17 Jean Grey: How do you start with this one? An Alpha-level mutant with telekinetic and telepathic powers, who could rip apart all the X-Men at one time without breaking a sweat, and she has no clue about her powers. In the stories, Xavier (Professor X) is literally tapdancing around his dynamo as he plays checkers with Magneto. Once you realize that, all the X-Men comics, movies, and cartoons take on a whole new depth and color.
18 Hulk: A good man and a scientist hoping to find a way to speed up the healing of the human body gets into an accident. Now, every time he loses emotional control he turns green, becomes huge, inhumanly powerful, and indestructible. And, because he is the strongest creature in the Marvel Universe, the military wants him to experiment on. Which makes him a good quiet man being hunted because of what’s inside him.
19 Black Adam: Granted the powers of the Egyptian gods, he turns bad and is put away for centuries. When he comes out again he is confronted by Captain Marvel, who has been given the same powers. Only after being beaten many times does he try to take the path of redemption. Egyptian gods, good guy turned bad, working for good again. They are planning a movie in 2019 starring Dwayne Johnson. I’m excited!
20 Wolverine: A character that can regenerate from nearly anything. You can stab him in the heart, drown him, shoot him in the head, or try to rip his body apart piece by piece and he just heals , flexes his claws, and comes at you again. And then he’s angry, always angry. The movies have been great, bringing out a reason why he is always drinking and is happiest alone.
21 Ozymandias: The smartest man in the world according to The Watchmen, he is also phenomenally fast. What I like best about this guy is that he isn’t your traditional smart, memorizing things and quoting people. This guy is really intelligent, easily outmaneuvering a being so powerful he can go anywhere in the universe, create multiple versions of himself, and make life.
22 Beast: Quoting every philosopher, scientist, poet, and conqueror I’ve ever heard of, all while effortlessly doing gymnastics or lifting objects of hundreds of pounds. The athlete is not supposed to be an intellect, the intellect is not supposed to be an athlete, but this guy is pure both without the particular talents of an Iron Man or a Lex Luthor or the martial skills of Batman or Wolverine. He might be blue, but he’s everything humans are supposed to want to be.
23 Black Cat: Imagine a beautiful cat burglar. Now imagine her with the Captain America formula. In the comics she teamed up with Spider-Man more often than not, half the time flirting, half the time being unethical, and some of the time helping out (she can flirt and be unethical at the same time, she actually prefers it).
One of the reasons I’ve never been able to place comic book heroes in the science fiction or the fantasy genres has been common sense. Science fiction might take the idea of faster-than-light travel and run with it, but there is usually some explanation as to why they use it (Star Trek says you are traveling through subspace, Stargate has gates all over the galaxy that create artificial wormholes, Andromeda makes use of string theory and the gravity wells of stars to navigate). They might use alternate dimensions, or alternate realities, but always there is some reason.
But not with comic heroes. The one that first bothered me was Superman. If comic heroes are living in the same universe we are in, but just with superheroes, then they should follow the same rules as we have to. So, when we learn that Superman’s body is so dense that a single strand of his hair can lift a ton it should seem a little odd that his body is also so light that he can fly. Not jump, like the Hulk for instance, he can fly. Alien physiology or no, that just doesn’t make sense in our universe.
It’s also frustrating when they add things, but I can live with that. When Wolverine was introduced in the 1970s he was paired with Captain America on occasion. Obviously he had never been in the World War II Captain America comics, so he had to be added retroactively. I’ll not get upset with anyone for not seeing ahead 25 or 30 years. Nor will I be upset if science one day concludes that all the extra dimensions (there are probably 11 you know) are too small for interstellar travel. They could never have known that when Star Trek first came out in 1966, and though things are going that way now we still aren’t sure.
I have a miniatures collection. It consists of Star Wars Force wielders like Sith, Jedi, and the occasional independent. I also have Marvel and DC comics figures; no minions just the heroes and villains themselves. I plan to get some of the Tolkiens, too – dragons, wizards, and stuff like that. If they make miniatures for Dune, or Matrix, even Dark Angel, Buffy, or Highlander, I’ll probably grab them as well. After all I’m a writer of fiction, and though my problem with any writing is the occasional run-on sentence, my biggest flaw in creating stories is describing characters. I need them as a reminder that it’s more interesting to know what they look like.
When I write, I need to be alone. Beethoven can be good for the concentration, or a medley of fun songs can help with a few ideas or to get me in a fun mood. No people though – nobody I have to pay attention to while I’m trying to sync up characters, plot, and entertainment. Well, people are good. They can be comforting and nurturing; like little voices in my head pushing me on to something deeper or more intricate. Miniatures are good for that. They are my silent friends.
So, the “Grandmaster of Science Fiction”. I’ve read his stuff. His descriptions of technology are generally lacking (though the positronic brain idea is pretty cool) and his character development seems nonexistent. I recently read The Foundation, which focuses on one character alone, and realized I knew nothing about Mr. Hari Seldon apart from the facts that he was uncertain about his ideas but very intent on exploring them fully. He had a wife, an adopted son, his entire family, and yet nothing was more than touched on. Honestly, if I wanted either I would have better luck with any of the Star Wars writers, and though good none of them have been given the same accolades Isaac Asimov.
Second were two intriguing and even at the time unusual notions. One was the idea that robots might be nothing but a benefit to humans. It is easy to ride the bandwagon and go the other way. Since we first started developing machines with basic reasoning skills there has been science fiction about the machines taking over and killing us – the Terminator and Battlestar Galactica franchises have only been the most successful at the concept. Asimov believed that robots were both inevitable and would help us, and in fact his robots are often more beneficial to mankind than the humans in his stories. With his original three laws concept (Robots cannot hurt humans, robots must obey humans as long as it does not involve harming humans, and robots must protect themselves unless doing so might harm humans) he made the idea of robots rebelling and exterminating us seem a little ridiculous.
