I have been asked by DC--and have agreed--to write the introduction to the "Supergirl" trade paperback which will collect "Many Happy Returns."
This, of course, will call for some tact.
Fortunately I'm loaded with tact.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at February 21, 2003 05:53 PM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingAs you said before there's the bookend for the series.
The key is to be as sarcastic as you can without them realising
Well, you managed to make a jab at DC for not collecting Atlantis Chronicles in your intro to Aquaman: Time & Tide, as well as referring to leaving the Hulk due to "creative differences" in your afterword to Hulk: Beauty and the Behemoth.
On the other hand, in the words of Cordelia Chase: "Tact is just not saying true stuff."
Corey
This may qualify as the first time I buy a trade paperback solely for the introduction.
For some reason, I always like reading the introductions to TPBs. It's interesting to see the creators of the series, or a creator who was a fan of the series, say something about the series in prose. It sort of makes the book seem more important (which is why I'd volunteer personally to write an intro to a Young Justice TPB if I could, but I digress).
I'm surprised that this is going to require so much tact. I thought that you said you weren't bitter about the series ending. Maybe that was about some other series of yours that ended recently.
Peter, can you give me/us an idea as to when the "Many Happy Returns" trade paperback might be available?
I'm about to buy some books from Amazon.com and would like to add this trade paperback to the list, consolidating everything under one international shipping charge. But if it will be 4+ months before it's released I'll just go ahead now with my first order.
While I'm here ... I've never read much of your Hulk stuff, and would like to get started. Can anyone advise on what Hulk trade paperbacks cover the 'Pantheon' storyline(s)? I picked up one or two Hulk issues at the time and that plot really appealed to me, so I want to start there.
Thanks,
Brad
Brad asked:
"Can anyone advise on what Hulk trade paperbacks cover the 'Pantheon' storyline(s)?"
The Pantheon storyline ran from issues #379-426, and only one TPB collects multiple issues from that era: the Ghost of the Past TPB, collecting #397-400.
Corey
Sorry, for a minute I thought I was at another blog. ;)
Brad:
>>>But if it will be 4+ months before it's released I'll just go ahead now with my first order<<<
Earliest it could possibly ship would be June -- I've seen the DC catalog through May '03 and it's not solicited through then.
>>>Can anyone advise on what Hulk trade paperbacks cover the 'Pantheon' storyline(s)?<<<
'tain't one. In fact, there are ONLY two PAD Hulk TPs at all: FUTURE IMPERFECT, the 2-issue mini he did with Perez, and GROUND ZERO which features issues from the McFarlane run.
-B
Brian Hibbs:
"tain't one. In fact, there are ONLY two PAD Hulk TPs at all: FUTURE IMPERFECT, the 2-issue mini he did with Perez, and GROUND ZERO which features issues from the McFarlane run."
Not quite right, as I mention in my message above yours. In addition to GHOST OF THE PAST and the ones you mention, BEAUTY AND THE BEHEMOTH collects 5 PAD Hulk issues, and ONSLAUGHT BOOK FOUR collects 2 issues.
See PAD's Bibliography on this site for detail on all PAD trade paperback collections (in Appendix A, toward the bottom of the page).
Corey the bibliographer
Is that before or after dreaming up and scrapping the intro about Supergirl being cut down by paper-pushing bureacrats just when it was starting to pick up? :)
Just kidding. I'm sure whatever you write will make the TPB an item in itself.
Psst- PAD...
How about a new Superboy series? He's living the Kents in Smallville. Think high school, secret ID, "Green Acres"...
Please? :)
PAD,
What could be said that hasn't been re-hashed in this column before?
Yes, it's wrong that DC didn't do more to promote Supergirl. Yes, the decision, (IMHO) was rushed to cancel the book. But, look at it as being in the past, and concentrate on the projects that are coming: i)the FALLEN ANGEL comic book; ii) the next SIR APROPOS OF NOTHING novel; and iii) the next STAR TREK: NEW FRONTIER novel.
Onward and upward! (Geez, I'm starting to sound like Stan Lee!)
Hey PAD,
Just wanna let you know that I finally got the chance to read this arc, at least up to issue 78. And I read issues 75 till 78 at once, it really feels like a fresh start.It's really a shame to see Supergirl go.
That page with Kara trying to push the earth out of orbit still "kills me", man, I laughed, a lot the first time I saw it, and since Thursday (the day when I got the books) i've flipped through it several time, and the laughs just keep coming back.
Also got YJ 54 in this week, really anxious about the conclusion.
J
I have no doubt that a writer of PAD's talents can easily avoid the political minefields inherent in such a project. I look forward to reading it when it comes out.
Allright, that's great news, PAD! Will it be maybe 3 or 4 pages long? I think it'd be great to write it as long as that.
