind but no mention of how the JLA knew even to look. As far as they knew, Batman was dead. Why suspect that he was really back in time and how convenient it would be to suddenly start finding suspicious cave paintings just after his disappearance into the past? It would have been cleaner if we were told how and why anyone thought to look for a time traveling Bruce Wayne and what told them that A.) he was capable to traveling forward in time and B.) that he was accumulating Omega Energy as part of Darkseid's plot to posthumously destroy Earth.

Of course, maybe that was in the book and I was just too tired to pick up on it.

I liked the stone age. I'm still wondering how the rocket ship (which did not contain Bruce's body but just his stuff) ended up in the exact time and place that Bruce's body did when zapped by Darkseid's Omega beams. I may have missed the connection in "Crisis", though. There was so much going on in that book, it was hard to keep all the details straight.

It was a little campy to have "Boy" of the Deer People become "Boy" (Robin) of the Bat People, but endearing nonetheless. I did find it really incredible to believe that someone who probably lived about 10,000 B.C. could have started a legend that would be remembered by a small tribe native Americans in 1640 A.D., but it was also kind of cool.

I kept wondering why Bruce took such a big leap in time at the first event, tens of thousands of years, and afterwards, jumped forward only a few centuries or a few decades? Of course, there was all that time in between when he wouldn't have had any sort of adventure and we do want to keep the action moving.

I enjoyed all of his time leaps, but my favorite was when Bruce "played" private detective investigating the allegation that his father murdered his mother (the man with her that fateful night wasn't supposed to be Thomas Wayne). Batman was originally created in the late 1930s, so pulp fiction dieselpunk is his natural element. I did have a tough time figuring out the year though, since there were video stores in existence, which would have placed him in the late 1970s or early 80s, but his grandfather was in an iron lung, which would have put it more in the 1950s.

Oh well.

When Bruce showed up at Vanishing Point and stole Rip Hunter's time machine, stranding Superman, GL, and the others just minutes before the end of the universe, I was definitely thrown a curve ball. It's all eventually explained, but I'm still trying to figure out who that guy Carter was, how he invented a time machine and why, if this was supposed to be in the 1940s or 50s, he was wearing a "Have a nice day" t-shirt, complete with smiley face.

A few things really bothered me. One was how many times Bruce came really close to death. If he was that easy to kill, he would have died a hundred times over just by being Batman. Of course, he didn't have his memory and he was way out of his element, but as the book says, Batman is a survivor. That's what he does.

The one thing I hated more than anything happens when Bruce steals Hunter's time machine and strands the JLA members in a force field (which turns out to be a time machine in the making). Superman panics. He has a real look of fear in one panel followed by him pounding impotently on the force field while practically wailing. No one else loses their cool, not even Booster Gold. Superman would not have panicked, no matter what. He'd be the one everyone else looked to for courage. I felt sorry for him.

I kind of liked it that a 17th century witch put an everlasting curse on one of Bruce's ancestors (and in this book, his ancestors were less than noble). It kind of explains why his life and his family is always in such a mess. He's got a lot to make up for.

Like the "Crisis" story, there's a bad guy and a worse bad guy. In this case, Wayne arriving in the 21st century and blowing it up isn't the only problem. There was also that evil thing in the Bat Cave in 1640 that passed on an "infection" of evil (hey, I don't make this stuff up). It definitely plays a part in why Bruce is so messed up when he finally reaches the present, mentally and physically, although I'm not sure how it ended up becoming the "bat-thing" Vandal Savage killed in the stone age right before Bruce arrives (and which becomes the basis for Bruce's first "costume").

"Return" is a book that assumes you know what's going on. Although it's still exciting and compelling all by itself, there are too many questions it raises if you don't buy 50 DC comic books every month for ten or twenty years in a row and memorize all of the details. In spite of what I just said, it's still more or less a "clean" story that contains most of the answers to the questions it raises. It held my attention and was even a page-turner when all I wanted in life was to get a few hours sleep.