The second idea is bizarre, fascinating, and possibly even feasible. It is the idea that the future on a large scale can be predicted. Asimov called his theoretical science “psychohistory”, but it boils down to a very scientific approach. Knowing where a group began, how it developed, and its current direction, psychohistory theorizes that it can guess the group’s future accurately. More than that, it might be able to guide the direction. So, for instance, the creator of psychohistory realizes that the human empire he is a part of can’t be saved but begins a plan that will greatly reduce the time of chaos between it and the next galactic government.
I admit to being a little behind, but I just watched Agents of Shield last night. I was already impressed with the interwoven plots of the Avengers movies, but this, timed with the aftermath of The Winter Soldier, was amazing. I can’t wait to see what they do next, and I am getting more and more excited about what they might try with their resources, Lucas’ mind, and … Star Wars – I shudder to think.
Lucas changed that. By writing a story and dividing it into three acts he had a ready-made sequel before his first one hit the theaters. Consistency was there, the plots were in no way forced. The original Star Wars trilogy amazed from episodes 4-6. After him, sequels were sometimes planned in advance, but more often room was made for them when writing a first movie. Sure, one shot wonders were still made with a follow-up sequel later. Indiana Jones can be watched 1-2-3 as easily as 3-2-1, but can you imagine the Matrix trilogy working like that? Or how about the new trend in Young Adult movies – Harry Potter/Divergent/Hunger Games/Maze Runner?
Then we get to the latest improvement in the cinematic experience; a series of four franchises all working in concert with the Avengers movies. They are adding in one T.V. series and at least one new franchise (Ant-Man) that I know of, and who can be certain of how Guardians of the Galaxy will fit into all this in the future. What Disney has done over the last few years has been something I would have thought to be an impossible task of contracting egos, manipulating scripts, and avoiding problems. Yet they have in producing at least two worthwhile movies each year for awhile now. Considering where we were for the nearly hundred years before Lucas, what movies have accomplished in the last forty years is amazing, and in the last ten absolutely miraculous. I hope the Star Wars Franchise again leads the way beginning in December of 2015.
I have ranted about comics, science fiction, fantasy, and even the occasional historical fiction (Don’t get me started on King Arthur!) during my blogging career. But tonight I would like to pose a simple question. What historical period would you like to see stories about? I realize that’s kind of a blanket statement, after all we already have over 40,000 years of history, and 10,000 of that has been with “civilization”. So, to help a little I’ll throw out a few options.
I think everyone who recognizes Frank Herbert will know Dune and its universe, which was synonymous with him. Six books, and a saga left unfinished that was and continues to be fleshed out by his son. But Frank wrote a great deal about Dune, but he wrote many other books. I’m reading The Green Brain, he also four books about life forms on a planet settled by humans (Destination: Void), and dozens of other stories about Native Americans, genetic tampering, and the power of nature in general. I’ve never been much for Herbert’s writing style, but his respect for the living earth and his understanding of ecosystems is a little overwhelming.
What impresses me about Herbert is simple. Arthur C. Clarke was a brilliant man who came up with ingenious ideas about star travel, time, and God. Asimov gave us stories about robots and a new technology to foretell the future. A dozen other Sci Fi writers have created their own niches in the genre, but Herbert did it by focusing on a respect for nature. Every story touched on some aspect of it. Of course to read Dune is to be familiar with every aspect of the subject – but he went into so much greater depth in his other works. Maybe not as brilliant as the two grandmasters of science fiction, probably not as interesting in his plots. His characters have depth, more so than Clarke’s, but they are not much fun to read about. What he did have was a singular vision of the future and the present and he used his imagination and his knowledge in novels to spread that vision to science fictions readers througout the world.
I have made a point of reading all of the Dune novels so far, and collecting all the other stories he published. The technology is generally not that interesting (apart from their form of space travel) and even the theme of the destined hero is not done as well as it might be. What attracts me are his insights on all aspects of a planet’s natural workings and his thoughts on genetics, politics, and even religion. When I read other science fiction writers I am reading intelligent men who found subjects that an audience might find appealing. When I read Herbert, it is a man who had an overwhelming passion and would not have cared if his following had never exceeded dozens. Integrity like that I can get behind, the writing doesn’t have to be as good, the plots and characters don’t need to be as strong. Reading Herbert is worth it.
Fantasy has had so many outlets over the last few decades with Star Wars, Narnia, and Tolkien and with comics from Marvel, DC, and several independent stories like Conan, R.I.P.D. and Watchmen.
I watched Interstellar already impressed with Nolan’s body of work (see a few weeks ago), and his storytelling just as good if not better than I saw in the Batman movies and Inception. In those movies the characters have a vitality and depth that goes beyond being interesting, you understand everything about them.
I suppose this blog will make me a ranter, but I watched the movie named above in silence. It occurred to me, if the Ice Age was a time when mankind’s very existence was in question how could there be massive cities built by large cities of them? Then I recalled, the earliest settlement is supposed to be Jericho and it is dated to 8,000 B.C.E. The great monuments of Egypt are traditionally dated to the third millennium before the Common Era. Even the most liberal scholars has never hazarded a guess much before 8,000. And of course the creme de la creme were the mammoths that did not survive until 10,000 B.C.E.
