Review: The Amazing Spider-Man [Spoiler Alert]

[This was an old post sitting in limbo.  I tried to clean it up some and keep it relevant.  Enjoy.]


Read the title - If you don't want to know about the movie, don't read any further!  Simple as that!  Once you've watched it though, push your partner over and grab your laptop/smartphone/tablet and get back here!

This post is just a follow-up on the movie The Amazing Spider-Man, what worked, what didn't, and what I, the all-knowing leader of the A-Sven-gers predicted (and what, if anything, I predicted incorrectly).

You'll recall in my post "The Amazing Spider-Man" - Will it Translate to "an Amazing Movie?",  I wrote this:

From previews, we know/can speculate the following:

- Peter becomes Spider-Man
- He meets Gwen and shares his secret
- Her father, police Captain George Stacy, doesn't trust the masked vigilante, Spider-Man
- Dr. Curt Connors becomes the Lizard, and Spider-Man must stop him

All true (Wow, Peter became Spider-Man?  What a twist!).

I did mention, however, how Peter would be unmasked a billion times in the movie.  While he still wasn't unmasked for a whole train of people, Spider-Man, in any incarnation, has to learn to secure that lid of his properly.

What Was New in "This" Franchise Installment?

As mentioned, Mary Jane Watson was completely absent from the film.  Historically, that's correct - Peter meets Gwen Stacy first, they date, and he meets MJ later on in his story.

Also absent was J. Jonah Jameson, editor of The Daily Bugle.  While the paper was mentioned, and Peter is interested in photography, ol' flat top wasn't in this incarnation, but likely will appear in future installations.

Captain George Stacy (as mentioned, who last appeared in Spider-Man 3) was portrayed in this film by Denis O'Leary - and made his first and last appearance in this film series (hey, I told you there would be spoilers!).  What was different from the captain's death in the film was that while he gets a claw-filled beat down from the Lizard on screen, his death in the comics came from Doctor Octopus being a jerk and smashing buildings onto people.

In his dying moments, the good captain tells Spider-Man he knows his identity - and then forbids him to hang out with his daughter.

Contrast this with the comic book, where Spider-Man and Stacy were (almost) developing a Batman-Commissioner Gordon relationship, and you see a different ending for Captain Stacy.

One interesting note is that Peter's parents, Richard and Mary Parker, are mentioned and have screen time, even developing a bit of a backstory.  While it took years for Marvel to address what happened to Peter's mother and father, it eventually turns out that they were secret agents (hey, why not) that may or may not have been traitors to America (not, actually, but Spider-Man proves this posthumously).  In the movie, it's never stated whether or not they are secret agents, but Richard is a scientist of some sort (if you were a secret agent you wouldn't be telling anyone either).  His father's love of science helps influence Peter and his works influence Spider-Man in unique ways - such as contributing to the DNA-enhanced super-spiders like the one that bit Peter, or having drawn up schematics for the web-shooters.

Speaking of web-shooters, in this franchise Peter uses manufactured web-shooters, his webbing isn't a side-effect of his mutation.  This angle is one I particularly prefer, because I want to see the scientist side of Peter.  Also, it allows for various plot devices, like "I should have refilled my webbing cartridge" or "the impact of the fall broke my web-shooters," that type of thing.  And finally, of course, it makes sense as to why Spider-Man makes his trademark rock star hand gestures - to push the trigger on his web-shooters.

First person to build me a set of these: Wins.

Was it Worth Rebooting the Franchise?

Simple answer: Yes and No.  So is this actually a simple answer?  No.  Read on.

The Spider-Man franchise needed a pick-me-up after the conclusion of Spider-Man 3.  I watched this movie again recently, and I really, really disliked Topher Grace then, and still do now, both in general and as Eddie Brock/Venom (I go by "Topher" because I'm too good to go by "Chris," gimme a break, Christopher).  I realize what the producers were doing, Topher vs Tobey, two skinny photographers that both need a tan working for the Daily Bugle, throw a woman love interest in there, and voila, you've got both a good and an evil version of Spider-Man essentially.  But that's not Eddie Brock in the comics.  The reason why Venom is so wicked in the comics is because he's a 'roid-raging, hulking maniac that gets his already great physical strength augmented by an alien symbiotic suit.

Brock is also a journalist, not a photographer, but I know that was changed for a plot point in the movie so I'll forgive it.

While we're on Spider-Man 3, let's not forget how Sandman beats up a few guards while robbing an armoured car, and is also the real murderer of Uncle Ben (WHAT A TWIST!), but in the end Spider-Man decides to play judge and jury and let this escaped convict go.  But now I'm giving you a movie review of a different movie all together (so what, it's my blog, deal with it)....

So in fairness, after that poor showing and an emo Peter Parker, maybe the franchise did need a reboot.  We forgave Batman, who appeared in Joel Schumacher's fluorescent-filled Batman & Robin in 1997 and then in Christopher Nolan's reboot Batman Begins in 2005, so perhaps Spider-Man should be given a chance.

When talk of Spider-Man 4 came out the Internet was a buzz with news of the Lizard as the primary villain.  And why not, as Dylan Baker had portrayed Dr. Curt Connors in Spider-Man 2 & Spider-Man 3 already, sans arm and everything.

Well, when the Sony execs decided to reboot instead of continue and news of The Amazing Spider-Man hit the audience, nobody was terribly shocked to see the Lizard as the lead antagonist.  The only challenge now would be to reintroduce the character to the audience members that aren't into comic books (or not reading this blog).

Leading this series with a previously unused villain was a good move.  It allows the film to find its own footing, not tread down the same beaten path or step on some other actor's performance barely 5-10 years old.  I didn't particularly care for the look of the Lizard, I think his head/face looks awkward, but if a human were to go scaly he wouldn't necessarily grow a lizard's snout, so sure, I'll concede that it may be more realistic (if we have to actually consider realism here).

