Robin In Perspective

(SPOILERS: Do not read this article if you haven’t read Batman Incorporated #8 or any Bat title #18 or higher)

As you can see in a prior entry (see here) I have a great respect for sidekicks. To me, a sidekick is just the entry level to becoming a true super hero. And there is no greater example of the sidekick than Robin. But as much as Robin is a great sidekick there seems to be a drawback to being a Robin. They have a tendency to die.

If you’ve read Batman comics in the past couple of years you would know that the current Robin is Damian Wayne, the son of Bruce Wayne and Talia Al Ghul. Of course perhaps I should say “was” instead of “is”. As of Batman Incorporated #8, Damian Wayne is dead. He is now the second Robin to die in the uniform (Jason Todd was the first but he got better). Technically he is the third Robin to die but when Stephanie Brown (who was Robin briefly when Tim Drake decided to give up the mantle) died she did so as Batgirl, not as Robin, and like Jason Todd she also came back from the dead. Of course the New 52 also wiped Stephanie Brown from continuity so there is that as well.

While Robins coming back from the dead seems to be good news for Damian, it no less changes the fact that they do die. And like most people who die, they are mourned. Even though Jason Todd came back from the dead, his costume still hangs in a class case in the Batcave, forever marking Batman’s failure to save him. Since all the previous Robins have been merely adopted sons, one can imagine how traumatic the death of Bruce Wayne’s flesh and blood must be to him. I know biology shouldn’t be a factor in matters like this but when one remembers that Batman’s entire quest is spurned by the death of his parents. To lose both one’s parents and one’s son seems too traumatic to imagine.

A sad thing to realize is that I am to blame for the death of both Robins. I don’t mean in some bizarre “I jumped into the comics” kind of way. No, I mean these two Robins were eliminated because they were never liked by the fans. Jason Todd was a notorious jerk who inspired DC Comics to launch a 900 number where you could vote on his fate (which I called and voted for his death). And Damian Wayne was seen as a spoiled brat from his first appearance. Even as he softened under the tutelage of his father, the younger Wayne never gained the love of the fans. He was an outsider, someone who didn’t really earn the mantle of Robin (like all four previous Robins) but only got it because of who his dad is. Damian Wayne is the nepotistic Robin. Thus no matter how hard he was portrayed as trying to be a worthy successor to his father’s empire, he would never be embraced by fans.

But even though I feel guilt for the death of Robin, I did not kill him. His own mother killed him. In the culmination of a long running plot point, which began even before the establishment of the New 52, Grant Morrison finally killed off his own creation in the pages of Batman Incorporated. It seemed like this Robin was always fated to die, even though readers were misled with stories of a future in which Damian grew into the mantle of his father. All of which was meant to never suspect the newest Robin was not long for this world. Which worked. I don’t think any reader really thought that ANOTHER Robin was going to be killed off.

But there is now a creative downside to the death of Damian. There can never be another Robin in the comics. How could Bruce Wayne ever replace his own son? Also any new character brought in to wear the Robin mantle would simple have fans asking how long the clock was running until this new Robin would be killed off. There are many fans that already joke that Robin is just a character with a big target on his back. And when half of the characters who have worn the mantle die, those jokes become a reality.

It is sad to think of Batman without Robin. Like no other super hero pair are these two characters linked. When two people work well together they are described as a “dynamic duo”, a term that originated to describe Batman and Robin.  Robin is the prototypical sidekick. An archetype of what a young hero is supposed to be and the relationship they are supposed to have with an older mentor. But with two deaths, the label of Robin seems to be tainted. Calling someone Robin has the same negative connotations as calling someone “O.J.” Doesn’t matter what positive aspects are associated with that person, people will only focus on the negative.

Decoy

Normally when a person dies their death wipes away any negative aspects people might associate with that person. Despite the negative associations people had with Jason Todd, when he died he became a symbol for one of Batman’s greatest failures and a constant reminder that this character was flawed. But the death of Damian Wayne has only shown the carelessness Batman shows by drafting children into his war on crime. The recent storyline Death of the Family showed that anyone who associates with Batman opens himself or herself up to being a target. Perhaps the death of Damian Wayne could not have been averted but had Batman forbid him from being Robin, it could possibly have been put off for a longer period of time.