Do the inaccuracies detract from the stories? I suppose not. However, I think they are an opportunity lost. Howard once said that he had intentionally placed his hero in a period outside of history so that he could do what he wanted in his world without the need to conform with what was happening in real cultures and kingdoms. Our understanding of our past has exceeded his writing now, however, and working in that sort of a fantastical prehistory is no longer possible.
13 Jack Harkness: The immortal Jack, polysexual, fun-loving, lover of the Dr. Sure he started off as a time agent, but how many times did he save the world? He ran Torchwood, all the while flirting with any sentient male, female, human, insect, fish, or plant he came across. And to see how he dies, well, was heartbreaking and satisfying at the same time.
A few months ago, with the announcement that Gal Gadot would play Wonder Woman in the upcoming DC movie, discussion became very intense about the actress’ physique and her ability to play such a key figure in the universe. This will be the first real showing of the character (apart from an abortive t.v. show and a short) since the 1970s, so I have what I would consider a more important question: Is she going to be portrayed as a feminist hero or as a typical male hero with breasts and long hair?
For me, it would not be very pro-woman role, and for the general public it would be a missed opportunity to make the character more interesting. For me, good heroines have always been more complex than their counterparts. The reintroduction of Wonder Woman would be an excellent opportunity to bring that out.
I’ve noticed two intriguing trends over the last few years. First is the superhero tale. Of course the big story there is Marvel, every summer since the first Ironman movies the studio has dominated the cinema scene. Star Wars and DC comics are coming on, however, with episode 7 in 2015 and the promise of spin-offs coming soon thereafter and the Batman movies followed by Man of Steel and its sequel due out next summer. There are also mythological and fantasy heroes – the Titans, Immortals, Conan, Hercules, and so forth.
Second is the tendency toward Lovecraft’s views of the universe in dramas. Lovecraft, if you are unfamiliar with the name, was perhaps the father of modern horror. His stories stories revolved around another world filled with supernatural beings and ancient gods that were older than anything man had ever seen. It’s a neat universe to work from, and since he never really defined the extent of the universe, the nature of all its denizens, or even a backstory it has been used consistently since he developed his “Lovecraft Circle”, a group of writers who used each other’s ideas and borrowed heavily from Lovecraft. Robert Howard was probably the most famous of the group and he based his Conan stories on Lovecraft’s ideas. Many of the sword and sorcery novels take their cues from a similar starting point. As mentioned above horror writers have based many of their ideas off of his premises, Stephen King among many others.
More recently, however, Lovecraft’s ideas have went beyond strictly horror into more mainstream shows such as Charmed, Buffy, Angel, Supernatural, and various vampire shows and movies. It’s also been done more elegantly and interestingly than ever before.
The Japanese have their own otherworld, filled with all nature of monsters and godlike creatures. It isn’t quite what Lovecraft saw, but it is remarkably dark and similar to his vision. The Japanese also have their own heroes from their legends and mythology. Take for instance Yamato. Born into the imperial house, his stories involved the supernatural as well as battles with human villains. He also had a sidekick, a giant monk named Benkei who is famous in his own right.
Medichlorians. They are the key to the Star Wars universe. Roughly 3,000 and you can be trained as a Jedi, Sith, or in any of a number of other Force groups. Over 20,000 and you are a chosen one.
Bruce Lee might also be mentioned as a person simply destined to be exceptional, i.e. possessing great numbers of medichlorians. After all he is considered the greatest fighter of the twentieth century and mastered styles in less time than it takes most people to learn a dance, and had died at only 33 in a field of study where a person is normally not considered a master until they are in their 50s.
You see, at the core of Lucas’ story is the hero seeking his path/destiny in the Joseph Campbell tradition. But you can hardly claim that an untrained and untested boy (the classic hero according to Campbell) is destined to save the world or the galaxy without something specific going for him. In mythology, that something is descent from a god. In Star Wars there are no gods, so the fatherless Anakin has the medichlorians to act as his marker for greatness.
Walt Disney was rascist, and yet he created one of the most beloved children’s franchises in the world. J.F.K. was a notorious adulterer who led our nation through the Cuban Missile Crisis. Babe Ruth was a drunk and a womanizer whose contributions to baseball are felt to this day. None of these things were public knowledge in their lifetimes.
I watched Card’s Ender’s Game some time ago. I was impressed with his concepts of education, leadership, morality, and ethics there. Since then his various novels have all been highly recommended to me and I intend to follow through with them. His ability to make social, political, and ethical statements through his characters on the screen was stunning. I look forward to collecting everything he has written in science fiction so I can follow how he continues to develop those themes and statements. If he has as much to say about education in the books as I saw in the movie I think that every educator on the planet could learn a great deal from him. The same goes for leadership and generals and ethics and politicians. 
If I ever met Orson Scott Card in person I’m not certain how I would react. Would I shake his hand, jaw slack, and stumble over some statement of awe about his farsighted vision of the future, or would I be tempted to denounce him as a man with his moral blinders on? I don’t honestly know. I do know that when he puts pen to paper in his stories he makes social statements that are in the best traditions of science fiction. Orson Scott Card is a novelist, like Disney was an entertainer, Kennedy a leader, and Ruth a baseball player. Yes, he is a flawed human being. Yes, those flaws stem from an absolute reading of the Bible that lacks any knowledge about its history and context. But I do not believe that all he has created should be condemned because of this. Like a savant, his gifts should be appreciated even if his inadequacies cannot be overlooked. 
Last night I watched the series finale of one of Joss Whedon’s abortive follow-ups to Buffy and Angel. The series had started off with a great gimmick – technology that gives people different personalities and skills that are imprinted on their minds and then erased for each assignment. Between jobs and while these people are in a childlike state they live in a sanctuary.