Corey:
>>>Not quite right, as I mention in my message above yours.<<<
Yep, you're right -- I forgot to type the phrase "in print" to modify the statement.
-B
Peter, as I know you peruse the Supergirl DCMB, I'm sure you're well aware of the anger (justified IMHO) behind the pre-mature cancellation of Supergirl. On another DC board, most readers who had read both the (much hyped) "Batman:Hush" and (not hyped at all)"Many Happy Returns" thought the Supergirl story better.
That being said, I have enough faith in you as a writer to know that if you send a few very subtle zingers DC's way on how the book was treated, you can be sure the die-hard readers will "get it" while the AOL/TimeWarner/DC execs responsible for Kara and Linda's axing may not.
Though they will continue to get my cash with "Fallen Angel".
It may require a bit opf tact, but not as much as if you were writting the into to Marv-vell (or however they spell it). Now THAT would reqire tact.
A double-dog 'Dare':
Just try and make it through this Affleck-in-tights flick
-BYLINE- CHRISTOPHER KELLY
-DATE- Fri, 14 Feb 2003 -SECTION- Star Time
-PAGE- 6
-CREDIT- Star-Telegram Film Critic
-SUBJECT- MOVIE REVIEW
I suppose it would be overstating things to call Daredevil the
worst movie ever made -- though it certainly felt that way while I
was watching it. I do think it's accurate to call it the worst
movie ever adapted from a comic book (and, no, I'm not forgetting
Howard the Duck). Because unlike even the worst comic book dreck,
Daredevil doesn't even try for integrity; it can't even pretend to
be a real movie.
The chintzy costumes, the half-baked visual scheme, certainly
the inane script -- every element of this movie is a sketch. The
movie lurches around, both literally (some of the editing and
camerawork is so confusing and disorienting that I had to look away
from the screen) and figuratively (one minute it's camp, the next
it's being played straight, the next it's striving for New Age
mystical poetry). By comparison, The Adventures of Pluto Nash is a
model of visual grace and storytelling coherence, and Swept Away
features some of the finest acting in film history.
How does one even begin to analyze a train wreck like this?
Let's start with the gruesome and cynical plot -- which follows how
Matt Murdock (Ben Affleck) becomes the eponymous superhero. As a
young boy Matt was blinded by an errant spray of hazardous waste (I
hate it when that happens). Then his father (David Keith) was
murdered for not throwing a boxing match (if I had a dollar for
every time that happened to me . . .). Though blind, Matt's sight
gets sort-of, kind-of restored when it rains -- a plot point that
writer-director Mark Steven Johnson doesn't bother to explain, or,
for that matter, even exploit in the course of the story. (However,
the rain sequences do periodically allow Johnson to make like he's
James Cameron circa The Abyss.)
All grown up and suddenly a hunk, Matt is a lawyer by day. When
we first see him, he's prosecuting a rape case; when the rapist is
acquitted, Matt puts on his Daredevil costume and kills him. This
plot deserves some kind of prize -- rarely is fascist vengeance
fantasy played with such complete sobriety.
Had this all been directed by, say, Russ Meyer or David Lynch --
directors who might have been attuned to Matt's sexual neuroses,
his fetish for a red leather costume, and his need to sleep in a
tub of water -- it might have been a grand, funny/sick joke. Had it
been directed by say, Oliver Stone, it might have turned into a
provocative political tract about the Bush administration's need to
play judge and jury to the world.
But as directed by Johnson, it is a big pile of gibberish. Some
scenes are presented in a matter-of-fact, essentially realist mode.
Others are presented with tongue so far in cheek that you might as
well be watching a Saturday Night Live skit. (When Matt meets his
love interest, played by Jennifer Garner, they suss one another out
by engaging in a full-scale kung-fu fight that stops the movie
cold; it's like the Bollywood version of The Matrix.)
It doesn't help that Affleck wanders through the movie looking
glum and bewildered -- and he still manages to give the best
performance in the film.
Daredevil is nothing more than a compendium of "Huh?" moments,
interrupted by scenes in which talented actors humiliate
themselves. When Michael Clarke Duncan -- as the crime lord
responsible for all the crime in New York City -- enters the
proceedings, the color scheme (which had been all dreary browns and
reds) suddenly turns gleaming silver and white; it's as if X-Men
director Bryan Singer stumbled upon the set one day and starting
fiddling with the lights.
Duncan's character hires Colin Farrell -- as a bad guy named
Bullseye, who kills people by tossing sharp objects at them -- to
destroy Daredevil. With his goatee, bald pate (his forehead
sporting a bull's-eye, no less -- oh, the wit!) and his
mincing/snarling burlesque act, Farrell looks like he's been
spending a little too much time watching old Mickey Rourke films.
