Am I Evil? - A Closer Look at Supervillainy

Pictured above: Evil?

The perfect setting for supervillainy

This past week I've been in a small cabin on the shore of Lake Superior in northern Minnesota with my wife and kids.  It's a great week to relax and unwind as we watch summer wind down.  However, my wife's extended family also joins us in the neighboring cabins, bringing a wonderful kind of lunacy to the week as well.  I was playing (not necessarily voluntarily) with two of my wife's cousin's children - Teagan (8) and Jace (6) and the idea for this entry is, in part, thanks to them.

Teagan, being an inquisitive 8-year-old, was going from adult to adult asking, "What are you doing?"  Since I enjoy confusing children, I responded with "trying to take over the world."  This, in turn, led to Teagan and Jace spending the next half hour climbing all over me in an effort to thwart my evil plans.  At the end of our time, Teagan asked me, "Why don't you join the good side?"

My reply: "What makes you think I'm not the good side?"  This, of course, was met with a blank stare.

Now that I've shared my brief family anecdote, let me bring this into what you're here for: comic books.

The real stars of the blog

I recently read two graphic novels by Brian Azzarello: Luthor and Joker.  Each of these focuses on a villain from the DC Universe; the archenemies of Superman and Batman, respectively.  What struck me as I read these was the strikingly different portrayals of these two signature villains.

The most frightening man to ever
wear a purple suit.

In reading Joker, it's made clear that the title villain is clearly a sociopath.  There is no greater purpose behind his villainy other than personal gain.  Joker is evil for evil's sake.  Azzarello does a masterful job portraying the controlled chaos that the Joker personifies.  I especially enjoyed the more realistic, less campy version of the Joker that Azzarello brings into his depiction.  This Joker is similar to Heath Ledger's portrayal in The Dark Knight rather than Cesear Romero's slapstick version from the 1960's Batman television show.  Azzarello's Joker is a great character study of one of DC's most prolific and, arguably, most depraved villains that explores the basic nature of the character's evil.  Be forewarned, this novel is intended for more mature readers and does contain somewhat more brutal violence than typical Batman comics.

A study in biased pictures

As much as I enjoyed reading Joker and generally prefer Batman to Superman, Luthor and Azzarello's treatment of Superman's nemesis was, in my opinion, the superior graphic novel.  Lex Luthor is depicted as something more than just a force of evil.  Azzarello focuses on Luthor's intense distrust of the alien that has taken public opinion by storm.  The book is best summarized in Luthor's statement to Superman - "All men are created equal.  You are not a man."

Comics at their best:
Philosophy with pictures

Lex is shown in turns as generous, obsessive, loyal, protective, and evil.  His illegal union busting as he works to complete a construction project stands in stark contrast to his obtaining a scholarship to a prestigious school for a janitor's son.  The nuanced and complex portrayal of Luthor leaves the reader wondering, is Luthor really a villain?  Are his aims truly evil?

So, I'll turn the question to you, what makes a villain?  What draws the line that tells us that Lex Luthor is evil, while Superman is good?  Is there a definite line or, as recent comics and other media suggest, is the line blurring?

Bumping Off the Blind Superhero: A Review of Daredevil - End of Days

So, I promised that I'd do this and it's taken me longer than I had hoped, but here we go.  Marvel recently published an eight-part mini-series starring the man without fear, Daredevil.  However, I think it "starring" might be an overstatement.

Daredevil: End of Days is the most recent effort by Marvel to break from the on-going series canon (though writer Brian Bendis asserts that this is part of the continuity) and jump to the end of the line for a given character.  Marvel has been doing this type of thing since the late 90's for various characters.  Sometimes the story takes the mini-series format, as it has with Daredevil, and sometimes the story is confined to a one-shot (single issue).

While the concept isn't new, Brian Bendis and David Mack take this story further than most "the end" stories go. The length of the mini-series (8 issues) is longer than most of Marvel's similar works.  Honestly, the length of the story appealed to me.  As I've said before, I like Daredevil and think that he's underrated by many readers.  Bendis and Mack took time to develop a solid story.

The story itself follows a complex series of twists.  I mentioned earlier that it may be a stretch to say that Daredevil "stars" in this mini-series.  While his name is on the cover, he's also dead before the middle of the first issue.

Not what one might expect of a title character

Daredevil's death, rather than serving as the culmination of the series, is the catalyst of the events that follow. The real focal point of the series is Daily Bugle reporter Ben Urich, one of a very few people who actually knew that Matt Murdock was Daredevil.  While Urich has played a key role in several of Marvel's titles and interacts with a number of superheroes, he's not really what one might expect as the lead character of a series.