Oz: The Great and Misogynistic

(SPOILER ALERT: I completely reveal major plot points of Oz: The Great and Powerful)

Just saw Oz: The Great and Powerful, which is supposed to be a prequel to the Wizard of Oz. The film is brought to us by Sam Raimi (Evil Dead and Spider-Man) and there are some obvious tells that show it is his movie. For the most part it is a fun fantasy film trying to cash in on a beloved childhood classic. But when you look at the film closer you see that at its core it’s kind of sexist.

First of all I would like to say I do not generally get offended by sexism in movies. I grew up in the eighties, the golden age of testosterone driven action films, so I’m pretty desensitized to this subject in films. But when four of the six main characters are women and the protagonist is such a manipulative jerk, it’s pretty tough to ignore. And it’s not subtle either. The female characters in this film are for the most part horribly portrayed.

The first big problem of the film is James Franco, playing the titular Oz. Oz is not the wise old man who shows the characters at the end of the original film they didn’t need the things they were searching for because they had them all the time. This Oz is just a plain old user. A womanizing magician in a traveling circus, we first meet Franco while he is giving some sob story about a dead grandmother to his newest potential sexual conquest. Presenting the girl with a music box he has her completely smitten even though his only purpose is to use her as a plant in the audience for his act.  This music box becomes a bit of a plot point as we see that Oz has several such boxes, which he uses to trick unwitting women. Interesting enough this is part of the inciting incident as we see Oz gave the wife of the circus strongman another such box and uses the hot air balloon to escape. So right off the bat, Oz is nothing more than just a guy running away from an angry husband.

So while Oz has been established as a jerk, nothing changes when he travels to the magical world that shares his name. As soon as Oz touches down in Oz, he meets one of the witches, Theodora. Seeing her as just another pretty face (which granted, being played by Mila Kunis she is gorgeous) he fall back on his womanizing ways. The very womanizing ways that got him in his situation in the first place. He even uses the same music box routine that got him in trouble. Despite surviving a balloon ride in a tornado, during which he even calls upon God for assistance, Oz has not changed a bit. And as bad as Oz is, I can’t completely forgive Theodora for falling for him. The character is set up as such a naïve and sheltered girl that she has no defense for dishonesty. She never questions anything that is told her. Oz claims to be the fabled Wizard who is predicted to save the land and she just goes along with it. In fact Oz has no greater ally in establishing his ruse than Theodora. She emphatically insists to everyone they meet that Oz is indeed a great and powerful wizard. Essentially the entire plotline revolves a young girl’s crush.

While Theodora plays the naïve girl in love, her sister Evanora portrays women as manipulative and power hungry. As anyone who watches the film for more than a second can tell Evanora is the “Wicked Witch” everyone fears yet no one seems to realize it is her (which seems odd since there are only three witches in the whole movie). Evanora, played by the amazing Rachel Weisz, is the stereotypical femme fatale. Her promises of riches and good times send Oz, our easily manipulated hero, on his journey to unknowingly fulfill her wishes. Further showing Evanora’s manipulative nature, she uses Theodora’s feelings for Oz to turn the naïve girl into the classic Wicked Witch from the Original Wizard of Oz. So out of the three female cast members of this film, two of them are evil.

The final member of the Witches trio is Glinda. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that she is supposed to be the “Good Witch”. The filmmakers even go so far as showing how Glinda resembles the great love of Oz’s life (who is getting married but wanted to give Oz one last chance). But even Glinda is not as pure and innocent as the film would like to portray her. Glinda is completely aware that Oz is a fake. Her father was the original Wizard but was murdered, but before he died he predicted another Wizard would come to save Oz. Glinda is well aware that Oz is not a wizard but she goes along with the ruse that he is magical in order to give her people hope. In many ways Glinda is just as manipulative as Evanora. Her lies are only forgiven because they are just end.

There is also the little China Girl (serious, she’s a girl made of porcelain) who whines and constantly demands attention from Oz. While she is there to be another reflection of a character Oz met in the real world (a little crippled girl who wanted Oz to make her walk) there comes a point where her constant clawing at Oz becomes annoying. She literally becomes a living embodiment of how fragile women and children can be, since she can break so easily. While she does have a redeeming moment at the end of the film, it is hard to shake that image of the fragile girl.