-How does Alpha go from being the bane of everyone’s existence to one of the central characters in the resistance? How does Echo manage to care for him at all? What makes him so sensitive that he gives Echo such a beautiful parting gift?
This spring and summer we have Spider-Man, Captain America, X-Men, and Guardians of the Galaxy. Next summer promises to be even better with Avengers 2 anchoring and Star Wars Episode 7 in the fall. Sure we have romances, action, fantasy, sci fi, and comedies but the superhero movies are quickly becoming the blockbuster mainstays.
Shouldn’t they take on that title? An unloved movie called Hancock was set in a universe with two beings who were basically unstoppable. What is to stop them from being worshipped as gods. Who is to stop them from taking control of the planet. In The Watchmen, one being can control matter and the creation of life. With so much superiority over humans why doesn’t the character dominate us? Morality? At some point such a being stops thinking of himself as like human (as he should). As a Marvel villain once put it “Morality doesn’t even enter the picture.”
Or maybe we all want beings out there who are far beyond us, who control us, or maybe someone who could do but does not because it is a way to implicitly praise the superiority of the human species. I don’t know. Maybe I don’t want to.
For nearly forty years that galaxy “far, far away” has been an icon of Western civilization. I should know, I’ve studied every aspect of it – technological, spiritual, cultural, and its many diverse characters.
However, there is another major universe in Science Fiction/Fantasy, one that’s hardly been explored but which has as much potential as any of the above universes and more than some. It is a universe from which Dr. Who was tapped for a great deal of its information – that of Isaac Asimov. It’s true, several movies have been made from his library of stories – I, Robot and Bicentennial Man being the most widely known, with a dozen or so others made on low budgets or simply without the technology to bring them to life. With as much modifying and alteration to fit various limitations, it’s safe to say that his unified Robot, Galactic Empire, and Foundation universe has never really been brought to the big screen.
This is an age where the entire Marvel universe is being put into movies, with characters and themes interconnecting in a way previously not even seen in cartoons. What greater challenge, and how much braoder the reward, to bring to life a universe that spans thousands of years and contains hundreds of intriguing notions about humanity and our ability to adapt? How fascinating would it be to have a visual storyteller bring his characters to life and share it with billions of people?
1992 saw the launch of a series that never should have been. The X-Files was a Sci-Fi show that generally had no gadgets in it, it was a fantasy show that had two people trying to explain everything, one of whom was constantly towing the mainstream line. In fact, the critic of the two, one Dana Scully, was so close-minded you often wanted to strangle her. And there was no sex. By that I don’t mean there wasn’t at least one gratuitous scene every week, I mean none of the characters seemed to have a sex. Mulder watched porn, but it was more of a running gag than anything. Scully didn’t wear anything sensual. There was never the addition of a strikingly attractive woman to keep the audience interested (a la Star Trek). The two characters never even kissed while the show was running.
Buffy The Vampire Slayer shouldn’t have worked either, but it has its own cult following. Same with Angel (consider the premise, a gorgeous guy who can never be happy and who has to avoid any female relationships). Hercules had possibly the worst lead actor since the Original Star Trek and its scripts were often intentionally corny, yet it was on top of its time slot when it went off the air. They each had different outlooks, attacked societal concerns in different ways, poked fun of themselves and others through the sense of humor of their creators, but each were unique and in their own way priceless.
Something changed around 2000, though. The mainstream found a way to absorb many new elements of the subgenre while steering clear of those elements that gave the shows their edge. I suppose that is the way of big business t.v. and it admittedly it has produced intriguing television; Being Human comes to mind.
A few years ago scientists discovered what has since been called the aging gene. It’s a simple thing really, a gene that controls the rate at which our body matures from infancy to adolescence, adulthood, and beyond. From an evolutionary perspective, aging makes certain we cannot reproduce until we are developed enough to be responsible, while providing adults with a sense of urgency to have children while we are still capable.
However, its potential applications in science fiction are endless – beings with an aging gene that has been shut off or that works in reverse, stops or pauses at various points would make for interesting stories. And writers have not avoided it. The idea has been used once in recent memory, last year as a main part of the movie In Time, but its scope was so limited and the theme (while an excellent use of the science fiction genre) interfered with an exploration of the topic. Still, that it is the only movie based on such a cornucopic idea seems like a great waste. I know of several other ageless beings in science fiction, presumably who also had deactivated aging genes. In order of appearance they are Flint in the Original Series of Star Trek, Vandal Savage of DC comics, Apocalypse from Marvel, and the main characters of the Highlander franchise. But these, too, are limited in their scope. Flint leaves Earth in search of death and love. Vandal Savage makes for an interesting villain against Superman because he has lived long enough that he has learned to predict threats to his mortality and has developed enough wealth, power, and influence to have his hands in anything he chooses. Apocalypse is perhaps the most interesting being of all. Because of his condition he has developed a sense of separation from the human race. Using foreign technology he stumbled upon, he periodically tests our species to verify its continuing right to exist. The concept behind the original Highlander is intriguing, but the movie only touched on the concept’s true potential and each sequel simply reinvented the same universe. The series made some use of what could be done, but was so focused on morality, life-and-death swordplay, and simple plots that there was no underlying exploration of the concept of agelessness.
Then there are the rare occasions where the issue is skirted entirely. My single complaint about Battlestar Galactica is that we are given nothing about the Final Five’s perspectives on the last few thousand years. Or Avatar, where the planet itself is aware and ancient beyond reckoning. Two-way communication with that entity would be incredible. I truly hope that is an aspect that is explored in some of the coming movies.
