Wednesday, August 17, 2016

Quotation(s) of the Day

From the Paris Review, Conrad Aiken on "The Art of Poetry, No. 9" (1968):
INTERVIEWER

You’ve spoken a couple of times—in Ushant and more guardedly or more subtly in the poetry—of your faith in consciousness. You speak of the “teleology of consciousness” at one point. This sounds almost as if you’re looking for a new spiritual attitude toward life, a new religion not based on religious dogma or revelation or a conventional God. Is there anything to this?

AIKEN

Possibly. I don’t know whether I’d put it quite like that. Of course I do believe in this evolution of consciousness as the only thing which we can embark on, or in fact, willy-nilly, are embarked on; and along with that will go the spiritual discoveries and, I feel, the inexhaustible wonder that one feels, that opens more and more the more you know. It’s simply that this increasing knowledge constantly enlarges your kingdom and the capacity for admiring and loving the universe. So in that sense I think what you say is correct. Ushant says this.

INTERVIEWER

One statement that’s always impressed me is the preface you recreated for The House of Dust in 1948 in which you wrote that “implicit in this poem was the theory that was to underlie much of the later work—namely, that in the evolution of man’s consciousness, ever widening and deepening and subtilizing his awareness, and in his dedication of himself to this supreme task, man possesses all that he could possibly require in the way of a religious credo: when the half-gods go, the gods arrive; he can, if he only will, become divine.” Is that too extreme a statement, do you feel, now?

AIKEN

No, I would stand by that. Which is really, in sum, more or less what my Grandfather Potter preached in New Bedford.

[. . .]

INTERVIEWER

You once wrote, speaking of the great writers of the American nineteenth century—Whitman, Melville, Hawthorne, James, Poe: “We isolate, we exile our great men, whether by ignoring them or praising them stupidly. And perhaps this isolation we offer them is our greatest gift.”* It seems to me you didn’t receive much attention from the time of your Pulitzer Prize in 1930 until, at best, fairly recently—that you were ignored in the way you speak of for almost thirty years. “This isolation we offer” as “our greatest gift”—would this be true of yourself also?

AIKEN

I think so. I think it’s very useful to be insulated from your surrounds, and this gives it to you because it gives you your inviolate privacy, without pressures, so that you can just be yourself. I think that what’s happening today, with all the young poets rushing from one college to another, lecturing at the drop of a hat and so on, is not too good; I think it might have a bad effect on a great many of the young poets. They—to quote Mark Twain—“swap juices” a little too much, so that they are in danger of losing their own identity and don’t give themselves time enough in which to work out what’s really of importance to them—they’re too busy. I think Wordsworth and Coleridge had the right idea, too—they deliberately sequestered themselves.

______________________________________

* London Mercury, vol. 4, no. 23, Sept. 1921. [link to New Republic, Oct. 12, 1921: 174, quoting this line]

Friday, March 4, 2016

The Movies of My Youth (late '70s to late '80s)

The Abyss (1989)
Alien (1979)
Aliens (1986)
Back to the Future (1985)
Barbarella (1968)
Better Off Dead (1985)
The Big Sleep (1946)
Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989)
Blade Runner (1982)
Blind Date (1987)
A Boy and His Dog (1975)
Brazil (1985)
Breaking Away (1979)
The 'Burbs (1989)
Casablanca (1942)
Cinderella (1950)
The Dark Crystal (1982)
Die Hard (1988)
Diner (1982)
The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Far from Home (1989)
Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982)
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)
Fletch (1985)
Footloose (1984)
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953)
Ghostbusters (1984)
Grease (1978)
Gun Crazy (1992)
Heathers (1988)
Highlander (1986)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
Ivanhoe (1982)
Labyrinth (1986)
License to Drive (1988)
Mad Max (1979)
The Maltese Falcon (1941)
Mary Poppins (1964)
Metropolis (1927)
Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979)
Near Dark (1987)
Niagara (1953)
The Night of the Iguana (1964)
North by Northwest (1959)
One Crazy Summer (1986)
Paradise (1982)
The Parent Trap (1961)
The Princess Bride (1987)
The Quiet Earth (1985)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Raising Arizona (1987)
Real Genius (1985)
Rear Window (1954)
The Road Warrior (1981)
The Seven Year Itch (1955)
A Shot in the Dark (1964)
Silverado (1985)
Singin' in the Rain (1952)
Sixteen Candles (1984)
Sleeping Beauty (1959)
Some Like It Hot (1959)
The Sound of Music (1965)
Star Wars (1977)
Superman: The Movie (1978)
The Terminator (1984)
This Is Spinal Tap (1984)
THX 1138 (1971)
Tron (1982)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Uncle Buck (1989)
Vertigo (1958)
WarGames (1983)
The Warriors (1979)
Weird Science (1985)

