Random Ramblings: One Fan's State Of Disinterest

I loved the reruns of Adam West and Burt Ward's Batman as a little Swift. I must have been seven or eight: Tim Burton's Batman had just been released or was about to be released, and Bat-Mania had most of us lads firmly in its grip for the next few years, along with the Ninja Turtles.

I didn't know any better at the time. I didn't understand that there were different interpretations of the character, that ill-fitting spandex costumes, a Joker with a mustache, and loud, colorful sound effects were not the Batman most fans wanted. But again, I was small. My folks didn't have a lot of money to throw around at the movies, and they were often concerned with what I watched (or more accurately, my mother was-- Dad was more understanding). I wouldn't see Batman until it came out on VHS; I would take what I could get at the time.

Of course, I grew up. After immersing myself in whatever Batman comics I could get my hands on, I understood how the Batman of the 60's show was a far, far cry from the comics I was reading, like Batman: Son Of The Demon, The Dark Knight Returns, and the Norm Breyfogle run of Detective Comics. I grew to disdain the campy show and its star, Adam West.

So why did I just spend over a hundred bucks on a 1/12 scale Batmobile from said show and two little plastic men in ill-fitting tights to occupy it?

You could argue that I'm somewhat more forgiving of the character, more accepting of Batman as a whole as I grow older. Which would be true, and Grant Morrison has a lot to do with that. Like it or loathe it, the 60's Batman show left its mark on the character and mythos, and is nothing if not iconic.

But I think it goes deeper than that. New 52? A Joker with his own cut-off face strapped to his head? Ben Affleck? The death of my beloved DC Universe toys from Mattel?

I'm just disheartened, at this point. As I grow older, more and more decisions made with my favorite character cease to interest me. I guess you could say I'm set in my ways, that I like what I like, and I have no qualms about spending what some would consider waaaaay too much money amassing the things that I like.

But they're few and far between. You could argue that I'm growing up; I would argue vehemently against that for every time I make or laugh at an inappropriate and childish joke.

There's a lull of things that interest me because there's not a lot of things, geek-wise, that are being marketed towards my demographic: the long-time fans who've stuck through the Dark Times of the 90's, who've suffered through things like Smallville, Joel Schumacher's Batman, the first terrible Hulk movie and almost been straight-jacketed in the belts, straps and buckles, almost crushed by the gigantic, impractical guns of the 90's anti-hero. We've towed the line for so long, stuck with these characters and tried to support their adaptations into other media, oft times finding them to be more Daredevil than The Avengers.

And now that our geek culture is being assimilated into pop culture as a whole, how do these companies (mostly DC) claiming ownership repay us?

They change everything. They shift their focus to reigning in new readers, new demographics, letting us stand by the wayside, our righteous indignation and sense of entitlement being completely ignored as they continue to mold their corporate mascots into something that can appeal to everyone.

I won't say I feel entitled, anymore. But I will say it's a pretty shitty time to be a long-time comic fan. They say nostalgia is just a feeling that things back then were better, but things really weren't; Adam West's Batman definitely makes that true. So what do I expect? Do I want them to cater to everyone? Maybe. They've done it before, and still do, every once in a while. They have all-ages comics as well as the ones with their joke of a "ratings" system on the covers. Do I expect some sort of favoritism? I did at first, but seeing kids run around with a Captain America shield or a Batman mask or those Hulk fists makes me smile. These characters are going to endure, just as the nostalgia for the Adam West stuff has endured.

So what do I expect? What do I want, out of my favorite comic book company? They've already shunted "my" version of the DC Universe aside for this shiny new bucket of piss; to change it around again would make even less sense than changing it in the first place. I don't know what I want, is what I'm trying to say. I'm disheartened, disinterested and unconcerned about what happens next, since it feels that all inroads to "Classic" DC Universe stuff have been roadblocked and declared off limits, with no media to tie into. With DC Universe Classics, some of the sting was taken away. For a little while, it seemed like I could hold onto characters that have been written out, made unrecognizable, or ignored (like Wally West) in plastic form and carry on. But now?

I don't know. I expect that I'll have a sweet Batmobile in a few days, is what I expect.

Cheers.

Swift

REVIEW: Square Enix Play Arts Kai Dark Knight Trilogy: Batman and Joker

I know what you're thinking: "Another Batman? Another Joker? Really?"