There's a lot I left out of the review, but if you haven't read "Return" yet, you'll need to get a copy and find out about the other connections that have now become part of the Legend of the Dark Knight. Despite all of my "complaints", I really liked it. I'm glad it was at my public library and it's a shame I have to return it. On the other hand, I have to give the next person a chance to experience the dilemma, the mystery, and the anguish of "the Return of Bruce Wayne."

Batman: Under the Red Hood DVD Review

First of all, this is loaded with spoilers, so if you haven't seen this video yet and you want to preserve the mystery, don't read any further. You've been warned.

OK, it was fabulous, and I don't give out compliments lightly. The suspense in this tale had even me twisting in my seat. I was actually nervous about how it all would come out. Go figure.

Several major pieces of Batman comic book history are adapted for this story.

First, Jason Todd, the second Robin, being killed by the Joker. That happens right at the beginning and is the set up for everything else. Jason is beaten to a pulp with a crowbar, left for dead, and then, before Batman could get there, the place blows sky high. No fake death. Batman gets to the site of the explosion less than a minute later and picks Jason's broken body out of the rubble. He's dead. No faking it.

Second, we have the "Red Hood" origin of the Joker. There are a number of different twists on Joker's origin, but one of them...one that I hate, is that the Joker was a petty crook trying to reform. He was married (the back story wasn't in the film, but I thought I should fill you in) and his wife was pregnant. His "honest" work wasn't going so well and some of his old pals convinced him to help pull off a heist. The catch is that he had to dress in some stupid looking red mask and cape, pretending to be a crime lord or something.

Naturally Batman shows up. It's in a chemical plant. The "Red Hood" tries to tell Batman that he didn't want to do wrong. It goes bad. "Hoodie" slips and falls into a vat of chemicals. The Joker is born.

Oh, the entire movie starts with Ra's al Ghul. Yeah. Thousands of miles away from Bosnia, which is where Jason buys it, Ra's knows somehow that Joker is beating Robin to death and, get this, that Batman will be too late to stop it. The film never explains how Ra's knows that but it does explain that Ra's hired the Joker...but not to kill Jason.

OK, that's out of the way.

Five years after Jason's death, a crime lord named Black Mask has taken over all of Gotham's mobs. Unfortunately, he's just Captain America's Red Skull with a black paint job and a bad temper. Nothing really special. I was disappointed.

The interesting part is when a guy in an adaptation of the Red Hood outfit (without cape, thankfully) takes over the mobs with the promise to protect the gangs from the Black Mask and Batman. He cuts himself into Gotham's drug profits but with one odd demand, "Sell drugs to kids and you're dead." He means it.

It was immediately apparent that the new Red Hood was Jason (although it takes Batman a little longer to figure out). Even with Nightwing's help, the Red Hood is always one step ahead of Batman. He knows all of Batman's moves. He can counter all of Batman's toys. The clues are all there. Jason wants Bruce to figure it out. At one point (and Bruce has to analyze the voice recording of their encounter to hear it), the Red Hood...Jason, even calls Batman, "Bruce".

The mystery isn't really why Jason would kill. Bruce knew right from the day he recruited Jason that he was both gifted and dangerous. Part of turning Jason into Robin was to control him, to keep him from going "dark". It almost worked until he died. Yeah, he really was dead. I'm getting to that.

Red Hood uses guns and explosives. He doesn't have a problem with killing. He does what he thinks Batman is afraid to do and he thinks that while it's impossible to get rid of crime, it can be controlled. In some ways, Jason walks a finer line than Bruce, few morals and no inhibition about killing, but he's not in it for the profit or even the thrill. He has a plan.

The mystery is how Jason really came back from the dead and ultimately what he wants with his new life. The first was hard to figure out because I never thought Ra's would go that far. The second was a bit of misdirection.

Batman wasn't the only one who felt guilty for Jason's death. Ra's hired Joker to be distract Batman while Ra's was working elsewhere. He never thought Joker would kidnap and kill Robin while Batman was chasing him in Bosnia. Ra's took Jason's dead body from the morgue after Bruce left the country and transported him to a Lazarus pit (Ra's replaces the body with a very convincing replica..and Bruce is too guilty to look at the body a second time). Oh crap. It worked. That green slime really can bring someone back from the dead. It can also drive them crazy, as it always threatens to do with Ra's.