The Movies of My Late Teens and Twenties (early '90s to early '00s)

Aladdin (1992)
Almost Famous (2000)
Amateur (1994)
Baby Doll (1956)
Battle Royale (2000)
Beautiful Girls (1996)
Beauty and the Beast (1991)
Before Sunrise (1995)
The Big Lebowski (1998)
Black Hawk Down (2001)
Blue Velvet (1986)
Boogie Nights (1997)
Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Bring It On (2000)
Buffalo '66 (1998)
Career Opportunities (1991)
Chinatown (1974)
Dazed and Confused (1993)
The Doom Generation (1995)
Eraserhead (1977)
The Fifth Element (1997)
Fight Club (1999)
The Game (1997)
Ghost World (2001)
Grosse Pointe Blank (1997)
Groundhog Day (1993)
Heavenly Creatures (1994)
Henry Fool (1997)
High Fidelity (2000)
The Ice Storm (1997)
Joe vs. the Volcano (1990)
Kicking and Screaming (1995)
Kiss Me Deadly (1955)
The Last Days of Disco (1998)
Léon: The Professional (1994)
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001, 2002, 2003)
Lost Highway (1997)
Lost in Translation (2003)
The Lover (1992)
Monsters, Inc. (2001)
Ms. 45 (1981)
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
My Dinner with Andre (1981)
Poison Ivy (1992)
Pulp Fiction (1994)
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (1990)
The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)
Rushmore (1998)
School of Rock (2003)
Shakespeare in Love (1998)
Sneakers (1992)
Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
Surviving Desire (1991)
Swimming Pool (2003)
Swingers (1996)
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
That Thing You Do! (1996)
The Thin Man (1934)
Tommy Boy (1995)
Toy Story (1995)
Toy Story 2 (1999)
Trust (1990)
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992)
The Unbelievable Truth (1989)
Unforgiven (1992)
Wild at Heart (1990)
Wild Things (1998)
Wonder Boys (2000)

The Movies of My Thirties and Beyond

The Apartment (1960)
The Awful Truth (1937)
Ball of Fire (1941)
Black Snake Moan (2006)
Black Swan (2010)
The Bourne Trilogy (2002, 2004, 2007)
Boyhood (2014)
Brick (2005)
Chronicle (2012)
The Dark Knight (2008)
The First Time (2012)
Fury (2014)
The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)
Gravity (2013)
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)
Her (2013)
Inception (2010)
The Incredibles (2004)
The Lady Eve (1941)
Let the Right One In (2008)
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)
Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011)
Melancholia (2011)
Mistress America (2015)
Ned Rifle (2014)
Only Lovers Left Alive (2013)
Pineapple Express (2008)
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
Sleeping Beauty (2011)
Somebody Up There Likes Me (2012)
Sucker Punch (2011)
Superbad (2007)
Under the Skin (2013)
Up (2009)
WALL-E (2008)
Winter's Bone (2010)
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Youth in Revolt (2009)

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Captain Couch Potato Ponders "Canon" as a Flawed
Concept for Use in Modern Multimedia Franchises


I never got around to seeing Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens in a movie theater. I'll see it eventually, when it comes out on DVD, but its release was not for me the watershed moment that it was for so many other lifelong Star Wars fans. Initially, my reasoning, which I used when discussing it with various friends who couldn't understand why I wasn't more excited--and who, without exception, reassured me1 that the movie was worth seeing--was that the Star Wars franchise had ceased to be important to me as a living entity. Claims, in the '90s and '00s (with the release of the "special edition" versions of the original trilogy, plus the three almost universally disappointing prequels), that George Lucas had "raped" the childhoods of original Star Wars fans was not just an exaggeration (to say nothing of a gross misuse of a word) but also ridiculous. I wondered if the minds of fans were really so impressionable that a distinct two-hour movie could be irreversibly tainted by a slightly altered version of that movie, or even by a different two-hour movie. To me, the original Star Wars remains Star Wars, regardless of some other version where Greedo shot first, or of what happened in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi, to say nothing of The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, or Revenge of the Sith--which don't even focus on the same main characters.2