Yes, really. I had canceled the pre-order at one point for Batman. See, I'd told myself, that among a myriad of DC Universe Classics versions of Batman (most being repaints or mild reworkings of the same mold), several LEGO minifigures, my old comic-version Microman and more than a few DC Direct incarnations of the character, not to mention the THREE different Bat-men I already have from Play Arts Kai, I didn't need this figure. On top of that, I didn't need a Nolan/Bale Batman; while I love The Dark Knight Trilogy for what it is, Batman, to me, is so much more than Chris Nolan's "grounded in reality" take for the character. I didn't need another Batman.

BATMAN

That was until I saw the first pics leaking out. And then they announced the Ledger Joker. And then came the pictures of their Man of Steel offerings. And the clencher? They brought back the two-piece articulated cape. Yep, if you can believe it, that was the deal-maker. It is so sorely lacking on the Arkham City Batman that simply bringing this feature back was enough to get me to buy another Batman figure that I was all but convinced I didn't need.

THE GOOD: So here we go-- Bale Batman in all his Anime-cized glory. And really, they didn't make him too cartoony. There's a resemblance in the sculpt that shows they were at least trying to make it look like Bale, so good for them. The rest of the sculpt seems accurate to the source material, and it's my preferred look for Nolan's Batman; that clunky first suit from Begins with the weird panther neck looks worse every time I see it. So while the proportions aren't all there (he's still stylized to a point), the liberties they've taken with the movie design are welcomed in the age of stumpy, awkward looking Movie Masters from Mattel. Something about this figure compared to the real actor in the real suit is more dynamic and super-hero-y.

As I said, the jointed cape is back, and it's very welcome. Bale-man can do all sorts of poses that will make you forget how... less than dynamic the greater half of the Dynamic Duo was for three films and just have fun trying to figure out if you can get him in a gliding pose with the new, included stand. I was going to take a picture of just that, but here's the thing: as welcome as the stand is, it's a GIANT pain in the dick. You have to assemble it, which is fine, but it took me a minute to realize the little thingamajig (not pictured) was for tightening the bolts when changing poses. And here I was, using pliers. I've since broken one of their stands, and wish there was a better option available that didn't involve a Third Party manufacturer. It's nice to include stands, but make them more durable and give us a better tool than a plastic "wrench," please. Anyway...

The hands and accessories seem to trump almost every other Batman release thus far. Throw in the stand, and the value starts to seem better and makes that $60-$65 price tag sting a little less. Or at least that's what I'm telling myself.

THE BAD: I'm sure this is a factory error, but I have to laugh a little. Wasn't it Bruce's left leg that was gimpy in the film? Because Mine totally has a bum left leg. When you get him posed, it's less obvious, but stand him up straight and he's definitely got an issue with his left knee. I also had to use a Sakura marker to replace the dot of black paint missing from his nose. Minor issues, but still as annoying as the minor issues  I seem to keep having with these. For fuck's sake, Square, get it together. I really love your products, foibles aside, but I could love them more-- I'm not asking for perfect, I'm asking for consistent. And the only consistency I see is that you have consistent, minor problems that could easily be rectified with better QC.

Other than that, there's the weird "floating crotch" that these figures have. The strip going around his taint (yes, I've referred to an action figure's taint now) looks like a Bat-thong. It's less obvious in some poses, but it's a weird, weird thing.

In conclusion, another swell Batman figure from Square. It's much more property-specific, but they managed to make a Bale Batman and still throw in their own style without getting too far from the source material.

JOKER

THE GOOD: Here's Nolan and Ledger's Joker, in all his punk-y, dirty glory. Articulation is what you would expect, although the lack of a bicep joint is puzzling. Thankfully, the elbows also swivel, so that kind of makes up for it. There's a pretty good attempt at a Ledger as Joker portrait here, but I wasn't expecting Hot Toys quality here, and Ledger was so enveloped in that character that you could barely tell who he was anyway. Does he look like the Joker did in The Dark Knight? Absolutely. Did they stylize him without straying from the source, as they did with Batman? You bet your sweet bippy they did. He is a fantastic companion piece to that Batman for sure.

Joker comes with not one, but two alternate heads: the first is (as far as I can tell) nearly identical to the portrait he comes with in the box, albeit with more smudging on the make-up. Thus far, the messier make-up head is my go-to. He also includes his clown mask from the Prologue, and it looks pretty accurate. I doubt I'll use that one, seeing as how his outfit was different and I think the Joker heads are cooler, but I guess it's a nice option to change up the display.

Other accessories are a bit of a let-down. He only comes with his knife, two playing cards, and two extra hands. No guns, no bomb detonators, no stacks of cash or grenades. Bummer. Also included is his stand, which isn't really necessary, but will gladly be used for another PAK figure when I get the chance to assemble the bloody thing.

