Chosen

Mark Millar is a difficult writer to start with because he is so god damn good. I could literally sit here and rave about every book he has written as i have loved almost all of them. It would be easy for me to simply suggest kick ass, wanted, civil war etc etc, but I want to try and show just how good , how versatile this man is. Although these (in particular for me kick ass) are so amazing, I want to show that this writer rarely outs a step wrong and deserves all of his creations to receive the wide spread acclaim that others such as kick ass and wanted have. My first book of choice is exactly that and is an example as to why Mark Millar is such a commodity these days in all types of media.

Chosen is the story of a boy who discovers that he is the second coming. It asks the question what we would do if we found out we were the second coming. How would we cope? How would our friends cope? What would our parents do? How would society cope?

The great thing about this book is it’s ingenuity and at the same time the sympathy you build for the characters. They act in a very human way if you can possibly imagine finding out such news.

However, it’s greatest ability is something that has become a god at: his ability to shock you, his ability to make you want to read the next issue I don’t think anyone will be disappointed with this book especially the ending that took me by complete surprise.

These days chosen is very difficult to hunt down which is a shame because it is one of Millar’s best and he doesn’t even need to use a single superhero in it. You should definitely pick this one up. Chosen is a true classic, that I still hope one day will see itself be created into a motion picture.

Anyway, though we’ll accept this little flaws. The next problem I had with the book is the idiotic story arc with Aunt May and Jameson’s father. This did not start in this issue (and in fact came to a crescendo here with them getting married) but that does not mean its good or plausible. Am I the only one who thought that Jameson (i.e. the one that Stan Lee wrote) was meant to have been in his sixties at the beginning of Spidey, or at least in his mid fifties. If this is true, after at least what is meant to have been ten years in comic book time with Peter Parker now being in his mid-late twenties, surely Jameson Jnr is close enough to May’s age already. I love Aunt May as much as the next person, but how long can Marvel have May survive and have the book realistic? I mean, Marvel seem to have Aunt May almost omnipotent: she is decrepit, she has been severely sick since the beginning of the book, and yet she seems as fit as a fiddle.

So, get over this terrible story arc and accept it. I had to and it unfortunately doesn’t look like it is going to die soon. Mind you, it wasn’t the worst thing in the world as we saw the return of Mary Jane at the end of the book and yes, it could be argued that the book succeeded in everyway it should have done: with putting MJ’s arrival at the end of the book, it has made me buy the next one and I will be buying the one after that.

Thus, not bad, not brilliant. The main feature was by no means the best part of the actual comic as I enjoyed Stan Lee’s return to the book with a mini story about Spidey going to a psychiatrist funny and what Spidey should be.

We will have to wait and see. Check back once issue 600 is released for my evaluation

A key examples that I am thinking about at the moment are both Captain America and Batman. The first I am going to discuss is Captain America. The death of Cap was a truly shocking event that made newspaper headlines as although Cap was no longer the Marvel Franchise player, in the actual comics he was the icon of hope and liberty. In many ways, Cap’s death saw Marvel as a company lead the characters down a much darker ambiguous path through the Dark Reign plot. But now, yet again, we are about to see him return. The book will no doubt make lots of money and as I said earlier I never think that the character should have died in the first place as the world being in this torrid state that it is at the moment needs a character like Cap to look up to. But the amount of rebirths and survivals etc we see in comics makes the medium feel less realistic. I know that we have to hold our belief as we are accepting a world where people have powers but still I think that once someone dies they should be dead.

Batman

Last year, the great Grant Morrison killed off the DC Franchise player in Batman. Since then, we have seen that the Batman will carry on regardless of whether Bruce Wayne is alive or not. At the moment I applaud this move by DC. In my opinion, I think that if a character dies, the best way to keep the book going is to pass the iconic character onto another as Dick Grayson has taken the Bat mantle. Furthermore, DC have released some excellent spin off Bat stories such as Red Robin that have taken characters down an incredible path that we may never have seen before. Now again, I am a big Bruce Wayne fan but in many ways would it not ruin things if he suddenly returned. What would happen with Dick now that he is Batman? Would he simply bow down to his teacher and re-emerge as Nightwing? Again, the original story would be good but the fact that us readers would have to accept that another ‘death’ meant little would be annoying.

Now, I would argue as a whole that before the recent story with Batman in DC, Marvel has been better at keeping its characters dead. The areas that I am going to be looking into are The Amazing Spider-man and the Ultimate series.

