Archive for the ‘General Geekery’ Category

Wonder Woman, T.V., and you.

October 2, 2010

http://livefeed.hollywoodreporter.com/2010/10/wonder-woman-tv-show.html

Not much to really comment on. I would love to see a female super-hero do well on the big screen by herself, but many people say it won’t work here. Now, dare I say, it works in Japan, we should make it work here. Before you go hysterical on me, Sailor Moon lasted on television, comics, and had three theatrical movie releases over most of the 1990’s. That does not include the MANY stage musicals that came after as well.

And while Sailor Moon did have a man she sort of relied on, please keep in mind this is the same man who got kidnapped by an evil space witch every season/movie/musical.

-Lauren

Birds of Prey #5

September 27, 2010

So far, this re-boot series has been terrific! If you are familiar with the Bird of Prey, it won’t be hard for you to jump right into this series. If you aren’t (like me), it won’t be hard for you to jump into this series, either. If you’re reading this blog, chances are good that you know who most of these women are. Oracle, the brains, is Barbara Gordon aka Batgirl. We have Black Canary, who happens to be involved with Green Arrow. We also have Lady Blackhawk, Dove, and Huntress. These team of kick ass women battle Gotham’s (or the worlds) underworld in an effort to keep you and me safe…If we lived in the crazy world that is DC comics.

In issue five we are still following the fight between Black Canary and White Canary. This fight while mostly physical, is somewhat of an emotional fight for Black Canary as well. However, we are still mostly unsure about the real motivation White Canary has against Black Canary, but the end of this issue will surely mess with you if you think you have it figured out. The other plot points seem almost moot compared to what Black Canary is going through. In my opinion she is the most interesting character in this series so far.

What really irks me, is that the art style changes in the middle of the comic. And it’s obvious too. I know lots of comics have more than one artist working on them, but the difference is usually muted, or if it is noticeable, it still looks good. This, does not look good. The art goes from really awesome, to really crappy, and back to awesome. If you don’t read this series, please pick up issue 5 and look through it. I can’t be the only one who gets annoyed at that crap.

All in all tho, this is a superb comic series.

-Lauren

Five questions, with Dan Parent

September 26, 2010

Special thanks to Dan Parent of Archie Comic fame for taking the time to answer a few questions about Kevin Keller, Archie 616, and the future of Archie!

-Of all of the conservative political figures to work from, how did Sarah Palin get elected (so to speak)?

Dan: We needed to go with someone who had the political “star power” that Obama has, on the GOP side of course. And Sarah Palin is definitely the face of the GOP right now.

-Is she going to be a parody like Tina Fey, or will she just be a normal conservative gal caught up in the craziness that is Riverdale?

Dan: We’re not going to get too political, the characters will be treated as public figures who get involved with the students, but we won’t see any hot button issues discussed.

-Also, will she say “donchaknow” or “you betcha” anywhere in there?

Dan: Maybe a ” you betcha” will find its way in there. In fact, it does!

-Will Kevin be in any future Archie stories? The way he was introduced into the Archie-verse was done with taste and fierceness, and I really hope to see more of him!

Dan: Kevin will definitely be back, there are already 2 more stories completed with him, with more to follow.

-What else can Archie fans look forward too in the upcoming months?

Dan: More new characters, more crossover stories, and 70th anniversary special issues for 2011.

-Lauren

Check out more of Dan Parent at www.danparent.com as well as www.archiecomics.com!

Who knew Archie was so liberal?

September 21, 2010

Coming out this December, Archie #616 will feature both the President, as well as Alaska’s own Sarah Palin. A quick blip from Archiecomics.com tells us “President Barack Obama and famed politician Sarah Palin get involved as Student Government campaigns spiral out of control at Riverdale High! The race between Archie and Reggie gets hot as campaign chaos reaches to the top, forcing an impromptu visit from these big-name politicos, who get pulled into the fray!”

Ok, the President I can understand, but Palin didn’t even finish out her term in Alaska. But I see where they are coming from; Grab the liberal, African-American President, and the conservative, white woman, who are both into politics and CRAZY SHIT HAPPENS.

However, much like when Kevin was introduced (you know, the gay kid in Riverdale.) people are going crazy over a comic book! Somehow this is pushing the liberal agenda on our youth, and really, won’t someone think of the children? I’ve been to schools where they do in fact push an agenda on to children. I find that more deplorable than a comic book you can simply say ‘no’ too. Is Archie even pushing a liberal agenda? I don’t think so. Before the 08 election I saw no sign of them telling readers to vote for either McCain or Obama. Sure, Veronica got to meet Obama, but that was after he was president. I’m sure if McCain was elected, he would be in the Archie universe somewhere. And if you’re still under the impression that having a gay character is pushing the liberal agenda (I guess all gay people are liberal), I have news for you: That’s not pushing any kind of political agenda. It’s pushing the including-all-people agenda. It might not be a real agenda, but it should be, because that is what this shit is.