It would be easy to say that Jason stayed crazy, but he didn't. He escaped Ra's al Ghul's compound and managed to make his way back into Gotham. Funded by drug profits, Jason decided to become a better Batman than Batman. Now that the mystery of how a dead guy comes back to life has been solved, what about the next mystery: what does Jason really want?

To kill the Joker? He almost does. To kill Batman for failing to save him? It looks that way. But looks can be deceiving. I won't tell you the details. Watch the DVD and find out for yourself. I absolutely promise it will be worth it.

Stuff I liked:

I liked the various flashback scenes when Bruce recalls Jason first becoming Robin and even when they first met in "crime alley", when he caught a 10 or 12 year old Jason trying to steal the hubcaps off of the Batmobile. Batman is Batman. Hard as nails, but inside, he really loved that kid. It humanizes Bruce and yet lets him keep the darkness and pain of being Batman.

I liked Alfred, probably because he's always Alfred. He's part of what anchors Batman and keeps him Bruce. He's the guy who gets to tell Batman stuff no one else would dare. He knows all there is about Bruce and he can be trusted. He's the closest thing Bruce has to a father (it never happens in the film, but if Jason really wanted to get to Bruce, all he'd have to do is mess with Alfred..fortunately Jason doesn't take it that far).

Stuff I didn't like:

I could get past Bruce Greenwood doing the voice work as Bruce/Batman. I certainly think that Kevin Conroy is *the* voice of Batman, but Greenwood (and I like Greenwood as an actor...a lot) wasn't half bad. I really hated John Di Maggio as the Joker, though. He sounded just like any other thug, especially in the beginning of the film when he was killing Robin. He communicated nothing of the dangerous insanity that Mark Hamill brings to the role. He was just mean and sarcastic.

That is until Di Maggio laughed. It's creepy, which it should be. Di Maggio redeems himself somewhat as the film progresses, especially when Black Mask springs him from Arkham and hires him to kill the Red Hood. The sequence of Joker going from broken prisoner to multiple-murderer in just a matter of seconds was brilliant.

I still think Hamill was better.

There was a scene where three out of four assassins trying to take Red Hood/Jason out were using variations on one and two-bladed light sabres. Oh c'mon, we've all seen Star Wars. Can't you be more creative? The action, suspense, and danger held up, but it took the edge off the scene just having light sabres there.

Batman: Under the Red Hood. I was impressed. Very impressed. Very few flaws, at least that I noticed on a first viewing. Lots of little homage pieces to other films and the comic books. Very little Jim Gordon, which there wasn't time for in the story (too bad). Frankly, I loved it. If you're a Batman fan, or maybe even if you're not, you'll love it too.

Batman is Real!

And I can prove it:



OK, I found it at Reddit.com but it was so retro and cool, I thought I'd share it will all of my fans (all seven of you).

If by some miracle it became practical, I'd love to own it. I have no idea what I'd do with it (besides summon Batman, of course), but it would be fabulous!

Success is Temporary, Failure is Temporary, Leave Me Alone!

It was a high counsel that I once heard given to a young person, "Always do what you are afraid to do."
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

Take calculated risks. That is quite different from being rash.
-George S. Patton

If you do not hope, you will not find what is beyond your hopes.
-St. Clement of Alexandra

We are all inventors, each sailing out on a voyage of discovery, guided each by a private chart, of which there is no duplicate. The world is all gates, all opportunities.
-Ralph Waldo Emerson

That's a small sampling from a motivational quotes website. Gee. Charming.

We're in a new year. 2011 is supposed to be better and brighter and more wonderful than 2010.

Bullshit.

Oh, I can't say that it won't be in absolute terms. I don't have a crystal ball or any other way to see into the future. But just because it's early January doesn't mean that the New Year is full of promise only because most of the year hasn't happened yet. I mean, with each new year, everyone thinks it's going to be great. But is that how the year turns out?

Just look at last year. Try to remember the beginning of 2010. Obama was President (still is). Pelosi was the Speaker of the House (now she's not). The "progressives" were in charge of everything and we all know that means everything that changes, changes for the better (as defined by a bunch of politicians and myopic optimists). How many people died in Afghanistan and Iraq? How many suicide bombings were there in the Middle East? How many people died in car accidents? How many little kids were diagnosed with cancer? How many people are out of work? Homeless? Sick? Dying?