THE BAD: QC strikes again. On the default head, there's an unsightly patch of glue in his hair where they glued the front portion on. With a little work and an exacto blade, I got some of it off, an improvement but not perfect. It's a bummer that such a nice sculpt, paint, etc. can be ruined with sloppy glue like that (not to mention it looks like Joker re-enacted that scene from There's Something About Mary. Blech!). So not terrible, but still a bummer, and why I've been using the other head more. The clicky joints in his left shoulder are nonexistent, but for now, hold poses just fine. I'm just bummed he doesn't have more accessories. His pistol at the very least would have made this figure a much better value, and the limited hand options are also a let-down. As it is, he doesn't even have a hand that I can squeeze a gun into from another figure or any relaxed right hands, so he has to hold his knife or his cards to not look weird. The left hand options are equally limited: he has a splayed-open hand and a fist, so it either looks like he's trying to take a dynamic, heroic stance (fist), saying "whaddya want?" or that he's talking with his hands like Linda Richman from Cawfee Talk or something (open hand). The playing cards are very tiny, and have to be wedged just right in his hand to stay, meaning they can get lost easily.

OVERALL: Batman is an easy A-, due to it being Batman and the crapload of accessories he has. The Joker, while fun and an excellent representation of the character, I have to give a B-. He's just too light on accessories to score as high as Batman. But, qualms and quibbles aside, these are still great figures, and any fan of import figures and Nolan's Batman films would probably deem them a worthy purchase. Til next time, kids.

Cheers,

Swift

An Open Letter To Ben Affleck And Warner Bros/DC Entertainment

Dear Ben,

I have nothing personal against you. You're not as bad as some would try to say you are, and you were, after all, the bomb in Phantoms. But have you forgotten so quickly how forgettable (at best) Daredevil was? It wasn't terrible, and you weren't horrible in it, but it wasn't good. In the halcyon days of the early two thousands, when X-Men had just made a buck at the box office, we didn't know things could be better, and neither did you or any of the filmmakers.

But we're living in a post-Avengers world. The Avengers was a superhero-movie game-changer. Marvel has let people who really understand their material work for them, and they respect those of us who've followed their characters' exploits for most of our lives.

DC doesn't get it. All they care about is making a buck with their characters, and it shows in their recent, non-Batman/Superman endeavors. You being cast as Batman is the straw that broke the camel's back for me. These corporate assholes are just trying to milk every ounce of scratch they can out of their glorified, spandex-clad mascots.

So if you have any integrity left in you, sir, I ask that you please find something else to do. You're coming into your own as a director-- The Town was at least interesting until I fell asleep after the first hour, and I hear this Argo flick was okay. Bow out. Do something else that will make you a ton of money and tell them to fuck off. Let someone--anyone, other than you-- don the cape and cowl and inspire another generation of children to do good. Please.

To Warner Brothers and DC Entertainment:

Fuck you people. First, you let a hackneyed, past-his-expiration-date artist and an upcoming writer sweep EVERYTHING I've loved about your comics since Crisis On Infinite Earths under the rug. Because of that, there's no support from you on such endeavor's as Mattel's "Classic" superhero toy line, and there will be no subscription service for those figures next year.

You idiots are drooling over all the money a Justice League movie will make, going so far to skip a second movie in the Man of Steel franchise just to throw Batman in the mix prematurely. I for one am not going to stand for it. I will not pay to see Batman vs. Superman or whatever shit you're calling it with Ben Affleck in it as Batman.

Dan Didio, Geoff Johns and Jim Lee can suck rose-thorned cocks in hell.

Ben-- I hope you hear the fans out, because WB isn't listening. Say hi to Damon for me, wouldja?

-Swift

Five Things That Were Absolutely Right In "Man Of Steel"

I wanted very badly to write a review for this movie after seeing it with my stepson. And then the jaded, geek vitriol poured in, like a sort of irritating version of the old Nickelodeon slime, all over my parade. I loved the movie, despite my own criticisms, despite my own personal cynicism toward Hollywood's handling of Superman in the past and my doubts over Christopher Nolan's "real-world" approach to superheroes being applied to the Big Blue Boy Scout. The stepson's review? "It was really, really, AWESOME!"

Having said all of that, I am endeavoring to put forth several things that the movie got right, whether you were just not "wowed" by it, or even if you hated it with a passion.