But this is where the concept of canon comes in. To the more devoted fan, Star Wars is not just a movie, but a universe. And for a franchise as old and lucrative as the Star Wars franchise is, the universe matters far more than the primary source material.3 (This is true with other franchises as well, such as Superman and Batman, where the initial source material is of even less practical value4 than subsequent iterations.) This is why The Phantom Menace upset so many fans. As part of the larger Star Wars universe, it wasn't just a bad movie; it was a bad movie that diminished the quality of the Star Wars universe as a whole. In a franchise situation like this, the parts of the whole are important primarily for their contribution to (or contamination of) the larger entity.5 Just as The Phantom Menace is reviled, so is The Empire Strikes Back lauded as the best of the Star Wars movies, despite the fact that it doesn't really have a beginning or an end in the traditional, dramatic three-act structure sense. Instead, it is Empire's contributions to the overall franchise that earns it its esteemed place in the canon: the (live-action) introduction of fan-favorite Boba Fett, the revelation that Darth Vader is Luke's father, Han Solo's burgeoning romance with Princess Leia, Yoda's pseudo-Eastern philosophic ramblings, etc.

So it is the ideas, characters, and potential contained within the Star Wars universe that Disney bought and which matter most to fans. But to do anything of note with these ideas and characters, Disney has to be able to create movies, comic books, novels, etc., that matter to the dedicated Star Wars fan. And to matter, these products need to be directly related to the source material that inaugurated the franchise.

To achieve this, Disney essentially "erased" thirty years of secondary material, from Timothy Zahn's popular Admiral Thrawn trilogy of Star Wars novels to the hundreds of Star Wars comic books published by Dark Horse since 1991. What had been considered "expanded universe" material (which, by Lucasfilm's canon algorithm, meant a secondary, but still "official" level of canon) was now known as "legends" material, which is essentially the same as professionally published fan fiction. Meanwhile, Disney and its media conglomerate subsidiaries, such as Marvel Comics, would create movies, comics, etc., that are all equally part of the official Star Wars canon.

This is all fine. But as more and more material is generated and sold to the public, the canon becomes more and more muddled (as the Star Wars canon already did with the proliferation of comics and novels of the last twenty years that Disney just swept under the rug). At what point will Disney need to wipe the slate clean a second time in order to re-engage a new generation of fans without the burden of too much ancillary material to keep straight? One of the many things that bothered me about the prequels is that much of the story took place offscreen. The Star Wars: Clone Wars (2003) cartoon filled in the story gaps between The Clone Wars and Revenge of the Sith to the point where its final episode led straight into the action of Revenge of the Sith, with Chancellor Palpatine being kidnapped in the episode's final moments.

A lot happens in between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back, but the audience is left to infer the missing story from the dialogue in the second film. For instance, Han Solo mentions a bounty hunter who almost captured him for Jabba the Hutt. But there's no cartoon or comic book that illustrates that encounter. Yet by the time the prequels came around, there was so much ancillary material that it was nearly impossible to take the films at face value because, if you did, you wouldn't have a clue what the hell was going on.

I'm not saying that Disney is in immediate danger of hopelessly convoluting the Star Wars franchise, but the rate at which they're churning out movies and comic books leads me to believe that, eventually, the casual fan will be lost once again. When that happens, today's canon will be tomorrow's apocrypha.

So to get back to my initial paragraph, why wasn't I excited about The Force Awakens? Because the Star Wars canon isn't what was important to me. What was important to me was George Lucas. I believe in André Bazin's auteur theory, which holds that a work of art should represent its creator's personal vision. Granted, he wasn't talking about a piece of fluff like Star Wars when he developed this theory with his fellow French film critics, and Lucas's film is hardly a masterpiece in the way that François Truffaut's The 400 Blows is a masterpiece, but the fact remains that Star Wars was Lucas's personal vision. Moreover, it's a film that he struggled to complete because literally no one around him at the time believed that it was anything other than a cinematic dog turd in the making.6 Oddly enough, Lucas had similar problems when overseeing The Empire Strikes Back. He was not the director or the writer of that film, but he was still its resident visionary. The prequels, as bad as they are, were also Lucas's vision--and for that reason alone they interested me. The Force Awakens, on the other hand, is just an action movie. It's about as exciting to me as was Terminator 3.