Yes, I'm grumpy. I'm grumpy because, like Christmas, everyone expects you to feel a certain way, as if it's the only way to feel, just because of a date on a calendar. Also, all these motivational people, sites, and sayings make just tons and tons of assumptions about people. If you aren't actually motivated by their popular drivel, then you're bad or evil or something. After all, these people make money by being motivational, so how dare you fail to be motivated by them. What they really want is to motivate you to give them your money.

How about an example of motivational drivel. Let's take a look at one popular motivational phrase:

Success isn't permanent, and failure isn't fatal.
-Mike Ditka US football player & coach

I'll totally buy the first part. No matter how well you do at something, it doesn't last. Just look at actors and politicians. No matter how good your last movie was, the next one could suck. No matter how many promises you made on the campaign trail that got you elected, your actions once you get in office will not always be popular (look how far Obama has fallen in the "popularity polls").

Failure isn't fatal. Well, that depends. If we're talking about skydiving or bungie cord jumping, then failure can damn well be fatal. If you're Superman, Batman, or Green Lantern and some series of bad guys are always trying to kill you, failure can almost assuredly be fatal.

But most of us don't have life threatening hobbies or happen to be superheroes, so no, failing won't really kill us.

It will just make us feel like we want to be dead.

Your boss always wants you to be successful at work (productive, whatever). Your boyfriend, girlfriend, partner, lover, spouse, mutant parasite wants you to always be successful in attending to their wants, needs, and desires. The credit card company wants you to be successful in paying your bills on time. Everybody wants you to be universally successful and will punish you in varying ways and in varying degrees if you fail.

No, it won't kill you, but you'll wish you were dead.

I've noticed that motivational phrases, websites, and people rarely provide practical advice, they just ramble off pie-in-the-sky platitudes. They're like comic book characters. Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman all have perfect bodies. Except for Batman, you never see them dieting or working out to achieve and maintain those bodies. They just have them. Success and failure are fictional illustions that happen on pages of paper covered with ink. While they can be inspirations, they also can point out that, by comparision, our little lives are pretty dull, boring, and our problems, though not on a magnificent scale most of the time, aren't very easy to solve (nor as dramatically solved).

So next time those of you who produce your motivational books and websites get the bright idea to give some advice to the rest of us, come down to earth first. Learn what it feels like to live with chronic depression or some sort of physical disability. Find out what it's like to have few friends, to live on a budget (a small one), to struggle to pay bills, to disappoint your spouse, to be called "a failure".

Success isn't permanent but failure is a label that, once stuck to your back with super glue, hangs on in your reputation and in your emotions for a long, long time.

Bite me, motivational people.

Who Should Appear in Smallville Season 10?

I suppose I could write a review of the Season 10 opener for Smallville just like everyone else but, face it, I don't want to be like everyone else. I suppose that's why I don't give a rats about Chlois, Clana, ClChloe, ClLex, Cl_whatever. For those of you who need to be emotionally enthralled with who Clark's in bed with, good on you, but it's not why I watch Smallville.

Rather than a review, I'll write about the other topic that Smallville fans are all over (no, not Michael Rosenbaum returning as Lex). I'm talking about what characters I'd like to see appear or return to Smallville.

I watch Smallville because I like the Superman legend and I like what the Smallville writers, producers, and actors have done to tweak the canon. I've been a long time Superman fan (you have no idea how long), so I love seeing references in Smallville that appeared in Superman related comics years or even decades ago. I'm kind of a trivia junkie, so that sort of stuff appeals to me.

So who do I want to appear in Smallville? Keep in mind that my wish list is completely unrealistic and has virtually no hope of being fulfilled for legal, contractual, and a jillion other reasons. I'm just doing this for the fun of it.