Here goes:

5. Russell Crowe as Jor-El

I'm not a huge Russell Crowe fan. In fact, I think the guy is a bit of a jag-off. But lately, his work has been impressing me. As Jack Knife in The Man With the Iron Fists, he showed me that he doesn't necessarily take himself very seriously, and as an actor (and not a complete out-of-the-closet crazy person, like Tom Cruise), that goes a long way for me. And while Mr. Crowe was certainly putting his serious face on for most of the film, he did a very good job grounding the prologue, and, for the first time in a long time (as a lifelong reader of Superman), made me give a shit about Krypton. Most times when they retell the origin, I can't wait to get the fuck off Krypton and get to Superman being Superman. Here, because of Jor-El, I was invested in his story, cryptic Codex MacGuffins aside. And who knew that Superman's dad was a badass? Not too many of us, I'm sure. But I'm glad that I know now.

4. The Production Design

Another thing that really helped with how much I liked the Krypton prologue was the design of everything. It felt alien, but not overdone. Ornate, but not impractical. The armor, the weaponry, the robes that the science council wore, the spaceships-- it all looked pretty fantastic. Because of things like this and even the set up of the ho-hum "normal" Earth, it was a nice movie from a visual standpoint. Last but certainly not least, Superman's costume is excellent. Yes, I still decry the red trunks (from my artist's standpoint Supes just looks odd with so much blue going on; the breakup of the colors is mostly what I miss), but I understand why they did away with them. The texture, the duller colors looking brighter in spots due to the metallic sheen-- it all looked fantastic. Add to that the way the cape attaches to the costume and the open neck, the exact opposite of what they've done with his costume in the comics, and I am one happy geek as far as this new Superman's duds. All of which would be meaningless, if they hadn't found the right cat to fill said suit, but...

3. Henry Caville As Superman-- And A MANLY Superman, At That

Caville had the right stature and presence for this role. If there's one thing on this list even the most hardcore of detractors can agree on, it's this. Caville looks the part, fills out the suit, and sounded American enough for me (he's British). But what really won me over, as stupid as it sounds, is that unlike most film stars these days, specifically super-hero movie stars, is the "manliness" Caville brought to Clark/Superman. No waxed chest hairs here-- Superman is a hairy bastard just like all those John Byrne-drawn comics from the 80's. You could even see the chest hair poking out of his suit, and whether or not that detail was intentional, I dig it, especially in a world of hairless James Bonds and Bruce Waynes. Caville sealed the deal here, and without him, not much of the movie would have worked as well as it did.

2. Michael Shannon As General Zod

Some people said he was boring, others probably wanted a re-hash of Terrence Stamp's take. For what Shannon did with Zod, I'll take it for what it is and congratulate him on a job well done. Cheers, Mr. Shannon! You've made me hate you on Boardwalk Empire and given us our first memorable Superman movie villain in decades. The man is a zealot, and Shannon relishing in that zeal is what made Zod great in Man Of Steel, and what continues to make him great on Empire. True villains always think what they're doing is right.

1. Hans Zimmer's Score

Many of us Superman fans immediately associate the character with John Williams' theme from the late seventies, and it's hard not to. While the Donner Superman theme will be a part of the geek consciousness for many generations to come, Zimmer's score is uplifting, tense when it needs to be, and overall, modern. There's no questioning that this score could be confused with a movie made ten years ago. It is unique, and still stuck in my head as I write this (which could be the fact that I'm listening to the Youtube video of the entire score as I write this, but still). It sets itself apart from Williams' and even Shirley Walker's score from Superman: The Animated Series while still identifying itself as Superman music. It's a great piece of work, and sticks with me even more than the work he did for The Dark Knight Trilogy.

So there it is, kids. Agree? Disagree? Lemme know what you think.

Cheers,

Swift

Shut The Fuck Up About The Pope

Yesterday (and today so far, at least on reddit), he of the ridiculous hats and fancy dresses, Pope Francis I (insert snicker and apology to all decent people named "Francis" here), claimed that all of us are "god's children" and that we are all "redeemed," "even the atheists."

I've been mulling this around in my head for the last eighteen hours or so, and I'm still a bit confused. I've bitched about it on facebook, I've bitched about it to my lovely missus. The missus asked me why I cared what this man thinks or says. I'll get back to that.

This morning on reddit, there were several links to more quotes from Sir Papal-Lapa-Ding-Dong (thanks for that to Katy Farrell) referencing that as long as atheists "do good," we can meet somewhere in the middle. This is more confusing, and angering. I'm not going to try and speak for all atheists out there, but I will speak for myself when I say that any sort of statement made by the pope toward unifying us as a species, while superficially commendable, is shallow and hollow and really fucking condescending.