The Amazing Spider-man

When, Gwen Stacy died in The Amazing Spider-man in the early 70s, we saw the whole basis of Spidey and Peter Parker’s world change. Not just that, Gwen, with her father George, is one of the few characters to have remained dead. She may have come back as a clone but the original Gwen is dead with no sign of her coming back. To me, this is a sign that killing characters forever can actually work. Peter Parker evolved as a character as like when Uncle Ben died (another Spidey character never to return thank goodness), Spidey learnt more that with great power comes great responsibility. What is more, if Gwen had not died it is likely that Peter’s social life may have become stagnant because he would never have got together with Mary Jane and as much as I liked the character Gwen, we all know that the feisty red head is the love of his life, who brought an extra dimension to the Spider-man character. So, an example where Marvel was brave, where they killed off a character forever (it would seem) and the character prospered. However, Marvel could have been more brave with having the Green Goblin remain dead instead of bringing him back to life. Do not get me wrong, in my opinion the Green Goblin is one of if not Spidey’s greatest villain. However, surely then the Green Goblin’s legacy would have been greater if he had died in the most iconic battle he had with the webslinger. His return in my view could never live up to the death that he had.

Ultimate

For a long time in the Ultimate series, Marvel took the sentiment that I have echoed in this article: if a character dies in the ultimate universe, they are dead. End of. This was a great thing about the Ultimate universe as it gave the universe a more realistic slant. However, as of late this has changed and in my opinion not for the better. Ultimate X-Men brought the Beast back from the dead when there did not seem to be any realistic way in which the character could have survived. What is more, with the ongoing Ultimatum storyline, can we honestly believe that every character that has died in the Ultimate universe will remain dead? Ultimatum has left the Ultimate universe in a state of  flux which will probably be brought back by characters returning from the dead.

Therefore, I close this article by arguing that some writers should have the courage to have their character remain dead if they do kill them off. This will be more of a genuine shock to the reader instead of the collective groan that us readers would make when the huge plot line that apparently was going to change things forever was changed by the character surviving.

The Editing

As I have stated above, if you are not including the prose sections of Watchmen such as Under the Hood, the first hour give or take is almost perfect compared to the book in every way. the attack upon the Comedian, Rorschach’s inverstigation etc. But then we hit the middle. Now the loss of the squid to me was not necessarily a big problem. However, Synder and co had to adapt, they had to create a new subplot that could be bent around the main plot that was still woven into the ‘Watchmen’ film. Did they do this? No. Furthermore, important sub characters such as the newspaper seller are completly deleted. This makes no sense as they were away in which the Watchmen plot was built as the formula of the book was story, character developmen, story, character development etc etec. So without the newspaper seller et al, the film had the potential to become 2 and a bit hours of straight character development and thats what we get. What is more, the character development that is kept in the film is odd (again, this only really occurs in Act 2). The audience is ‘treated’ to the Silk Spectre/Nite Owl can he get it up saga in full whereas Rorschach’s origin chapter, chapter 6 (best chapter of the book in my opinion) is heavily cut down. When I first saw the film this bemused me as Rorschah is the fan favourite, he is in many ways the main character of the book as he narrates to us what occurs and was used as the main attraction to lure people in. So why cut his chapter down? Surely it would have made more sense to cut Silk Spectre and Nite Owl down not Rorschach? When it comes down to it, he is the character a lot of people came to see. After this we are thrown back into the forefront of the story but for people that have not read the book, it would seem as a whole, Synder had lost his audience. I am aware that this was the case because the majority of people who I know who did not read the book and went to see the film did not have a clue what was happening by this time. So, we’re left with a film that feels as if a huge gaping hole has being cut out of it which in all tense and purposes, it has.

Too Loyal to the text

This sounds an odd complaint and in any other comic book film I’d complain if it wasn’t so loyal but it’s loyalty (and as mentioned above it is only loyal to character development) is its downfall. Because ‘Watchmen’ the book is so rich a tapistry, it is impossible to cram everything into the film and therefore it needed to be redeveloped for the film. Again, Synder in some ways should be praised because his version is better than what a lot of other people had wished to create, but his genius is constrained by the paranoia that if he even took a few steps outside the box, the film would fall. If we look back at the film, certain charcaters development could have being chopped and moved around to make it more audience friendly as many people really did not know what was happening. Furthermore if you are not a comic book fan you want to be able to go to see a film that does not need homework before hand: you want a film that people can go to see and enjoy. Then, once they’ve watched it, draw people into the medium. But I don’t feel this was the case with ‘Watchmen’.

The key problem I have with the UK release of the blu ray is that it is the theatrical release. In my opinion, many of the problems will be solved with the extended version such as the plot getting back on the right track in act 2. But for some reason, the Brits don’t get that. A real shame.

‘Watchmen’, however is not all doom and gloom. I think that Synder, to a certain extent did the best he could and did a pretty good job at that. What is more, Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian and Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach embody the roles better than I think anyone expected. In particualar Haley who almost transforms into Rorschach his performance is that good.

The Film  is still good enough to buy and watch again and again and I believe if Alan Moore did watch the Watchmen (which is doubtful), I think he’d be happier than he expected. 