Marvel's least likely hero (possibly excluding Squirrel Girl)

Urich's goal over the course of the series is to track down the meaning of Daredevil's last word: "Mapone."  In his efforts to discover the secret behind who or what "Mapone" is, Urich interacts with a variety of characters from the Daredevil comics.  His interviews with key figures from the Marvel universe provide the forward progress for much of the story line.  Personally, I found his interview with the Punisher to be a highlight in the series.  The further Urich gets in his search, the more mysterious things get.  While I don't want to spoil the storyline for you, let me assure you that Daredevil is not the only character to die in the End of Days storyline - he's merely the first.  As Urich digs deeper and the body count climbs, a new Daredevil emerges as well - one who tracks Ben and seems to watch over him as something of a guardian angel (or guardian devil).

The noir feel that the story takes on worked for me.  I've always enjoyed the "street-level" heroes and the true-crime feel that their stories tend to take on.  The mystery in Daredevil: End of Days sells the story. While I won't reveal it here, the revelations at the end of the series in issues 7 and 8 worked well and resolved the story in a satisfying way.  End of Days received extremely positive reviews and I agree with those wholeheartedly.  This mini-series doesn't require much background knowledge from the reader and serves as a solid stand-alone story.

The original run of the mini-series started in October of 2012 and ended in June of 2013, so issues should still be fairly available in most comic shops.  The entire series was also released as a graphic novel this month and is readily available both in stores and on-line.

As always, feel free to post your thoughts, especially if you've had a chance to read End of Days or if you want to discuss part of the story.

Rise of the Reboots - DC's New 52 and Marvel Now!

Pictured Above: Average Comic Fan Response to Change

Avid comic fans know it. The hardest thing about being a dedicated comic reader is having to deal with comic publishers who make seemingly bone-headed decisions and alter their fictional universes on a whim, destroying years of continuity to make things fresh and draw new readers.  Often the backlash can be brutal (nothing rages like a pack of dedicated comic book geeks and yes, I speak from experience).

Number of Times Peter Parker Held a Gun to a Villain's Head: 0
Pictured Above: Not Peter Parker

Most recently, Marvel has seen criticism from their controversial questionable ill-advised downright stupid decision to turn The Amazing Spider-man on its head.  For those of you who aren't following Spider-man, Marvel decided to cut off The Amazing Spider-man at issue 700.  And they ended in spectacular fashion: by killing Peter Parker.  The icing on the cake is that now Dr. Octopus, one of Spider-man's signature villains, arguably second only to the Green Goblin, is now inhabiting Peter Parker's body and living his life as the Superior Spider-man.  Yes, Spider-man fans now get to watch one of his greatest villains - a character they've been trained to hate - play hero on a monthly basis.  This has been going on for about seven months.  I'm fairly certain the flow of death threats mailed/tweeted to Marvel's offices and/or writer Dan Slott has tapered off.

While The Superior Spider-man represents a reboot facing serious criticism, not every reboot is a bad idea. Both Marvel and DC Comics, two of the largest comic publishers in the US, launched large scale reboots of their publications within the last two years.  In 2011, DC launched the New 52 in a series of "waves" as they restarted numbering on all of their popular series at 1.  Marvel followed a similar path in 2012 with its Marvel Now line the restarted several popular storylines, though not every publication that they produce.

While everything has good and bad to it, I've personally found a fair amount to be happy with in both series of reboots.  One of the biggest positives (in my opinion) is the convenient jumping on point that these reboots provide for potential readers.  It's overwhelming to jump into a story that literally has decades of convoluted backstory.  The reboots offer friendly starts for people that don't have the detailed background of a die-hard fan.  And really, at the end of the day, writers and artists want their work to be accessible.  If potential readers are turned off by something, consideration should be made as to how to grow readership.  It can be done while maintaining the integrity of the underlying story.  DC, in my opinion, has done a great job of maintaining the integrity of their characters while going into the rebooted titles (this time around, at least).

Pictured Above: Not maintaining the Integrity of a Character

But now it's time to turn the question on you - what do you think of the concept of the reboot?  Is it acceptable to occasionally "reset" reality to avoid making work inaccessible?  Or does it cheapen the overall integrity of the art/story?

Coming soon: more discussion of specific titles in the New 52 and Marvel Now and that review of Daredevil: End of Days that I promised you about a week ago.  Really.  I promise.