To me, this implies that we weren't 'doing good' up until recently. Now, I'm not sure what kind of social and cultural impact my life has on this web of shit, or exactly what he considers to be "good"-- but I'm pretty sure I haven't been harming anyone while I've been living my godless life. I don't kick puppies. I don't steal, I don't kill (unless insects and arachnids count. And they do not.), and I try, some days harder than others, to not be an asshole. I love my stepson like he was my own (that's something Jesus would do, right?), something some other people of other denominations have failed to do for generations. So while I don't consider myself a do-gooder (I rarely donate to charities, I don't work in soup kitchens, etc.), I'm not doing anything bad, so why the fuck would you zero in and actually say the word "atheist?"

You're not going to convert anyone, Franny. What you're going to do is confuse and earn the ire of atheists worldwide for even mentioning us specifically. And this notion that we have to "do good" to get along, while it's a nice sentiment, you're still blowing papal smoke up our asses. We should not have to do anything to make our existence acceptable to your dubious authority, you arrogant prick. Because while many of us non-believers go about living our godless lives harmlessly, you, the figurehead of one of the richest religious organizations in the world, still oppose gay marriage and abortion and making contraceptives readily available.

I started to research before writing this, just to see what other bullshit opinions you have about things, but you know what? Those three things alone, be they catholic church line-towing or not, are some of the most evil things I can think of this day and age. To oppose a biological predisposition to sexual identity, to oppose the option to have an abortion and the social and psychological ramifications of such, to tell people it's immoral to use condoms or birth control of any sort is horrible and wrong.

So for you, oh high priest of the uninformed, to come at me from this moral high ground, as if we need to do more to earn some sort of acceptance, is kind of fucked up.

I reject this notion that we can all work together to make a better world until you catch up with the good we do by simply not opposing things that are basic human rights. You have no high ground to preach from, Franny. You don't. I would almost go so far as to say that atheists do more good by their inaction and vocal support of gays, abortion, and contraception than you do by running off at the mouth with these hollow platitudes about how we all need to come together. While I won't deny that there is good to be found in the catholic church, and that as a species we need to come together to further ourselves and this planet, it isn't the non-believers who need to catch up and do good: it's you. You have a responsibility, if you take anything about your job seriously, to do more good. And you can start by catching up to reality with your views on gays and abortion and contraception.

So: why do I care what an old man in a dress says? Because other people do. Other people believe this man has authority, and structure their opinions and beliefs based upon what he says. While this has no direct effect on me, it effects millions of catholics around the world, and holds us back as a species just as much as any other religion promoting hatred and oppression and limiting freedoms because your book of fairy tales says it was wrong, regardless of how science says different or how social attitudes have changed in two thousand years. It's realistically and morally irresponsible.

I'll meet in the middle when you and your organization come to terms with the world we are living in and stop promoting ideals that restrict and harm people who only want to live their lives. And if that day comes, I will still make fun of your ridiculous fucking hat.

Cheers.

-Swift

Justice League: The Movie-- You're Doing It Wrong

With all the hubbub this past year surrounding Marvel's The Avengers, Warner Bros. has been greedily licking their chops and drooling all over their fancy corporate suits at the money to be made with a superhero team movie. And from their standpoint, I can't find fault with their logic: they are, after all, in the business to make money. But as far as coming close to something as commercially and critically successful as Avengers, after the failure of Green Lantern and WB's utter failure at getting some of their other superheroes off the page to the screen, there's a ton of work to be done.

So, in case anybody gives a shit, let me say that Justice League should NOT happen, unless they throw out EVERYTHING they've already done (which it looks like they have, so far), and go smaller. Not too small, mind you; this is a team of variously-powered god-like beings, and getting them together will take more than just a team-up of mob guys from Gotham and Intergang from Metropolis to stoke the fires of the superteam.

The following are my suggestions for how to get this whole shebang underway, WITHOUT blowing their load too early with intergalactic villainy or establishing a huge villain team-ups with too many characters. Whether or not they want to establish these heroes individually beforehand, like Marvel did, is moot.

1. Don't Use Darkseid

Darkseid is a great villain. He was created by Jack "King" Kirby, along with the rest of the Fourth World and the New Gods. Having said that, Darkseid is a horrible choice to throw into the mix for your first outing with the Justice League.