Star Wars is not the only franchise with a problematic canon. The movie version of Spider-Man, for example, has been rebooted three times in the last fifteen years. Batman movies have been rebooted twice in ten years. And although the Star Trek reboot made an effort to keep its canon glued together with the appearance of Leonard Nimoy as Spock in the 2009 movie, it's impossible to pretend that the original '60s TV show has more than a superficial link to the current film series (and I'm not just referring to the fact that the cast is played by different actors; Gene Roddenberry's vision is nowhere to be found in J. J. Abrams's films). Likewise, DC Comics' tone-deaf Before Watchmen project needlessly "extend[ed] a groundbreaking work into a glossy but lifeless franchise." Alan Moore's and Dave Gibbons's Watchmen needed a prequel about as much as George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four needed a sequel.



Pointless Footnotes

1 Reassurance being an important thing when it comes to post-original Star Wars trilogy movies.

2 By which I mean that Anakin Skywalker, Obi-wan Kenobi, Yoda, C-3PO, and R2-D2 were supporting characters in the original trilogy. Besides, even though the "protagonist" of the prequels, Anakin Skywalker, becomes Darth Vader, the villain of the original trilogy, they're still pretty much two completely different characters (at least until Darth Vader shows up at the tail end of Revenge of the Sith).

3 It's worth noting here that when Disney bought Star Wars for $4 billion, it bought the franchise but not the original movies themselves, which Fox continues to own through the year 2020.

4 As opposed to nostalgic or collectible value. Sure, a mint copy of Action Comics 1 (the issue in which Superman first appeared) recently sold for $3.2 million on ebay. But the latest Superman movie, Man of Steel, which wasn't even that good, grossed $668 million. The character is worth infinitely more than the first, primitive Superman story Siegel and Shuster wrote and drew in 1938.

5 In the '70s, at least, George Lucas was a creator who well understood the value of collaboration and market saturation. He practically invented the idea of effective movie licensing, the kind that enriches rather than merely exploits the brand. Take the first Star Wars comic book series, published by Marvel beginning in the late '70s. In the eighth issue, writer Roy Thomas and artist Howard Chaykin introduced Jaxxon, a six-foot-tall anthropomorphic green bunny. Lucas usually took a hands-off approach to the comic book license, but in the case of Jaxxon he told Marvel to axe the character, who disappeared completely by issue sixteen. Thomas and Chaykin, it seems, hadn't yet grasped the strengths of the Star Wars franchise, and had accidentally created a character that didn't jibe with the Star Wars universe. Sure, the movie was for kids, but not toddlers. Lucas knew that Jaxxon would degrade the franchise, however slightly, so he demanded that Jaxxon be removed. Simple as that. Of course, in the '90s, the very same man who nixed Jaxxon approved Jar-Jar Binks. Jaxxon may have looked goofy, but at least he was a laser-gun-toting badass. Jar-Jar, on the other hand, was simply goofy. (In fact, if Disney's Goofy were a space alien, he would be Jar-Jar.)

On the flipside of the same coin, although I'm not quite cynical enough to suggest that Lucas inserted Ewoks into Return of the Jedi strictly because he knew the action figures, plush toys, and cartoon would sell like gangbusters, they were definitely one of the marketing highlights of the third Star Wars film. I'm not a big fan of them now, in my forties, but at the ages of seven and ten, respectively, my brother and I thought they were awesome, as did pretty much every other kid on earth.

6 See John Seabrook's New Yorker article, in which he recounts Lucas showing the rough cut of Star Wars to Steven Spielberg, Alan Ladd, Brian De Palma, a few other friends, and some Fox executives. Their communal reaction was muted, to say the least.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

In which Professor Bookworm attempts to recapture one of the many joys of youth, with mixed results


In my other blog I write about the personal connection I have to specific comic book issues that I read when I was a kid. The overall point of that blog being that comic books were an important part of my childhood.