I have mentioned the physical manifestation of energy of Force users in the past, the really neat stuff that gets people’s attention. But that, as with martial arts, is only a small portion of the whole. Another aspect of Force users, something that gives them serious advantages in their dealings with other beings, are their superior senses. And again, the origins of that can be found in the martial arts.
Advanced students can focus these abilities at will. In Star Wars, the senses of sight, sound, and smell are so highly developed among Force Practitioners that they are able to use Farsight and Force Sight, they can feel what is happening a great distance away and they can tell if a person is good or bad, happy or sad, open or cryptic on sight. Precognizance, the ability to anticipate actions before they occur, is often a final level of achievement for martial artists. Force users have it, too. One could suppose Yoda’s ability to sense future events is a huge extension of that gift.
It is also believed that focusing the mind on one simple, purely physical goal can also enhance the body’s natural ability. In the Star Wars universe speed, jumping, strength, and scream can all be enhanced with the Force to levels beyond anything the human body could be capable of. Instead of moving slightly faster than normal, they can move several times faster. An enhanced vertical leap becomes the grace to jump stories. Additional pounds become multiples of their body weight. A scream attack changes from something painful to the ears to a gale wind.
King Arthur. The phrase conjures images of fair maidens, brave knights, chivalry, and twelfth century armaments. The fact is that everyone’s favorite British king lived in the fifth century. He probably had hand-me-down armor, sword, and shield. He may not have spoken Latin, but he knew enough about the past to respect Rome. His life was hard, consisting of poor hygiene, bad diet, and battles as a part of everyday life. 
Tristan and Isolde is technically not an Arthurian film. The story itself is mythological and involves a dragon. Still, the movie is set in the ancient world, and of course Tristan, Isolde, and Mark – or rather Drust, Iseult, and March, are considered Arthurian characters. Though the storyline strays badly from the legend itself, the movie has the gritty, bloody feel of the period much like King Arthur.
First Knight. Where to start. The machine which brings Lancelot to Arthur’s attention? The twelfth century armaments? The plot twist that Meleagant was once a member of the Round Table? That stupid theme about the man with no fear (no warrior worth his weapon is afraid to die, but fear is what keeps a person sharp on the battlefield)? It isn’t even a good adaptation of the famous poem “Le Chevalier de la Charrette” on which it was based with the absence of the intriguing character Bademagus and the minimization of Kay.
With the main cast of Episode 7 now decided, talk has been focused on the placement of the movie in relation to the original trilogy, the story-lines that will be followed, and the nature of the primary antagonist. I won’t bother adding my own voice to the mass because so much has already been said and there are now so many ways the series can go.
In the Star Wars universe, the channeling of impact is magnified to a Force Push and Force Pull which can be effective from many meters away. Both light and dark sides (Ashla and Bogan) can use this application, or the more difficult technique of articulately moving objects – for instance Luke’s X-Wing on Dagobah, C-3PO among the Ewoks, or Amidala’s food during her dinner with Anakin. 
Luke also uses lightning, though he controls it so that it can be used for non-lethal purposes; he calls his version of the technique Green Lightning. Similarly, the body’s energy can be used to heal persons by correcting the patient’s energy flows with subtle changes to their energy lines. Many Jedi are known as healers, and most have the limited ability to heal themselves and others. Considering the delicacy involved and the giving nature of the technique, it’s no surprise the Sith don’t normally have this ability unless they were first trained as a Jedi and only converted later.
The passed few weeks I have been comparing DC and Marvel characters to demonstrate how making the DC versions so overwhelmingly strong/durable/fast/magical that they have lost a key element in making them more interesting characters. I had planned on writing another blog, between Superman and Thor, but it would only belabor the point. One more comparison is all that’s needed; one of sames.
That seems to be where the comparison ends. The DC Hercules is a flat character. As in the myths he generally follows a cycle of crime, punishment, and redemption. The writers have tried to make storylines about him interesting, but his character never develops beyond those three familiar activities.
Early on in this series of comparisons a reader commented that Superman and Batman would always be her favorite, that she preferred her heroes to be super. And I admit, there is something appealing about idolizing an incorruptible individual that could never have anything to fear from we mortals, especially in a world without incorruptible public figures or super-people. I find myself wishing for that too, and I find myself very interested in what DC is attempting right now because I want to see Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
In the previous two comparisons I have started with a Marvel character and tried to find a DC equivalent. This week I thought I would start with a DC character – Batman. His original, and primary, quality is that he is an independent detective. Batman also happens to be the most interesting character in the DC pantheon for me. But, by right of his detecting quality, the closest character to be found in the Marvel universe is The Punisher.
So, again to the comparison. Batman was first seen in 1939. He is one of the most intelligent humans in the DC universe, comparable to Lex Luthor. He is rich, too. He has an endless supply of money to invest in gadgets and travel. Batman is also the most accomplished martial artist in the DC universe, having learned and excelled at nearly every form of combat in existence. Add to that he keeps his body at the level of an Olympic athlete and he is nearly unbeatable to any human he comes up against. He has also worked to master nearly every science known to man, including interrogation and escapology, and is both quick-witted and thinks ahead. This means that his utility belt allows him to beat even alien and superior opponents. He is mentally tough, too, able to withstand tremendous levels of pain or the mental attacks of telepaths.