I’m glad Archie is moving forward into modern times. I can safely say I have Archie books from the 40’s and 50’s where they were anything but politically correct. They have indeed come a long way, and I can’t wait to see where they go from here.

-Lauren

If Batman was to replace Joe Flacco…

September 20, 2010

Maybe the Ravens would have a perfect season.

Brightest Day still continues to be a challenge for me to get through. The new Namor series has been good so far (so I’ll review it soon). Of course it’s one issue in…so really time will tell. Two new Batman comics are due out this fall, to go along with the 50 other Batman titles already out. Hey, Marvel and DC, I don’t think your target audience is as rich as you might think, so maybe you could knock it off with the 15 titles for one character shit?

-Lauren

Veronica #202

September 12, 2010

I’ll make this short and sweet. Veronica #202, the issue that introduces Riverdale’s new gay kid, has sold out. To you nay sayers that claim Archie no longer attracts interest, well that issue sold out. Sure it was because of a controversial topic (GAY PEOPLE, IN MY COMICS? NO WAY.) but hey! It still sold out. The issue should be hitting stores such as Borders and Barnes and Nobles this week.

Also, I would like to with our Jewish readers a happy and healthy new year! L’Shanah Tovah!

-Lauren

Damn you, Iron Man!

September 8, 2010

Frequent readers of this blog know that I get heated when non comic book people blame comic books for the problems in society, specifically with our children. Nancy King being the most recent, claiming that if teachers are being cut from schools, kids will start reading (READING) comics.

Recently, the Philly Inquirer’s staff reporter Tirdad Derakhshani did a story on how comic book characters are piss poor role models. Tirdad sites that our children–specifically boys because we all know girls don’t read comics–are being brainwashed into thinking they have to be macho, violent, aggressive assholes in society. This is all comes from Sharon Lamb, a psychologist in Boston. If you’re wondering what her actual credentials are, I couldn’t tell you. I’m going off of this report.

Lamb claims that today’s supermen and woman are much different then the ones of yesteryear. Violent, sarcastic, and selfish. It also helps define gender roles.

“There is no doubt that children establish an understanding of what it means to be a girl or what it means to be a boy to a large extent from the media,” …Lamb says from her office in Boston. “Kids depend on stereotypes of gender to define themselves” and the role they play in society.” However, parent’s also help with gender roles. I can’t count the times when I hear a parent say–rather harmlessly–to a young boy “Don’t cry. Big boys don’t cry.” Or a father telling his young son to man up. Yet when a girl cries it’s ok, girls should be more open about their feelings. I can say that from personal experience as I am A) a girl and B) have parent’s.
 
Media as a whole has been supporting gender roles since the invention of media itself. If we look back at advertisements from the 1800s through early 1900s, women are always shown as being soft, delicate creatures. Ad’s selling bars of soap claim the soap is as soft as a woman (or something asinine like that). The idea that media may have had a heavier hand in showing gender roles is also asinine. Do you know who comes up with said advertisements? Men and women who both grew up with those idea’s instilled in them by their mothers and fathers, who got that idea from their own parents, ect ect.
 
The other issue NO ONE apparently brings up, is that parents are the bottom line. Some people argue that if you don’t have kids, it’s hard to understand. I babysit on the side so I have some idea of what being responsible means. I also know plenty of parents who have a heavy hand on what their kid watches/reads/whatever. Older kids might be harder to control, but if your 4-year-old son is reading a modern Batman comic, that’s your own fault. You ultimately have the power of saying ‘no’. My mom and dad said ‘no’ to me HUNDREDS of times in my young life. No to Happy Meals, comic books, toys, and video games.  But even if a violent film slipped in, my mom or dad would ALWAYS tell me that shit wasn’t real. I might have played Mortal Kombat in middle school, but I can safely say I am not ripping out people’s spines after a grueling match to the death.
Another part which irked me, was this. “Lamb asserts that today’s heroes are motivated by selfish desires, including the desire for vengeance, and not justice and the common good.” Batman became Batman because he had a desire to avenge his parents death. And in the early Action comics was a piece of shit who killed people. Both characters who not “wholesome” until a few years after they were created. “A perfect example, says Tappan, is Iron Man hero Tony Stark, an arms manufacturer and randy playboy who fights terrorists and other evildoers but seems more concerned with self-promotion and self-aggrandizement than justice.”  He was also an alcoholic. He also does fight for America, as he managed to destroy a terrorist group who had HIS own weapons. He became Iron Man because he felt he needed to defend America from terrorists. I thought that was pretty obvious since he stated it in the movie but what the fuck do I know, I don’t have a degree in this shit.
 
“Superheroes “used to be the underdog, or at least had to fight against powerful obstacles. And they could fail,” says Arcudi, author of the superhero graphic novel A God Somewhere.”  Superman wasn’t actually an underdog, neither was Batman. The foe’s golden age characters had to fight were also more real than Lex Luthor. For example, a theme in many GA books was fighting Hitler or the Japanese. The books were propaganda for America’s youth, but can we really argue against that? No. Especially when Captain America Comics #1 has Captain America punching Hitler. And really, who doesn’t love a good Captain America punching Hitler cover?