Lex Luthor

I figured I'd go with the obvious one first. Yes, I do want Michael Rosenbaum to return to Smallville as Lex. He did a fantastic job over eight years of slowly moving Lex into the dark side of himself. There were times I wanted to kill Lex and other times I was hoping he'd come out on top. He's an interesting and complex "bad guy" and Rosenbaum did a fabulous job in the role. I know he doesn't want to go through the rest of his life shaving his head, but if he comes back for the final season, it would be the icing on the cake.

Lana Lang

Actually, I find Lana kind of whiny and annoying, but I'd love to see "Kryptonite Girl" make a reappearance. I'd also love to know what she's been up to with her super powers lately. Although she's now deadly to Clark, she would come in handy if he were threatened by other Kryptonian baddies. Probably not much help against Darkseid, though.

Hal Jordan

Here's where the lack of realism starts. There's no way WB will bring a young, pre-Green Lantern Hal Jordan into Smallville, but a Hal Jordan/Oliver Queen team-up would so rock!

Bruce Wayne

Again, WB isn't going to bring a pre-Batman Wayne into Smallville. I'm not sure how the timeline would even work since "now", Batman should exist in Gotham City. Totally off the radar, but seeing Clark and Bruce in a "World's Finest" meet would be terrific.

The Justice Society

We know that Carter and Shayera Hall (Hol?) will be showing up with Lois in Egypt in the next Smallville episode, Shield, but what about other Society members? The original Green Lantern was a guy named Alan Scott. If Hal Jordan can't make an appearance, how about Scott's Green Lantern?

Wonder Woman

Actress Lynda Carter (TV's Wonder Woman from the 1970s) appeared on Smallville in 2007 as Moira Sullivan, Chloe's mother, but how about a new, young, smoking hot Wonder Woman or even a Diana, Princess of Paradise Island, fresh in this country and before the (skin tight) costume and invisible plane (she could have the golden lasso)? It would make my night!

The Martian Manhunter

I'd like to see John Jones again. He's a good "wingman" for Clark and well as a wise and pragmatic mentor. If at all possible, I'd love for his powers to return. Something tells me that when Darkseid cuts loose, Clark's going to need all the help he can get.

I've already heard that John Glover will be reprising his role as Lionel Luthor for the very last two episodes of the series. I take it as a foregone conclusion that the Justice League members will be coming back sometime during this season, if for no other reason than to get revenge for Oliver's torture and to rescue Chloe. It looks like Annette O'Toole will be returning as Martha Kent and her real life husband Michael McKean will be returning as Perry White (Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Planet?). Everyone knows that Laura Vandervoort is returning for the 200th episode of Smallville, Supergirl as both Kara (Supergirl) and Linda Lee Danvers.

I think James Masters is returning to Smallville from the 31st century as Brainiac 5, perhaps along with the Legion of Superheroes, and that will be interesting. Can we trust version 5 when versions 1 and 2 were such a tremendous pain?

That was my A list. If a B list shows up in my imagination, I'll let you know. How about you? Is there anyone you want to see come to or come back to Smallville that I missed?

Superhero Role Models, Part 2

Today's media superheroes -- including Batman in The Dark Knight and the Hulk in Planet Hulk -- as well as the ''slacker'' characters often portrayed in TV shows and movies offer boys poor role models, says a University of Massachusetts professor who polled hundreds of boys up to age 18 to find out their favorites.

The poll results suggest boys hear two ways to be masculine, says researcher Sharon Lamb, EdD, distinguished professor of mental health at the University of Massachusetts-Boston, who presented the findings Sunday at the American Psychological Association's annual meeting in San Diego.

"One was the superhero image, created as someone who shows their masculinity through power over other people, through exploiting women, showing their wealth, and through sarcasm and superiority," she says.

Superheroes: Bad Role Models for Boys?

It's been over a month since I posted part I of Superhero Role Models. I meant to get back to it sooner, but you wouldn't believe how busy I get with the jobs that actually pay me. Nevermind that, though. Right to work.

Batman

Bruce Wayne is the living embodiment of the phrase, "Don't get mad, get even." When Bruce was about 10 years old or so, his parents were gunned down right before his eyes during a robbery in an alley. The Waynes were rich, but apparently they didn't want to blow any of their dough on bodyguards and didn't believe in leaving the theatre by the front door. Bam! Bam! Mom and Dad are just dead.