I still read comic books, but they're usually published by Fantagraphics, Drawn & Quarterly, and Pantheon, or--to a lesser extent--Vertigo, Dark Horse, and Image. My Marvel and Archie days are long behind me.

However, I recently discovered a website that sells new Marvel trade paperbacks at fifty percent off the cover price, and I had also read somewhere that Marvel was experiencing something of a creative renaissance recently, so I decided to try a few and see if I could reclaim some of that childhood magic. The results (I should not have been surprised to learn, really) were hit and miss. Nonetheless, here are my thoughts on what I read.



Amazing Spider-Man by Dan Slott and Humberto Ramos (vols. 1–3 + 1.1) Read on the heels of Slott's Superior Spider-Man arc (see below), I was less than impressed. The first volume was a good start: Peter Parker, newly restored to his body after defeating Doctor Octopus (who had taken over Peter's body--and life--as the "superior" Spider-Man), goes about repairing the damage done to his reputation as a civilian and as a superhero by the oddly well-meaning Doc Ock. As Spider-Man he apologies to New York City as a whole, and as Peter Parker he makes amends with his aunt, Mary Jane, and a host of others. But in volumes 2 and 3 we leave this character-building track behind to instead watch dozens of alternate-reality Spider-Men/Women/Robots, etc., join together with Peter to battle Morlun, an old mainstay in Spider-Man's rouges' gallery, and Morlun's multiverse-spanning family of Spider-assassins. These two volumes are all action, little plot, and no character. In a phrase, they bummed me out, reminding me why I stopped reading Marvel comics back in the '80s. In volume 4 Peter gets back to trying to save his company (which Doc Ock created), but by this point I'd lost interest. And volume 1.1 was just a modern retelling of Spider-Man's origin, released in conjunction with the second Amazing Spider-Man movie. Bleh.
The Verdict: ★★☆☆☆

Black Widow by Nathan Edmondson and Phil Noto (vols. 1–2) Fans of the Iron Man, Avengers, and Captain America movies who don't read comics may not know that the Black Widow is most popularly associated with Daredevil in the comics. Granted, she first showed up as a nemesis for Iron Man, but by the early '70s she appeared most often alongside the Man without Fear--even sharing title billing with Daredevil on his own comic book for a while (see?). As Daredevil's costar, the Black Widow was awesome. Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow? Also awesome. But I have yet to read a solo Black Widow series that capitalizes on the Black Widow's strengths. This series by Edmondson and Noto comes close, but I just couldn't quite get into it.
The Verdict: ★★☆☆☆

Captain Marvel by Kelly Sue DeConnick and Dexter Soy/Emma Rios/Filipe Andrade and David Lopez/Marcio Takara (vols. 1–2; 1–3) I started off loving this series. But as time went on, my unfamiliarity with Carol Danvers's extremely deep backstory started to hurt my enjoyment of the book. The first series, and the first volume of the reboot were all pretty good. The series is strongest when Captain Marvel is exploring the galaxy in a classic sci-fi manner. But I'd mostly lost interest by the last two volumes. I think part of my problem is that the book seems controlled, to some extent, by Marvel's desire to maintain Captain Marvel as a viable film property. Certain Avengers, as well as Rocket Raccoon (from Guardians of the Galaxy), show up in the series often enough that I started to wonder how much editorial meddling was involved in DeConnick's story. Possibly I'm wrong, and DeConnick is telling exactly the story she wants to, but I'm skeptical.
The Verdict: ★★★☆☆