My point is, and I’ll say this again and again, parents! YOU ARE THE MOST POWERFUL INFLUENCE IN YOUR KIDS LIFE. Flex that power and stop blaming everyone else. If you allow your kid to read modern comics, fine, but they need to know these books are works of fiction. At the end of the day, your kid will listen to you, and they’ll turn out ok.

 
-Lauren

Versace and Archie; A match made in my fabulous dreams.

September 7, 2010

There is nothing I can comment or say, but I think it’s *awesome* that a high-end designer is digging the new gay character, Kevin, in the Archie universe.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-30/gay-archie-character-the-final-frontier

Oh and here’s the standard HATERS GONNA HATE/SIT THE FUCK DOWN-SHUT THE FUCK UP/BITCHES BE JEALOUS thing I always put in here for those of you who are still against fictional gay characters in comic books.

-Lauren

US Supreme Court + Video Games = controlled substance?

September 4, 2010

The Escapist magazine has a new video on Free Speech and Video Games. It’s actually a srs business video discussing the fact that California’s law preventing minors from purchasing video games with “violent conduct,” basically claiming that video games contain zero artistic value, and they “do harm” to minors. Go, watch it, then come back.
What, I’m not going to go on until you watch it.

Sorry, I can’t embed it, just click the link.

okay. This video is actually pretty important material. If video games can be censored for “harming children,” who are “clearly unable to make choices for themselves,” where does that leave the rest of pop culture material?

In the first place, if you are a minor, why do you have real purchasing power? Minors, those under the age of 18, generally speaking, can’t hold jobs. Without being able to hold a job, how do they have money of their own? Allowances? Parents, in my opinion, should be monitoring what their children are spending their money on, because there is no law saying you have to give a child an allowance. If your 12 year old is using his monthly allowance to purchase a violent video game, I think you should know this!! How is your 12 year old getting to the store? How are they coming home and playing that game without you, as a parent, knowing?? They don’t! They can’t! They’re CHILDREN.

So lets say your minor is 16 years old and is working at ShopRite. Or wherever. Sixteen, a whole two years younger than eighteen, is a world of difference. Yet, part of what I mentioned before still stands. How can you have no idea what kinds of entertainment your child is choosing? And, as a parent, isn’t it your responsibility to control or influence that in some way? Or decide that your child is indeed mature enough to play this game and be fully aware that they aren’t going to go out and blow people away because that’s what they do?

Beyond that point, in general employees at game shops will often advise parents of the content of a game if they know that the game is being purchased for a minor. Games also have a rating system from the ESRB. Games are rated Early childhood, Everyone, Everyone over the age of 10, Teen (13+), Mature, Adults Only, and Rating Pending. It’s not like this rating is obscure. It is denoted on the front of the game, and EXPLAINED on the back of the game. Parents who are too ignorant to see this shouldn’t be blaming the game for being violent, they should be blaming THEMSELVES for NOT SEEING the fact that the game CALLS ITSELF violent!

If games are going to be censored or controlled by the government, then what says that other forms of entertainment, such as movies, COMICS, books and television are not going to become targets of this kind of legislature? If games harm minors, who can’t make decisions for the good of themselves, then why don’t comics fall under that? Why are movies exempt? They are….for now. But if this follows through, it opens the door for censorship across all entertainment genres, and sets up a legislation that permits violation of the First Amendment of our Constitution. Which is definitely Bad News Bears.

Essentially, I don’t understand why this case is making it to the Supreme Court. It simply, logically, legally, makes no sense. If you’re interested in hearing more and/or helping the cause, please visit this site: www.theeca.com.

~Han

I found this on a Facebook update…

September 1, 2010

So clearly this is out of context. However, it is in context for this post!

” G4 TV’s
Abbie Heppe was very critical of the game, rating it a 2 out of 5 on
the grounds that the gameplay was “mediocre”, and stating that the
portrayal of Samus is “sexist,” insulting to female gamers and
inconsistent with the rest of the series.”

First, I don’t take G4 seriously. I’m not sure why Abbie Heppe finds Samus sexist, perhaps she could write us geeks a 5 page essay on how a strong, female lead in an action video game is sexist. I’ve played Metroid, and frankly this bitch kicks more ass than Mega Man or Snake. Her body armor is also really bad ass. Frankly you can’t even drool over her body most of the time, because she’s in that bulky armor. Samus is also one of the major (and one of the first) female protagonists in a video game. That’s pretty important, and I don’t find that to be sexist. Perhaps, Abbie, that you should blow the sexist horn on something else. Maybe Princess Peach. As a female I find it sexist that she is constantly abducted by a giant lizard-turtle hybrid, and always needs to be saved by a short, fat Italian plumber.

-Lauren