There are variations on a theme, but generally, Bruce spends the rest of his childhood being raised by the family's kindly butler Alfred. All the while, something is slowly smoldering in the maturing Bruce and a plan takes form. Eventually, he sets himself on a path of education not typically offered by most Ivy League schools and acquires the skill sets and material to let him become the Batman!

This is more than a simple case of revenge. If revenge against one murderer were the answer, all Bruce would have to do is offer a few million to the person who could find and whack the guy who killed his parents and it would be over. No. For Bruce, it will never be over.

So what kind of role model does that make him?

Pretty awful, actually. He's obsessed and keeps on letting himself be obsessed. In a material sense, he's got everything a person could ever want: looks, money, power, and popularity. Other people manage to get past family tragedies. Another person would have channelled all his hurt and anger into developing programs for crime victims and their families, paying for therapy (which Bruce desperately needed as a child and no one seemed to recognize), and lobbying for harsher penalties for repeat offenders. What twists inside a person so badly, that he has to put on a black costume at night and beat the bad guys to a pulp with his fists?

Do you want your little boy to grow up like that? Most parents want their kids to be happy. Bruce is never happy.

What's worse, he spreads his obsession to a succession of young, impressionable teen boys. It would be one thing if Bruce were to contain his pain within himself, put on the costume alone, and take the risks as an individual, but he keeps bringing these kids into it. Depending on which version of the legend you look at, at least one Robin was killed by the Joker and, in a Batman Beyond episode, another Robin was captured, tortured, and brainwashed by the Joker. The poor kid ended up just barely avoiding capping Batman and finally finishing off the Joker. He needed and got years of therapy, but he never put on a cape and mask again. Lucky him.

Batman as a role model for young boys? Forget it. You might as well assign Dracula to run Boys Town (but only at night) or let the Joker himself adopt a few kiddies for fun and games in the chem lab. A freaking F- for Bruce.

Thor

He's big. He's strong. He talks like the King James version of the Bible. In the 1960s, the Haight-Ashbury hippies probably loved his hair. Everyone who even dreams of Gold's Gym probably loves his muscles. In next year's movie, Natalie Portman gets to be his girlfriend (Yowza!). But how is he as a role model for kids?

First, some background.

According to the original Marvel Comics canon, Dr Don Blake (with a limp and cane, decades before House) is vacationing in Norway when he falls down a big hole and ends up in a cave. I think this has something to do with him witnessing an alien invasion a few minutes before this incident and feeling kind of freaked out. He loses his cane but finds an old beat up stick to use. Banging it on the ground, it turns into this really big hammer and he turns into Thor.

Apparently, Thor had been a bad boy. Arrogant and snobby and all that (probably what Bruce Wayne would have turned into as a rich family's only child if his parents hadn't been gunned down). His father Odin decides to teach him humility by cursing Thor (minus a few memories) and placing him into the body of whatever hapless sap happened to come upon that stick in a cave. The sap would be Blake.

From this point on, Blake and Thor share a dual identity, with the nice, quiet Blake running his private practice in Manhattan, and Thor showing up whenever some big time menace made the scene.

Thor's history gets really long and complicated from here, but sticking to the basics, both Blake and Thor are really conservative good guys. Thor, with all his thees and thous, comes off like a cosmic cornball, but he's loyal to Daddy Odin, loyal to the Avengers, and believes in honor and justice. Blake, though not nearly as dynamic as his hammer-wielding alter ego, is also essentially a good guy. He's always tried to do the right thing by his girlfriend Jane Foster, even to the point of making her an immortal, but Odin didn't like the idea and stripped her of her immortality and memories of Asgard. Hardly Thor's fault.

You really can't blame the guy for anything. There are probably times when he lost his temper and flew off the handle, but if you ever wanted someone to have your back, it would be Thor.

Honor, justice, and fighting evil as Thor and helping the sick and injured and pulling down a six figure income as an M.D. in Manhattan as Don Blake. For role model material, he gets an A+.