This is one of the main reasons the New 52 Relaunch of the Justice League was so terrible. Darkseid can have a polarizing effect on all our do-gooders, sure. But to blow your load with DC Comics' ultimate otherworldly baddie right out of the gate? Dumb. Fucking idiotically dumb, really. It's how I felt about using Parallax in Green Lantern: the reason Parallax was so powerful in the comics-- and why his retcon into being the living embodiment of fear that possessed Hal Jordan was so well-received-- was because it was a retcon that fit and redeemed a character who was pretty fucked over to begin with thanks to trends in the nineties. Parallax was an ok movie monster, but to undermine his importance to the current mythos and introduce him to moviegoers who don't give a flying fuck about comics was weak. Darkseid would face a similar problem. Most folks don't know who he is, and he would come off as pretty generic with no buildup to how much of a badass he is. Take into account that Darkseid is very similar to Marvel's Thanos, and you would merely confuse your audience and make them think you're ripping Marvel off, when they get to Thanos in the inevitable Avengers sequel(s).

Darkseid is a character that you need to build up to make a believable threat. If you were to use him right away, and your heroes somehow came together, never knowing each other before a 2, 2 1/2 hour runtime to defeat him, it would come off as forced and anticlimactic, at best. Ya know, just like that sixth issue of the New 52 Justice League. And story incongruousness aside, where the fuck would you go from there? Being the Baddest of the Bad amongst DC villainy, what would you do for a sequel, if your movie is successful?

There are plenty of other villains in DC's long history to play around with on screen. If you're going to use Darkseid, don't do it first. You risk putting the cart in front of the horse that way. Slowly build toward him, if you absolutely HAVE to use him, like they're doing with Thanos. Otherwise, let's leave him out of the equation, shall we?

2. Don't Use Joe Levitt As Batman

If you have any fucking sense at all, Warner Bros., you will keep Justice League's version of Batman far, far, FAR away from Christopher Nolan's vision of the Dark Knight. I understand that you want a familiar face for your audience, and I'm sure JGL would do great as the Caped Crusader, but here's the thing: this is Goddamned BATMAN we're talking about. Other than Superman and Spider-man, Batman is the most recognizable superhero in THE WORLD. We all know who he is and what his fucking deal is. Do not waste your money or your moviegoers time with re-establishing Batman's deal in this movie. Cast someone with the stature and physicality and whose chin looks flattering poking out of that cowl, and just give us fucking Batman kicking ass in Gotham and discovering the pending crisis that will bring our heroes together has come to his doorstep. Batman should be the first to catch on to whatever is going on and a reluctant participant in the team effort to stop it. We don't need to see Bruce Wayne in this movie at all, you hear? BATMAN is important to the Justice League, and the actor portraying him should not be seen without the mask, period.

3. Have A Decent Script

This should go without saying, but the fact that this project in various iterations has been floundering since AT LEAST 2007 does not instill confidence. You have to make sure the script is decent before you do ANYTHING else. No green-light, no casting, no costuming, no storyboards, NOTHING should be done until you have a script that isn't complete and utter shit.

There are plenty of (good) stories about the League's formation that a halfway decent scriptwriter can look at for inspiration that don't involve fucking Darkseid or our heroes acting like complete assholes (well, except Batman. Batman is allowed to be a dick, at least at first).

My suggestion? When JLA was launched in the late 90's, a version of Starro the Conquerer was used that had facehugger-like drones to enslave Earth's population. Something like this would be a great way to get the team together, without relying on an Apokalyptik threat like Darkseid.

Perhaps it would be best to show that Superman and Batman already know each other, or the camaraderie between Flash and Green Lantern. We don't have to show everyone meeting for the first time; history can be easily explained with several lines of dialogue. You'll save time building character relationships by showing that some team members already have friendships, or at least have met in the past. Even if you use only five characters, as the most recent reports said, you're going to have one hell of a time giving everyone something to do (let alone developing characters) without solo movies to establish figures like Wonder Woman, Aquaman and the Flash. So go light with the exposition on Superman and Batman, and have fun with the down-to-earth Flash and the culturally inept Aquaman and Wonder Woman. Don't beat us over the head with Supes and Bats shenanigans; your audience already knows who they are, and so should the characters in your movie. If you're going to do this shit backwards (i.e. the reverse of Marvel's model), give the other characters time to shine to drive up interest in the solo movies that can follow Justice League.

Oh, and please, for the love of Kirby, try to steer clear of those classic cliched "we're superheroes who have never met, and through some inexplicable misunderstanding, have to fight each other before we can team up!" moments. It worked for decades in the comics, but with these characters? Plus, they already did that in Avengers, which leads me to my next point.