After about an hour of this, I pretty much gave up -- and I
spent the remaining 40 minutes trying to keep my jaw from dropping
too far. Considering international audiences' seemingly insatiable
appetite for watching grown men in leather costumes fight with one
another, this movie might very well be a hit. That doesn't make it
good, but credit where credit is due: Daredevil can hardly be
called a "movie," but it turns aiming for the lowest common
denominator into an art form.
Daredevil No stars
Director: Mark Steven Johnson
Stars: Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner
Length: 103 min.
Rated: PG-13 (violence, sexual content)
Christopher Kelly, (817) 390-7032 cmkelly@star-telegram.com
In a world where comic book movies include not only "Howard the Duck," but "The Return of Swamp Thing," "Judge Dredd," "Captain America," "Fantastic Four," "The Punisher," and "Batman and Robin," calling Daredevil the worst comic book movie ever made is not simply subjectively misplaced opinion. It's just flat around wrong.
PAD
"Though blind, Matt's sight
gets sort-of, kind-of restored when it rains -- a plot point that
writer-director Mark Steven Johnson doesn't bother to explain"
Written like someone who wasn't paying much attention to the movie.
Corey
WTF movie did that reviewer watch?!? Sounds like someone has a few issues to deal with.
Not that local papers have been much better. Two of the most memorable comments from the local paper refer to a "wooden" Ben Affleck, and claims that DD kills everyone in the bar fight.
Wow. I saw it this weekend and said "this is what Batman should have been" and "Spider-man was the light side, Daredevil was the dark side" and "Daredevil was the best comic-book movie yet".
Some of the CGI was annoying, but not much. The casting was dead-on. The little asides with his powers were great (the combo-locks for one). I thought the Electra/Matt thing was perfect for establishing an attraction. I would have liked a little more info on the priest/DD relationship, but I figure that would be explored eventually.
Colin Farrell was terrific (the plane scene was GREAT).
Can you tell I really enjoyed it? And I'm the one who likes to rip movies apart...
OK, so DD isn't the worst adaptation of a comic to the [live action] big screen. Neither is it the best, however.
So, what is? Comments?
But, before you cry out "SPIDERMAN" or "X-MEN", do yourselves a favour and try to find "ASTERIX ET OBELIX CONTRE CESAR" or "ASTERIX ET OBELIX: MISSION CLEOPATRE." The former, which ran at the same time as THE PHANTOM MENACE, outgrossed it in Quebec theatres. And rightly so.
These French/German adaptations of the Belgian strip ASTERIX (yes, the comic has been translated to English, among many other languages) have to be seen to be believed. Just about everything is done to perfection. OK, so Asterix SHOULD be shorter. But there just aren't that many 5 ft tall actors out there who would look the part.
Still, although I'm not aware of the films being available in English (you'd want subtitles anyway) even my unilingual anglophone friends were often doubled over laughing at the visual/auditory humour in both of these comedic masterpieces.
The humour is indeed broad, ranging from vaudeville to road-runner-esque to more sophisticated. A couple of examples of the latter being in the first film when the leads run into Julius Ceasar but don't immediately recognize him until he turns aside and one of them gets the idea of pulling a [Roman] coin out of his purse and compares the profiles "I knew I'd seen him somewhere!". Or, in the second film, when workers at a palace construction site, having just been given some magic potion which temporarilly gives them super-strength, spontaneously break into a hilarious song and dance number to the tune of "Ah feel good!"
Cinematic in-jokes abound with almost every kind of film from Kung Fu flicks, to Sam Peckinpaw, to STAR WARS are lampooned expertly, especially in the second film. The SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN sound effects as Obelix starts to run [slow-motion, of course] in CLEOPATRE had people rolling in the aisles.
The acting is perfect (how can you go wrong with the legendary Depardieu as the kindly, but slow-witted Obelix?) and casting ditto. I especially loved the Roman commander in the first film - he looked like a clean-shaven gorilla sporting an "Oh, woe is me!" expression. 8-)
Everything from the sound effects (listen for the sound of bowling pins scattering as a potion-enhanced Asterix bowls over a line of legionaries in the second film) to the costumes (note to the lead costumer, people are making comments about Cleopatra's NOSE, not her ... ah, never mind. 8-) ) could not be improved upon.
If your French is non-existent, hope for a fan sub (the DVD is unilingual with no English subtitles) or find someone who can at least translate the occasional plot point. It's worth it. It just doesn't get much better than this.
And remember to see them at least twice. There's so much, you'll miss some of it the first time through. It wasn't until my third time that I caught the tourist gag in the background at the Sphinx scene.
I don't know how this thread got turned into a talk about Daredevil, but I thought it was pretty bad. PAD's right, it's not the worst out there, but ranks right above Batman and Robin
This is a link to an article over on MSN about their top 10 comic book movies:
http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=114936
I think it might be a little suspect, though. They rated Batman Returns at number 3.