I realize this is a movie meant for kids (even though it is rated PG-13) and children will not see the same things I see. They’ll only see a movie where a magician travels to a magic land, makes friends with a monkey and fights witches. And to be honest, that’s all kids should see. But if a film like this has such sexist tones in its subtext, we as a society can not be surprised when children grow up to have such behavior as adults.

Why Do We Care So Much About the End of the World?

Went to the movies recently and before the feature I saw no less than three movies in which the story revolved around the characters trying to survive on a post-apocalyptic earth. Each film had a different take on what finally ends the earth, or at least makes it uninhabitable for humans, but each film had one basic message: Humans are not long for this world. We might be able to abandon it and find a place to resettle among the stars, but the third planet in our solar system will eventually become too hostile for us. I could say this is just one of those Hollywood trends that comes along every now and then, but that’s not true. Hollywood has been destroying the earth for years. And I am curious as to why.

Now there are those among you who may lean to the right and scream endlessly about “Liberal Hollywood” claiming that all these end of the world movies are trying to push some sort of environmental agenda. There may be some truth to that. I don’t agree in the idea of Hollywood having some mass agenda but there certainly could be enough of an audience for films about the environment could exist. Except not all the films about the world ending have to do with an environmental change. In fact there are as many different scenarios for the world ending as there are films to show them. Some films show the earth after a vast cataclysm, others depict the scorched remains of a war torn planet. Two of the films I saw trailers for seemed to indicate humanity being wiped out by aliens. And of course there is always the much beloved zombie apocalypse. There is a never-ending stream of ways for the world to end.

"That's right. I survive!"

The one common denominator of all these stories is that the world doesn’t end completely. There are survivors. Much like the Rapture (yet another world ending scenario), there are those who are left behind. Not everyone was killed by radiation or drowned in a flood or turned into zombies. Some people manage to avoid the end of the world completely, left to roam the wasteland and/or try to rebuild society. This of course makes sense. A story needs characters and if the end of the world truly did wipe out all the humans then there would only be a film of a burnt wasteland (which might be better than most films out there but would still be kind of boring).

But I still haven’t answered why. What’s the appeal? Well there are several reasons that we are interested in the end of the world. The first is my favorite and it was first brought to my attention by the brilliant comic Patton Oswalt. Many of you know him as the voice of Remy the Rat in Ratatouille. Mr. Oswalt wrote a book entitled Zombie, Spaceship, Wasteland. He explains that the reason his book has that title is because so many writers starting out have such a narrow view of the world and limited amount of experiences that in order to compensate for this they set their stories in worlds where the normal rules of society no longer exist. Thus they as a writer are no longer bound by said rules. Nothing they do can be criticized as unbelievable since they are working in a world of their own creation.

Another reason why there is such a fascination with the end of the world is a reason I already mention in this entry. The Rapture. Even if you are not Christian, chances are you’ve lived in some society with some form of religion. And every religion has both a Creation story (how the world began) and a Destruction story (how the world will end). Be it the Rapture where souls will ascend into Heaven, or Ragnarok where a giant snake devours the world, human culture has been seeped in stories about the end of the world. Even if you are someone like me who has abandoned the concept of religion, you are probably aware of these stories.

Similar to the above reason is something a little closer to our chests. We are all going to die. Human life is fragile and mortal and eventually comes to an end. Many of us find that a hard fact to grasp. So as partly as a way to deal with our own impending end we imagine the end of our world in general. And like many people I’m sure we imagine a world that would be completely devastated by our deaths.

The final reason is the most honest one. The world WILL come to end. It’s inevitable. NASA is tracking no less than three different meteors that if their orbits were just a bit closer could completely annihilate all life on earth. The threat of nuclear war is constantly hovering over our heads, with rogue nations trying to develop weapons all the time. Viruses and Bacteria are constantly evolving and changing, becoming resistant to all the methods we use to treat them. Plus massive extinction events have occurred on this planet before so chances are they could happen again.

Saying all that, I’m not going to lose any sleep. For the time being, the end of world shall remain the fantasy of Hollywood films. No meteor, zombie plague, alien invasion, climate shift or giant Nordic snake is going to keep me from living my life the way I have been. Besides, if any of those films are to judge, someone will survive so I might still have a chance.