4. Don't Try To Copy Marvel

I know you soulless corporate bastards want that Avengers money so bad you can taste it. But if you want to make money on it, you can't cheapen this brand or these characters in order to make a buck. I know you want to make money. But establishing this brand, in a unique way, entertainingly and successfully, will mean that you can CONTINUE to make money on sequels, merchandise and spin-offs. Does Marvel have a plan to successfully continue their characters between and beyond Avengers? Absolutely. But that is what's working for THEM, for THEIR characters. Trying to emulate Marvel's business model will further cheapen your brand, and your audience will know it. They'll see Justice League, a movie based on one of the original superhero teams, and dismiss it as an Avengers ripoff almost immediately. You need someone who WANTS to make this into a movie, someone who, first and foremost, has a love and an understanding of what makes these characters tick, what makes them special. Making money and following your studio notes about why such-and-such doing such-and-such isn't marketable and being your paid bitch should not be qualities to look for in a writer or director. Story and character should come first to whomever you hire, and if it's good, like Whedon's Avengers, it will sell. Slavishly trying to replicate Marvel's success is going to look like a slavish replication of what Marvel has done, period.

If you make Justice League first, then make it able to stand on its own before licking your lips at all the money you can make on what comes after. Drop all the references and hints that you want, but adding those instead of story, dialogue and character development will not hold your movie together. You can ask Angela Bassett how well that Amanda Waller cameo worked out for her and get back to me, if need be.

Conclusion

If this movie ever gets off the ground, they'll probably fuck it up anyway. I think weighing in my two cents is probably not going to go anywhere except to (possibly) ingratiate myself with my fellow dorks. Even though I have strong opinions about what I would like to see done with this franchise, I can't imagine how insurmountable a task this must seem to any writer or director approached with the job. But at the same time, is it truly that difficult to make a film based on a long-beloved property that doesn't change things to piss off the fans and still have universal appeal? This is the Justice League, for fuck's sake! Almost everyone knows who Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are! Let's leave the exposition for the comics that spawned this media and merchandising machine that the WB constantly profits from, and just make a damn fine movie to rival Avengers in scope and scale without tirelessly trying to top it, ape it, or outsell it, shall we?

Just give us a good, un-rushed Justice League, Warner Bros. Us geeks will continue to sort out which superheroes from which universes would win in a fight while you and Disney have your pissing contests over how big the box office is.

-Swift

REVIEW: Play Arts Kai Arkham City Catwoman and Batman

Ah, yes, more Play Arts for me to get my tattooed bear paws on. Mwahahaha. I LOVE Arkham Asylum/Arkham City. These games are the greatest comic-to-game translation ever, and currently one of my favorite versions of the Batman Mythos period (even over Nolan's films). So getting great action figures of great designs is a bonus for me, at this point. Read on to see how well these two fare.

Catwoman

Catwoman's game design didn't stray too far from the modern look in the comics, which is a huge plus. She's had a variety of designs over the years, being one of Batman's oldest adversaries, some being very silly, while others were more cheesecake (not saying this one isn't, of course), but Darwyn Cooke's turn-of-the-century "catsuit" costume, to me, makes the most sense. And this take-off on it, while it definitely sexes her up more than a bit thanks to Square's Anime styling, is probably one of the best female figures ever.

The Good: The overall look is great. The seams and zippers, buckles and laces are all sculpted superbly and painted appropriately, with little slop that I can find. Her hands swap out easily, and the included "googles-down" head would be a huge bonus, if not for something I'll get to momentarily. And while the figure brings plenty of vampy va-va-va-voom to the table, this kitten's got claws. It's very nice that she has TWO sets of extra hands, making three sets altogether: relaxed, gripping, and claws out. She can pose down and go blow for blow with any of your PAK, or even catfight Harley like miAmego did on the Fwoosh boards. Her whip fits well in both hands, and is made of a fairly flexible plastic if you want to ensnare other figures.

The Bad: I love swappable accessories on my action figures. It gives dorks like me plenty of options for play display. Having said that, swappable accessories are worth absolutely FUCK ALL if you cannot swap said pieces out easily. Thus, the swappable heads. The normal, "goggles up" head pops off very easily. The alternate head, however, would not go on without a little heating, and now, will not come off without bringing the entire two-ball neck peg with it. I seriously can't get it out now that I've put the goggled head on, not even with needle-nose plyers and more heating, and I fear chipping paint or otherwise breaking it trying to pry the peg free, or, worse yet, losing the neck peg if I get it off (like I almost did with Batman). If Square is going to continue doing extra heads, they need to include an extra neck peg or at least reassess how large the alternate head's hole has to be to fit the ball peg. It's really frustrating that I can't just swap it out, and makes me feel cheated somehow. I intend to write them about it when I get the chance. And the only reason I have a pic of her with the normal head on is because I simply set it on the neck post and snapped the photo.