Anyway just some extra thoughts from me as to where wolverine went wrong.

When X-Men was first created, Stan based the two characters in question on Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Xavier being MLK and Mags, Malcolm X. Now, I would like to put forward the notion that Professor X is no where near the man (if he existed) that MLK was. Professor X in my view has one image for the public but the reader sees his true face. He argues that he wants to bring forth peace between mutant and humans but how does he try to do that? He assembles an army of ‘peacekeepers’. I’m sure every fascist country would refer to their secret police as ‘peacekeepers’. Furthermore, if Xavier was truly like MLK, surely he would have Wolverine stick claws into the seat he was sitting on, on the bus and refuse to move. Cyclops and Jean would try to convince people when they called them derogatory terms such as ‘Mutie’ through peaceful debate. No, Xavier sends them out to attack the people that have started riots etc. Now I know reading a book where Wolverine refused to move on a bus would be quite boring and therefore, the fighting element of X-Men is needed, but I believe the argument is still valid. If Xavier was the man he preaches he is, he would not condone any kind of violence. Consequently, this is why Magneto is more honest than Xavier: he may attack places even kill people but he accepts that this is who he is. he does not lie about it and believes that he is doing it for the greater purpose of creating a mutant commune. What is more, Xavier continues to lie about the way that he uses his power. This is illustrated in Ultimate X-Men after Magneto and the X-Men’s first battle. Now before this. Xavier has always said that he would not use his mind reading ability unless he had the permission of the person before hand. However, this is proven to be lies yet again as when the X-Men believe that they have beaten Magneto, he makes everyone think that Magneto is dead. What is more, he goes onto ‘rehabilitate’ Magnus by making him forget that he is a mutant, and an active one at that. Now surely this goes against everything he believes in? Furthermore, Xavier does not even tell S.H.I.E.L.D what he’s doing. Shouldn’t it be the police and the likes job to control criminals and if they did need the help, should they not have asked for it instead of it being forced upon them? I believe the answer to all of this is yes and therefore Xavier is actually worse than Magneto. Xavier says he won’t, but when it comes down to it, he does things that are in his best interest, not the worlds as he preaches.

Now, I’d like to comment on why I feel that if we had gone through what Magneto had gone through we would also feel the same anguish that he does whilst linking this to the Israeli-Palestine conflict. I would like to make it clear that I am not condoning what Magneto does, I am just saying that I can see why he does it. Magneto, like many of the Israelis was a man that suffered under the Nazis including being in an extermination camp. Many people after this atrocity felt ‘never again’. Now it is technically in my opinion other countries fault that the Israeli-Palestine conflict started and they are both as bad as each other. Both were ‘given’ the area in question and consequently both feel that they have a right to that land. What is more, as I mentioned earlier, after the inhumane attacks the Nazis had against the Jewish people, I believe that you can understand why they do not trust other people again. Now linking this with Magneto. When he sees the US considering Mutant registration laws and the like, this automatically reminds him of the horrors he witnessed under the Nazis and feels if he does not do anything, the same will happen again. Can anyone honestly say if they had been through what a character like Magneto had gone through, and they heard a similar thing begin to happen to their people in the same way that it had before, they would happily stand by and watch it happen. No of course not and consequently at the core of Magneto is the belief of ‘Never Again’. Therefore he is fighting for survival more than anything else. I would like to finally discuss the beginning of ultimatum where I believe the ‘never again’ theory can be seen in full. At the end of Ultimates 3, Magneto has lost both his children and the war begins. Again, as I have said if you had lost everything that Magneto had lost and then to top it off machines created by humans kill your children would you stand by? Magneto sees this as an attack against him and therefore must fight back in order to survive.

So I believe that this has illustrated that Magneto is no more a terrorist than he is a tortured soul, forced into doing the things he does because what he has witnessed.

They got a mastercard.

Priceless for him; worthless for her

In my opinion, Stan at the time, depicted Mary Jane as the gateway drug that many people believe that marijuana has a tendency to do. This argument can be backed up as in the drug issues, Harry can be seen taking pills. Harry’s drug use can be seen to be drugs such as ecstasy or LSD. Again, the gateway theory is that a person would start on a drug such as marijuana and work their way up to ecstasy and the like when they no longer feel that they are getting the buzz they want. I believe that if my theory that Mary Jane Watson was first used as a method to portray the dangers of drugs, I think it was a brilliant one. The drug issues were an amazing way of opening the eyes of people that did not think that drugs were bad. Stan Lee’s subtle depiction of marijuana illustrates the dangers that the drug possess.

So, am I barking up the wrong tree? Am I saying there is more to the Mary Jane/Harry Osborn split than there was? Whatever you may say, even if I am wrong, the drugs issues are the exact thing that comic books should be doing: raising awareness and addressing the problems of today’s society