The Punisher was first introduced in 1974. Though possessing above average intelligence he is about as close to Bruce Wayne as a class valedictorian would be to Stephen Hawking. He has access to money, but this is limited to the cash he collects from the criminals he hunts. Not that his income has ever hampered his access to weapons or tools, but then again I don’t see a specially designed suit worth millions in his future. He also possesses a high level of physical fitness and specialized military training, though nothing like Batman. Along the way he has learned mission-specific abilities such as acting and has the same level of pain tolerance and mental strength as his counterpart.
This week I would like to compare two more primary characters of the Marvel and DC universes, the redoubtable Professor Charles Xavier and the inimitable J’onn J’onzz. Both are considered among the greatest telepaths in their respective universes.
J’onn first appeared in 1955. He is an advanced telepath, able to connect with the entire planet at one time in order to locate someone. He is also an advanced shapeshifter, capable of changing his size and shape to anything he wishes. His density can be modified at will; he can phase in and out or become incredibly dense. He can use energy attacks, fly, turn invisible, has x-Ray vision, can create force fields, and has strength, durability, and endurance to match Superman. He was at one point weakened by fire, but now only certain types of psychic fires have any impact on him.
As with Wally, J’onn’s powers are so far beyond human it is difficult to imagine a worthy adversary for him. He also has no personality wrinkles. J’onn is either separated from his people or the last of his kind (depending on the era his story is told in), but no attempt has ever been made to explore that aspect of his personality. He is another flat character from the DC pantheon of pseudo-gods.
Professor X is powerful, and even more so with the support of his X-Men. But he is not all-powerful. He is vulnerable to the most basic attacks; his wheelchair can be tipped over to leave him prone. He cannot outfight someone with even a minimal knowledge of streetfighting, either. His crippled state works perfectly for a character whose goal is to peacefully champion mutant rights. It makes him interesting, too. It just doesn’t make him a superhuman hero.
On many occasions I have mentioned my preference for the Marvel universe over the DC. I thought perhaps a point by point comparison might demonstrate this best. This week, the unaging and immediately healing Wolverine and the unaging and immediately healing Wally West (The Flash).
Wally West was first created in 1960, his abilities include not only healing and a lack of aging, but also speed. That’s actually an understatement. The DC universe has what it calls a speed factor, something that controls all speed in the universe. Speed Factor gave Wally speed beyond all measure. He has been to the beginning of time and back. He has outrun death. He has moved half a million people 35 miles in the 100 picoseconds after a nuclear explosion.
Wally’s abilities make him almost boring. He can’t be hit except by luck and if he is moving at speed the strike will be harmless. If he is rendered unconscious the only way to stop him is to kill him before he wakes up as his speed makes him unholdable as well. I cannot think of a reasonable opponent for him apart from someone intelligent enough to kill him before he knows someone is after him.
Why aren’t there more movies like Watchmen? It has realistic portrayals of the psychology behind being a superhero, complex characters, ev en superheroes who generally don’t have superpowers. The Comedian aged slowly and Ozymandias moved quicker than everyone else. Extraordinary yes, but nothing like their counterparts Wolverine or The Flash. And Dr. Manhattan? He has very original origins and powers. It was also very nice to see the most powerful individual in a movie not dominating the activities of the others.
But that’s right back to the psychology. Our sports heroes think they are something special and treat women like they are part of the perks of being good at what they do. It only makes sense that someone like the Comedian would have that attitude as well. Silk Spectre might have been one of the great heroes for many years, but as a retired person she was pressured into a standard gender role and naturally hated having her independence stripped from her. Silhouette was a public figure, which made her open homosexuality a target. There is mention made of at least one superhero who has gone insane, too; that is a perfectly normal reaction given what these people do and how they do it. Ozymandias had been a vigilante for years before he went public. He had gotten used to making up the rules as he needed to. He was also intelligent enough to disguise his activities so that he wasn’t labeled insane and didn’t become a public target. The sequence of events he sets in place, of killing millions to save billions, is something a madman or vigilante human might think was the right move, but persons with a socially acceptable respect for life would never consider it. That any of the other heroes can even consider Ozymandias might be right speaks to the consistency of that thinking.
Complexity made for an interesting feature as well in the movie. A god plagued by doubts and regrets who tells other characters what is going to happen even as he tries to understand what he must do. Two heroes finding the line between doing the right thing and vigilantism as they fall in love. A guy who finds dark humor in the world around him and has little respect for any individual but tries to save the planet from chaos at the cost of his own life. Even the book the first Night Owl wrote made for better dimension; superheroes contemplating the meaning and importance of superheroes to their society.
We are all going a little crazy over the developing Star Wars t.v. shows, movies, and speculation in general. A Boba Fett movie, a special season to finish off animated Clone Wars, another animated Star Wars show, a live-action show, and of course endless articles about Episode 7 and beyond keep the fan constantly buzzing with excitement.
Then there are masters, people whose abilities with ki are such that they can not only focus it to an even greater degree but they can control where it is used. Someone with this ability can break the last board or brick in a stack (erroneously called Dim Mak in Bloodsport), or damage an organ without leaving a bruise at the point of contact. There are even legends of grandmasters capable of killing with barely a touch or no contact at all.
There are other aspects of the martial arts that are exaggerated in Star Wars as well. Martial combat and meditation eventually brings a clarity that borders on precognition, though nowhere near what Yoda, Sidious, and their cronies manage. For many years after the body begins to decline the understanding of martial arts that has been developed more than makes up for what is lost. However, generally fighters in their eighties and older are not the best fighters as they are in the Star Wars universe.
This week I thought I might write about some female characters out of the media, from mythology to more recent movies. I don’t know that I would call them ideal feminine heroes, but I do know that they all have at least one excellent heroic quality; they don’t let their egos get in the way.