Superior Spider-Man versus Inferior Marvel Universe

WARNING: SPOILERS! If you haven’t read Amazing Spider-Man #700 and/or Superior Spider-Man #1, please stop reading. I also spoil Ultimate Spider-Man as well if you're not up to date.

If you’re a Spider-Man fan you are all too well aware of the big shake up to the world of everyone’s favorite wall-crawler. First they killed off Peter Parker in the pages of Ultimate Spider-Man. And then as if the need to outdo their Ultimate timeline, the in continuity (usually referred to as Earth 616) version of Peter Parker needed to die as well. But while the death of Peter in Ultimate Spider-Man was pretty straight forward, the version of events in Amazing Spider-Man were going to be far more complex.

In a bizarre twist, Spider-Man’s long time foe Doctor Octopus managed to figure out a way to switch his brain with that of his nemesis. For many years the character of Doc Ock had been portrayed as decaying away and slowly dying. So Doc Ock ends up in Spider-Man’s body, leaving poor Peter Parker stuck in the dying body of a super villain. Now I, like many other fans, thought there would be some miraculous save when Peter Parker escaped and confronted Doc Ock, hoping to get his body back. No such miracle occurred. Doctor Octopus’s body died taking the mind of Peter Parker with it. But before he died, Peter Parker managed to convince Otto Octavius to continue his mission of justice.

This leads us to Superior Spider-Man. While Doc Ock agreed to continue to honor Peter Parker’s heroic legacy, his super villain ego has him determined to be an even better Spider-Man than Spider-Man (hence SUPERIOR Spider-Man). And here is where problems with the title develop. Otto Octavius, while possessing all the knowledge and memories of Peter Parker, has a completely different style and mannerisms to Peter. His attitude is not that of bullied and noble Peter Parker. YET NO ONE IN THE MARVEL UNIVERSE SEEMS TO NOTICE!

 

To give a brief history of Marvel Comics stories, not too long ago there was a storyline entitled Secret Invasion. This storyline involved members of the alien race, the Skrulls, kidnapping and replacing super heroes and villains all over the world. Essentially an invasion force had infiltrated the entire super human community. The story had a lasting effect on characters in the various titles in the Marvel Universe. This leads me to believe that super heroes might be a bit paranoid about huge changes in a heroes personality. And yet no one suspects a thing from Peter Parker.

And to be clear, Spider-Man is not hanging out with a bunch of frat boys. He is an Avenger and is constantly surrounded by some of the most brilliant minds in the Marvel Universe. Tony Stark, Hank Pym, Reed Richards, these are people Spider-Man has on speed dial. And each of them is considered the most brilliant scientific minds of their perspective fields. In fact they all consider Spider-Man to be a peer, as Spider-Man has proven his own scientific intelligence. Now while Otto Octavius can probably easily keep up with them scientifically, these brilliant men should be able to notice different behavior from a trusted colleague and friend. If someone you worked with and hung out with all the time suddenly changed their tastes and habits you would be suspicious of these things.

The above is also ignoring that the Marvel Universe is also filled with telepaths and mind readers. S.H.I.E.L.D. is supposed to have an entire division devoted solely to psychics. Not to mention powerful magic users like Dr. Strange. Certainly the Sorcerer Supreme of earth would have a spell to let him know his friend’s body is hosting a soul that is not his own.  Also there are heroes with extremely heightened senses and amazing attention to detail. Since I mentioned SHIELD, Nick Fury’s whole job is to seek out deceit. And I find it hard to believe anyone could keep a secret from Wolverine or Daredevil’s enhanced senses. Both are human lie detectors and both have close ties to Spider-Man.

"Spider-Ock, Spider-Ock..."

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Otto Octavius with access to Peter Parker’s memories is smarter and cleverer than the entire Marvel Universe. If not even his closest family and friends can deduce that Peter Parker is not Peter Parker, then it seems likely that they may never. Obviously this must be temporary because the sequel to The Amazing Spider-Man is currently filming and I have no doubt that Peter Parker will find a way back from the beyond and into his own body well before its theatrical release (perhaps even to coincide with it).