Daredevil by Mark Waid and Paolo Rivera/Marco Checchetto/Marcos Martin/Kano/Emma Rios/Chris Samnee/Khoi Pham/Michael Allred and Chris Samnee/Javier Rodriguez (vols. 1–7; 1–3) Daredevil is my favorite Marvel character, but my post-childhood encounters with his comic book series have been largely disappointing. Kevin Smith's overhyped eight-issue run in 1999 was one of the lowest points of the series as far as I'm concerned, and the subsequent arcs written by David Mack and Brian Michael Bendis were OK but not great. But I'd heard that Mark Waid has been writing the heck out of Daredevil since 2011, so I bought his initial 36-issue run as well as the three volumes released so far from the current series. And it's good. Waid seems to understand the fundamental appeal of Matt Murdock and his Daredevil alter ego, and capitalizes on this understanding very well. Matt's funny again (not Spider-Man funny, but witty nonetheless), and still dark and brooding, but not too dark and brooding. Moving Matt Murdock to San Francisco in the newest volume is an interesting choice (apparently DD had moved there temporarily a few years back), and presents him with some new challenges. This is the kind of creative change that can make a fifty-year-old series fresh. (See, Smith? You don't need to kill Karen Page to make a Daredevil issue meaningful! Jerk.) Oh, and the art, primarily by Chris Samnee, is spectacular.
The Verdict: ★★★★☆

Darth Vader by Kieron Gillen and Salvador Larroca (vol. 1) The greatest villain of late-'70s blockbuster cinema gets his own comic book, which has led me to wonder if there's actually that much substance to this character who seemed so interestingly amoral and badass in Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. Perhaps Darth Vader was so impressive as a villain because we didn't know that much about him. His primary purpose, from a storytelling point of view, was to capture Princess Leia, kill Ben Kenobi, and set Luke Skywalker on his path to the Force. He also provides some dramatic sequences on Bespin, including torturing Han Solo and screwing up Luke's mind (not to mention his hand), but he's not a guy who has much of an interior life onscreen. George Lucas tried to remedy this with the prequel movies, and failed spectacularly. Gillen, here, does a slightly better job, but that's not saying much. I think Darth Vader functions better as the scary, unknowable antagonist of our Rebel heroes, rather than as a three-dimensional character. Let's not forget, as Ben Kenobi said, that he's more machine than man. Perhaps he should stay that way.
The Verdict: ★★☆☆☆

Hawkeye by Matt Fraction and David Aja/Javier Pulido/Chris Eliopoulos/Annie Wu/Francesco Francavilla/etc. (vols. 1–4) This is the book that got all the publicity that convinced me to give Marvel a try in the twenty-first century. Fortunately, it's one of the books that actually delivered on what was promised. The story, the art--it's all really good. It has the perfect balance of humor and drama, along with some effectively experimental stories that I'd expect to find in a book published by an independent company like Fantagraphics. I'm disappointed that this series is over; it's one of the few that I would've continued to read.
The Verdict: ★★★★☆

Iron Fist: The Living Weapon by Kaare Andrews (vol. 1) As the one series in the bunch written and drawn by a single creator, I had high hopes for Iron Fist. Andrews's artwork is amazing, but his writing is less than stellar. I liked the plot well enough, but the script could have used some help. Of course it probably doesn't help that I don't know much about Iron Fist as a character to begin with. I felt like I was missing something, which is perhaps not Andrews's fault, but it still didn't make me want to pick up the second volume.
The Verdict: ★☆☆☆☆

Moon Knight by Warren Ellis/Brian Wood and Declan Shalvey/Jordie Bellaire/Greg Smallwood (vols. 1–2) Warren Ellis wrote the first volume, and I didn't care for it. He effectively reintroduced Marc Spector as a vigilante who is certifiably nuts, but the six stories he wrote for the first volume didn't amount to much. He built no continuity, and the stand-alone issues weren't strong enough to impress me. I got the feeling Ellis wrote them strictly for the paycheck. Brian Wood, who wrote the second volume, did a better job of crafting a sustained story, but in the end I just couldn't get into it.
The Verdict: ★★☆☆☆

Ms. Marvel by G. Willow Wilson and Adrian Alphona/Jake Wyatt/Takeshi Miyagawa (vols. 1–3) This is the only 5-star book of the bunch as far as I'm concerned. G. Willow Wilson is a great writer (I loved her graphic novel Cairo), and her creation of a new superhero--Kamala Khan, a Muslim teenager living in Jersey City--allows Wilson to write a strong, character-based story without fifty years of continuity baggage tying her down. Ms. Marvel reminds me of the early issues of The Amazing Spider-Man, in that Kamala is a teenager with teenage problems, who tries her best to balance her superhero life with her civilian one. She fun, spunky, a bit awkward (like most teenagers), and she sometimes makes mistakes. But she learns from those mistakes in an attempt to become a better superhero. In short, she's adorable. This is a great series.
The Verdict: ★★★★★