Hulk

Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry. I'm sure you recognized this tagline from the Incredible Hulk TV series. Starting with original canon, shy, withdrawn super-brainy Government scientist Dr. Robert Bruce Banner invents the Gamma Bomb and, back in the day when above-ground nuclear tests were legal, he arranges to have it test detonated out in the middle of some forsaken desert.

The problem is thick-headed Rick Jones, some footloose teenager with more time than sense, happened to drive out onto the test range on a bet and was just seconds away from being blasted into radioactive atoms. Bruce sees Rick outside and orders the countdown be stopped, but he didn't count on a lousy Commie spy being in the bunker, too. The spy, seeing an opportunity to get rid of Banner (moron..kidnap him for his secrets, don't kill him) and somehow access his research, makes sure the countdown doesn't stop.

Why Banner didn't think he had all the time in the world is beyond me, but he runs out onto the testing range, screaming like a madman, and manages to get Rick to safety just in time. The bomb does off and instead of killing Banner instantly or killing him by radiation poisoning or by inducing cancer, the gamma blast gives Banner the ability to turn into a raging green (gray on the cover of issue 1) behemoth called "the Hulk".

Again, lots and lots of history, but underneath it all, I say Banner has an authority problem. Think about it. Brainy, nerdy guy in the early 1960s when it certainly wasn't popular to be nerdy. Having tough Army officers with the collective IQ of a barrel cactus telling him what to do. I bet he couldn't wait to figure out a way to trash the nearest Army base and get his revenge. The Hulk was just a means to an end. Victim of radiation poisoning, my butt!

Whenever Banner gets in a jam he can't think his way out of, he turns into the Hulk and overcomes the problem by brute force. Want to teach that lesson to your 14 year old? Didn't think so.

To be fair, Banner didn't ask for what happened to him but, most scientists would have turned themselves over to the medical profession and had geniuses like Reed Richards, Henry Pym, and Tony Stark figure out a cure rather than going on the run (OK, he was probably afraid of a Government conspiracy...who wouldn't be?).

Role model material? I'll be generous and give him a D. You don't want kids yelling "Hulk Smash!" and then trying to break out of the house through a wall when they get mad because they don't want to do their homework.

The Flash

I know what you're thinking, but we're not talking about guys in cheap raincoats who don't wear pants. I'm talking about a police scientist (today, we'd call him a Crime Scene Investigator) who gets a ton of chemicals spilled all over him thanks to a freak lightning strike, resulting in Barry Allen gaining the ability to access something called the speed force, which enables him to, among other things, run faster than the speed of light.

Pretty cool.

1960s canon dictates that Barry Allen be squeaky clean, have a cool girlfriend named Iris (another reporter), a job, and be a nice guy. Heck, when Allen was first introduced, he even had a crewcut.

Barry started out as the classic nerd, always slow, methodical, and occasionally forgetful, but heck, he's a cop. When he discovers he has super powers, he does what anyone in his position would do (especially in the comic book world). He makes a costume with a mask and becomes a superhero.

In Barry's case, he had a little help. He was reading a comic book about the Golden Age Flash (Jay Garrick) right before the accident, so it's not like the idea to become a costumed hero was particularly inventive.

Flash remains a hero in the classic sense throughout his career and even gets to marry his girlfriend. All is well, until one of his arch villains, the Reverse Flash, kills Iris. Eventually the Flash (but not Barry) goes on trial for the murder of his wife's killer, but the whole thing is a setup by another villain named Abra Kadabra (some of these names are over the edge). Barry solves the mystery, clears his name, and even reunited with dead Iris, since her spirit ended up in the 30th century and was given a new body (Don't ask..it takes too long to explain).

The next problem was that the Flash ends up dead, but he dies heroically. It goes on and on, but the complicated history isn't the point of this analysis. What we see is a guy who never stops being a hero, even in the face of death. He never stops loving his wife, he takes her lonely nephew under his wing (a guy named Wally West), and..need I go on?

I can't find a problem with this guy. He's gone through hell and back and still comes out smelling like a rose. The Flash also gets an A+ as a role model.

That's it for this round. It seems, based on this group, that you're either a really good superhero role model or a really bad one.

If you have any suggestions or comments about future superhero role models or you think I've been unfair to the ones I've reviewed so far, let me know.