Cassandra is another one of the Greeks that seems very much apart. She was born with a perfect clarity regarding the future, and the curse of never being believed. She could have used her gift for money or to change world events. But she understood those things to be distractions from what really mattered. Instead, she did what she could to save her family; the royal house of Troy. Now the fact that she didn’t save them is not her fault. There was that curse. Nor is the fact that she could not think of a clever way of using the curse to her advantage. I would call her lack of creativity more of a tragic quality.
Finally, I’d like to mention Willow in Buffy. O.K. yeah, she is shy and lacks confidence. She is also the most powerful human in the Buffyverse (and do not mess with anyone she is in love with!). Even after she comes to a full realization of her powers, her personality never really changes. She is a nice girl, supportive of others. Buffy can have center stage, Willow doesn’t need it. One gets the distinct impression that Willow is delighted that she can help her friend in her destiny, and is grateful that she doesn’t have one of her own.
Hyborian Age. The word is barely in the American lexicon but represents the foundations for the sword and sorcery genre. It was a term coined by Robert Howard in the 1930s. He used it to describe the fictional historical period his most famous character, Conan, inhabited. He defined it as the period after the fall of Atlantis and before the Indo-European invasions. Later writers have specified his words as a period sometime after 20,000 B.C.E. and before 9500. What Howard was after was a period of history we didn’t know much about so that he could give it the history he wanted.
To be blunt, though reading about a period without any preconceived notions provides a good place for letting an imagination centering around the supernatural to flourish, not having some limitations in the end leaves any creative enterprise without structure. Small children can’t grasp the concept of kryptonite, untrained youths won’t understand that Superman is a solar hero. Without those foundations, the defender of truth, justice, and the American way is boring. Without any boundaries of magic, logic, or science, so is Conan’s ‘Hyborian Age’.
I have a proposition. Instead of yet another Conan movie/book/comic with an oversized sword and two-dimensional female characters, why doesn’t Hollywood try something a little more interesting? How about a clever, muscular, amoral man running around the world in the last years of the ice age trying to use the tech of the time to get the girl and win as much money as he can. We might not generate an iconic figure that way, but the movie would have some serious entertainment value. Imagine how a loner coming upon a primitive Eleusian Mystery might react. Or how he might respond to a sacrifice? Imagine his perceptions of daily life versus the perceptions of a clan fully indoctrinated in their culture. A documentary, drama, or even comedy would be great vehicles for this kind of story
Pacific Rim is an interesting combination of several genres that have never been readily accepted by the American public; oversized monsters called Kaiju have been a part of Japanese entertainment for decades (Godzilla among them). Jaegers are a common name for very large robots. The movie also has elements of disaster films. Del Toro has bluntly stated that his creation is about overcoming differences of sex, race, and even prejudgment. All of them are great and nicely meshed into a seamless story. The director even sidestepped making it look like a war-glorifying film by giving ranks that belong more in a Western than a military film. But what made the movie intriguing for me was the concept of the Matter Bridge.
The Matter Bridge is not a new concept. I remember hearing of it first with The One, where two policemen patrol a “multiverse” where every person may have a counterpart in every other universe. The television programs Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis both also used matter bridges for various purposes. But the concept was always the same there; the cast was introduced to their counterparts from another dimension/reality.
It’s also a feasible. Recently, scientists have discovered that there may be Matter Bridges throughout the universe. They are discovering an increasing amount of evidence that dark matter may serve as a type of connector for the universe, helping to keep it tied together and structured even as the galaxies expand exponentially. According to the theory, Matter Bridges are composed of this dark matter. It is possible that they span not only galaxies but (perhaps) work on the smaller scale of solar systems as well. And, if there are other universes or dimensions (a big if), then it stands to reason the dark matter and therefore Matter Bridges would connect them together as well.
A fan or not, it’s hard to get around the fact that Middle Earth is a font for blockbuster movies. There have been five so far, each installment getting an extended version, and people flock to watch the movies and buy the videos. And why wouldn’t they? With wizards capable of unique and powerful magics, bizarre and neat looking monsters, elves capable of superhuman feats, and even humans wading into these fantastic tales, the stories seem to have something for everyone.
Perhaps Tolkien was a master at making the average person look important. Maybe the personal aspect of the hobbits’ characters allowed him to generate a much greater feeling of closeness to them than we might otherwise have felt. But the fact is that hobbits make Middle Earth work. They are the only characters to be trusted with the ring. They hide it, they travel with it, they destroy it. They make the trip to Moria possible, they bring the Ents into the war against Sauron. They bring the human/elf/human trio into Rohan where they save the king and protect its people from invasion. One saves the Gondor seneschal’s son. Others are better fighters, better strategists, better speakers, but without the hobbits nothing happens.
Perhaps that is one more layer of Tolkien’s Middle Earth. That, for him, the hero isn’t necessarily the man who has volunteered and trained to serve his country who is the real hero. Instead it’s the person thrust into a role he isn’t bred or trained for who manages anyway. I always like to keep in mind that he and his three close friends were drafted into World War I, a role none of them were ready for, and only Tolkien survived. Maybe, just maybe, the Middle Earth stories originated as his way of saluting their sacrifice, of recognizing what they could have been, and of bringing attention to the significance of their lives. In that way, I think he immortalized them all.
Last week I spoke about the development of the female hero from a masculinized woman into a woman who is allowed to retain her normal social roles. This week I would like to focus on the woman’s contribution to adventures. If women were not traditionally the heroes in the classical sense then certainly they had other roles beyond being the prize or the damsel in distress.