Otherwise, the normal portrait has a dark airbrushing that's a little distracting. It looks like Selina's makeup is running, and it seems like a widespread problem. It's not as bad as Kratos or even the Joker, but it may bother some. Her joints are all great, save for the the clicky-joint on her left hip and her right shoulder is a tad loose. The hip doesn't seem to be a big problem, as the joint still functions properly, but I fear her shoulder may droop over time and as it gets used for posing.

Overall: Catwoman is the definite winner of these two. If you already have the AA Bats and are leery of spending another sixty buck on the AC version, do yourself a favor and at least pick up Selina. Again, one of, if not THE best female action figures I've ever owned. The constantly-improving PAK articulation scheme really shines here, and you can get her into plenty of poses that don't detract from the femininity of it being a woman character, and the exaggerated Anime proportions definitely help with that.

Batman

Bruce here has seen a lot of PAK love thus far, and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. I balked at another game-styled Batman at first, and then realized that not only was he significantly different, but that I'm a big enough dork for all things Batman to be suckered into buying him anyway. There are plenty of differences between this and the AA version, the most noticeable being his overall build and stature. He simply looks more imposing than AA Bats, and when placed next to each other, AC Bats is taller and wider in the shoulders.

The Good: Again, the stature and build are what really struck me on this figure. The upper body in particular looks much more like the game model. The bat emblem on his chest looks bolder than the AA, but still a little off from the game. The blue used on him, at first glance, seems the same as the AA Bats, but in better lighting there's a deep royal blue airbrushing going on that just makes him pop more. The cape sculpt is nice, but I have issues with it that I'll get to below.

His accessories we've seen before: The batclaw and a batarang. As far as I can tell, these are straight-up re-use from the original, as are his hands. The new accessory included, however, is a line for the batclaw that you can swap out and ensnare baddies (or Catwoman, I guess, if she's into that). The best accessory, to me, is the alternate portrait with a sort of snarling face. Normally, these sculpts can make it look like a toy is taking a shit. But this one is very well done. Just standing him on the shelf, posed cracking his knuckles, makes it look as if he's sizing up the rest of my collection and wondering who to hit first and exactly how hard. Bats poses pretty well, too, with some limitations, but looks great just standing there, ready to dole out some broken limbs to anyone stupid enough to fuck with the Goddamn Batman.

The Bad: The cape. The cape baffles me quite a bit. One of the great successes of the AA version, to me, was the clicky-joints that the cape was mounted on in two sections. The fact that this one is not only glued down but limits his articulation is a huge bummer. Yes, the plastic is pliable, but not nearly as much as I'd like. But the tradeoff is that the stiffer plastic can help balance Bats in a number of poses, and a softer material would have made that impossible, or at least exasperating when trying to get him to stand.

"I believe I can fly... I believe I can touch the sky..."

"Fuck you."

The extra head is a pain in the ass here, too; but unlike Selina, I can get my plyers in and pop the neck peg out to swap them, which is still something I'm not fond of doing. Good thing I like the angry head, I guess. Also, mine has some minor paint issues: several spots on the neutral head had either been worn off during assembly and packaging or simply weren't painted evenly to begin with, leaving dots of flesh-colored plastic showing.

While the color scheme has grown on me, it looks a little odd to see a blue and gray Batman without blue gloves and boots. The gauntlets and shin greaves are in a dark gunmetal with varying grays that make up the gloves and boots. So if you're looking for a more traditional looking Bats and the slightly shorter height on the AA doesn't bother you, this one may not be for you. Also, his build going down to the waist is a little strange. His lower torso tapers to the belt line, and then blows up to accommodate his huge legs. The proportions on the AA are a tad more realistic.

Overall: While I'm slightly disappointed, I still really like this Batman. The differences between AC and AA are enough for me to be satisfied with my purchase, even with the cape and swappable head issues. Since the AA Bats is going for $80 or more on the aftermarket, I'd say this is probably a smarter buy, especially if you happen to think like me that this one looks more badass, even with the posing limitations. Here's hoping the issues with both can be addressed in future releases (and hope that Square doesn't go the Hot Toys route in releasing new and improved versions of older figures twice every year), and if not, maybe they can send me extra neck pegs for both. But I doubt it.

Til next time, kids.

-Swift