She-Hulk by Charles Soule and Javier Pulido/Ronald Wimberly (vols. 1–2) This series had so much potential. The only Marvel series of the last fifteen years that I liked (before reading this latest group, that is) was Dan Slott's run on She-Hulk in 2004–2007. That was a great book, unfortunately doomed by low sales. Soule's take on She-Hulk was charming in its own way, and Javier Pulido's oddly static artwork complemented the story extremely well. I probably would've continued to read this series, but poor She-Hulk just can't seem to hold onto a solo series for long. This one was canceled after volume 2, without ever quite shining the way Slott's series had.
The Verdict: ★★★☆☆

Silver Surfer by Dan Slott and Michael Allred (vols. 1–2) I love the Silver Surfer, I love Mike Allred's artwork, and I consider this series to be another contemporary Marvel success. Dan Slott has successfully extracted the Silver Surfer from the less useful aspects of his considerable backstory to tell a series of enjoyable, wacky adventures out in the far reaches of space. His Earthling companion, Dawn Greenwood, helps to ground the Silver Surfer in a very human way. I'll keep reading this one for as long as Slott and Allred are involved.
The Verdict: ★★★★☆

Star Wars by Jason Aaron and John Cassaday (vol. 1) With Disney's acquisition of Marvel Comics and Lucasfilm, the reboot of the Star Wars comic book was probably the most-anticipated mainstream comics release of 2015. Marvel's original Star Wars comic, which ran from 1977 to 1986, was an occasionally thrilling, often goofy take on the universe in which George Lucas's popular trilogy took place. I loved it, but it had its faults. This new series, which takes place between the first two movies and attempts to take the franchise a bit more seriously (again, very important corporate interests are at stake now), was a bit too dry for me. Sure, it hits all the obvious crowd-pleasing notes (Boba Fett! The cantina! Han Solo's a wise-cracking scoundrel! Boba Fett, again!) but it reads like a series plotted by committee. Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I can easily picture Disney handing Aaron a stack of notes, essentially telling him, "This is what we need to see in the comic." The story is well told, but there's not much passion in it, and who has time to read a series with no passion? Not me.
The Verdict: ★★☆☆☆

Superior Spider-Man by Dan Slott and Humberto Ramos/Ryan Stegman/Giuseppe Camuncoli/Javier Rodriguez (vols. 1–6) Spider-Man's arch-nemesis, Doctor Octopus, is dying in prison. Spider-Man visits him to pay his last respects. Bad idea! Doc Ock seizes the opportunity to switch bodies with Spider-Man, leaving Peter Parker to die in Otto Octavius's decrepit form. At last, Doctor Octopus has the ultimate revenge on his enemy. But just before Peter dies in Otto's old body, he tells the "new" Spider-Man that with great power comes great responsibility. Thus, Otto vows to become the Superior Spider-Man. What follows is a supervillain's attempt at becoming a hero, and the results are, well, amazing (if not truly superior). Dan Slott claims he received death threats when he made this change to the most popular character in the Marvel Universe, but he didn't deserve them. I enjoyed this series tremendously. Although he tries to be a hero, Otto Octavius is still a dick, thus his interactions with Peter Parker's friends and family (including Spider-Man's verbal sparring partner J. Jonah Jameson) are hilarious. Similarly, Otto's attempts at improving Spider-Man's crimefighting effectiveness seems to work at first, but eventually breaks down into a crazy, paramilitary disaster, causing widespread devastation across New York City. What can I say? Dan Slott's a pro. I may have hated his run thus far on the relaunched Amazing Spider-Man (see above), but that's one stumble in an otherwise pretty stellar writing career. This one's well worth reading again.
The Verdict: ★★★★☆



What I learned from this little experiment is that my taste in superhero comics hasn't changed much in thirty years. As when I was a kid, I still prefer the outliers to the more popular books. Thus I will continue reading Daredevil (OK, maybe he's not a true outlier anymore), Ms. Marvel, and Silver Surfer. The rest I can do without, which is actually kind of reassuring in a weird way. To be honest, I'd rather not feel compelled to devote so much of my reading time to a bunch of superheroes.