Medea and Niniane, too, guide and protect their respective heroes. Medea advises Jason on how to deal with the fire-breathing bulls her father would have killed him with. She also arranges for the Argonauts’ safe journey from Colchis by killing her brother and leaving his cut up pieces in the sea to be picked up. Niniane serves as a useful advisor to Arthur in the latter part of his reign, helping him with his decisions and later arranging for his transport to Avalon for healing.
I’ve chosen these two characters intentionally, they are among the most notorious people in myth and legend for the perception of them as foolish or at least lacking foresight. But for women such qualities are o.k., because that’s all they can do.
Wonder Woman, Batgirl, Supergirl, Black Cat, Sue Storm, and Jean Grey. Your typical female superheroes, right? Not so much. I did a quick search of my library and on the internet and learned a very interesting fact; there are only three superheroines in the legends and myths – Atalanta, Caenis, and a warrior from the Mahabharata. Atalanta and the Mahabharata heroine refused to marry, and when they were finally forced to both women lost their martial abilities. Caenis was raped by a god and asked in return to be made a man. Caenis, or Caeneus, is a good symbol for all three women. To be considered a superhero, a woman traditionally had to give up being a woman altogether.
Not so with the comic book genre. Wonder Woman was created in 1942, and in that very same issue she fell in love with Steve Trevor. The feelings were returned, and the couple have carried on a romantic relationship. In the 1960s and 1970s the Invisible Woman and Jean Grey were similarly able to have marriages, with both women eventually marrying. Interestingly, in all three cases the women were more powerful than their mates.
That a woman could be more powerful than her man would have been unthinkable up until the last few decades. In our society, the thought that a woman could be better, at anything, than a man continues to be an issue. I just watched Hancock again, and there is a scene where Charlize Theron asks her husband to open a bottle she is having trouble with. It’s silly, and I laughed at the irony. But the scene is so honest it’s also frightening.
Just as the hero is consistently representative of the dominant culture group, so too his enemies tend to have the same characteristics. In the ancient past they were a rationalization of the conquered peoples. The giants among the Norse, the Amazons among the Greeks, and the various little people of the British Isles were all the representations of the conquered in common memory. Tiamat among the Mesopotamians and the Titans of Greek myth were symbols of the religions they had overthrown. In all these cases, creating hero myths was a means of simplifying conquests into a simple equation of good and evil for future generations.
At the dawn of the historical period the role of the hero was adjusted from a means of assuaging guilt into a tool for the development of nationalism. As such, characters such as William Wallace, Yoshitsune, and Roland now fought real people that the culture group already viewed as enemies. So, King Arthur may have fought only Britons in his lifetime, but with the rise of this new form of hero he became a British symbol in their fight against the English. After 1136, the English adopted him as their hero and used him to demonstrate their superiority over all of Britain and the continent.
The newspaper became a powerful instrument in the development of nationalism with the widespread development of reading in the nineteenth century; Bismarck would employ it to unite all of Germany. But it wasn’t long before the hero had transformed again. Here in the United States that change came at the conclusion of the Civil War. At the time, the nation’s pop culture revolved around three types of heroes – Indian fighters, outlaw gunfighters and the lawmen who fought them (and were often not much more legal than the outlaws). These weren’t, in either case, figures of national importance or even individuals whose exploits were being used to foster a sense of nationalism. They were instead indications of American’s state of mind. Years of brainwashing had convinced our forefathers that the Indians were savages and so all activities surrounding them were clouded with that viewpoint. Indian fighters represented our ability to tame America. Likewise with the lawmen, whose purview was U.S. settlements.
And it was easy to associate many outlaws with a continuing rebellion against the north because several individuals, the James brothers among them, had fought for the south during the war. Outlaws could be seen as a rebellion against the civilizing of the west as well in their attacks on the railroads, banks, and stagecoaches that embodied that expanding civilization.
The intelligent invent things like microelectronics and the Internet right along with bombs and smaller weapons, their contributions vary with the environment. Machines are limited in morality and abilities by their creators. And although the wealthy are capable of great evils in our world, they are not all evil. 
As an historian, I understand that one of the best ways of understanding nearly any aspect of a society is to understand where it comes from. Take superheroes, for instance. Throughout the world they all have some basic features. Now I don’t propose to go all Joseph Campbell, but I do think there is a point to be made here.
Second item; throughout the world heroes neutralize and/or trick the bad guys. King Arthur decapitates Urien, his most difficult personal combat. Thor kills, as does Yoshitsune and Tametamo in Japan, Roland in France, Sigurd among the Norse, and Arjun in India. In more recent myth, our own frontiersmen, gunfighters, and lawmen killed Indians, outlaws, and lawmen. 
I recently read an article naming the X-Men as a forward-thinking comic because it had clearly been made with a minority in mind (first link below). They were initially intended to represent nerds and other outcasts in high school. They have evolved from that point. The clear delineation of Xavier and Magneto’s philosophies strongly resemble the approaches of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X, respectively. The point was also made that the scene where Iceman reveals his mutant abilities to his parents in X-Men 2 looked exactly like a “coming out”.
So, interesting thought. Say a historian, let’s call him Berlinghoff Rasmussen for fun, decides to travel back in time from 2500 to the present. Being well-versed in the problems of time travel, he puts his ship in a careful orbit to avoid so much as altering the movement of any objects in space. He gets planetside without the use of a ship so that there is no footprint. While studying us he eats his own food, always collects his own waste, makes sure no one even knows he is present. When he leaves, there is no evidence he was ever there for even the most paranoid person to follow. Then he goes home.
Cian Beirdd 