It's speculated that Norman Osborn was the shadowy figure talking with Connors at the conclusion of the film, so Green Goblin will likely appear later on, but if you know anything about Spider-Man or read anything recently in Marvel Comics, Osborn is generally a big player and can't be ignored.

I'll admit, I think rebooting the franchise worked, and it was worthwhile.  While watching The Amazing Spider-Man, a chum remarked mid-film, "This is better than Spider-Man 1, 2 and 3 already!"  And it was a good film on its own.  By actually rebooting the franchise, however, it freed up any film-continuity already established.  We know Mary-Jane & Peter will end up together, it happened in the comics.  How many more films do we have to endure watching their fractured relationship after Spider-Man, 2 & 3?  This isn't a weekly TV drama.  By bringing in Gwen we can now watch Peter's love life evolve in a new direction, even if it's ultimately doomed, and he will eventually end up with Mary-Jane (who is now confirmed to appear in the sequel).

My only major gripe, however, is that they chose to do a reboot and not a soft reboot.  What's the difference?  Pacing.  While the pacing didn't suffer horribly in this film, I continue to maintain that they could have omitted the whole Uncle-Ben-Gets-Shot scene from the movie.  Even the spider bite.  I know these elements are crucial to the mythos of Spider-Man. Watch Tim Burton's Batman.  I just watched this film again the other day for the first time in a while, and it's gold.  And while this is the first time Batman hit the big screen, the film only gives you Batman's history in a brief flashback.  You get it: Parents died.  Vengeance.  Let's see some gadgets and get another look at that sweet car.

And we saw the same thing with Eric Bana in Hulk, and Edward Norton in The Incredible Hulk.  Hulk did a drawn out origin story - too long, as I've opined before - and a soft boot of The Incredible Hulk let you know that this is an independent story, but carried a lot of the same essential elements as the last one (major gamma ray accident + anger = HULK).

But I will say once again, it didn't drag the film down.

Final Thoughts

I'm not really a film critic - I'm sure you've observed that by now after reading this far.  If you ask me, "Should I watch this [comic-related] film," I'll likely tell you, "Yes," and then have some hour-long briefing of whether it was actually enjoyable or not, but that you should watch it nonetheless.  But I like to think I know comics.

To be fair, it was hard to get excited about a franchise reboot when massive blockbusters like The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises were premiering the same summer.  And let's face it, if they did another Spider-Man reboot next year, it would still likely be profitable.  It wouldn't be a mega-star blockbuster like the current Batman franchise or The Avengers, but I wager enough kids would continue to go, as well as enough of us nerds.  And you'd anger a lot of movie-goers with another origin (myself included), but I still wager it would be profitable.  It should be noted, however, that this was the lowest-grossing Spider-Man film produced to date.

The Amazing Spider-Man had some hurdles to jump/buildings to web-swing over, but in the end, however, it was enjoyable and a worthwhile chance to take.  I like the new lead, Andrew Garfield - he's a believable enough nerd and social outcast, but he doesn't have to wear a pocket protector to try to convince you.  Emma Stone is quickly becoming one of Hollywood's favourites and one of mine as well, and the two of these actors helped breathe fresh life into this franchise.  With a new menace in Parker's life and perhaps a more interesting backstory, this franchise looks like it will pick up steam quickly.  And when the new installment arrives, I'll be swinging over to see it.

"But please, no emo Spider-Man...."

Like a Phoenix, Rising From the Ashes....

And so this blog is reborn!

Yes, it's been some time, my friends.  Due to personal time commitments, as well as perhaps losing direction with this whole thing, I took a hiatus.

But now I'm tanned, I'm rested, and I'm ready to give this ol' town a wedgie again!




So bear with me as I regain my footing here.

We've got much to discuss.

Much indeed.

Go See "The Dark Knight Rises" - No Spoilers

I went and saw The Dark Knight Rises this week, and I have to say, I think it's my favourite of the trilogy.

I'm sure many of you have gone already, but I know there's still a tone of fear in society due to the sad unfortunate incident played out the first night.

Don't let this hinder you from enjoying probably the best movie of the summer.

After the 9/11 attacks, both Marvel & DC Comics published comics as an effort to raise money for charity.  These comics delved into people's fears, but more importantly, into hope.

One of the most prominent stories I read - I think DC (Batman's company) published it, but it's irrelevant - was a conversation taking place in a bar between sports fans in Boston.

As baseball fans well know, there's a longstanding rivalry between the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees.  During a conversation while watching the game, one of the longtime hometown BoSox fans mentions the horrors of the recent terrorist attack, and says how a win for the Yankees would be good for New York.

Immediately, however, his friend turns on him for defecting.  As tragic as the event is, if you live in fear because of it, you've let the terrorists win.  If they can incite fear into you, so much so that you change your regular patterns, you've let them win.

In many ways, I think that storyline applies to many circumstances in life, the Colorado incident included.

If you let this one gunman (never say his name - he doesn't deserve it) change your way of life, he's accomplished everything he set out to do.

Remember the victims and their families.  My thoughts and prayers continue to be with them daily, as well as once I purchased my ticket, and entered the theatre.

But don't let fear win.

A Dark Night in Denver

Before reading this, please be aware that my tone is meant to be respectful.  The situation that happened in Aurora, Colorado, is one of great tragedy, and one of disgust.  My thoughts and prayers go to the victims and their families.

I just finished watching an episode of Doc Zone from CBC all about conspiracy theories, and how it is human nature to try to make sense of the chaos, to seek patterns.  Once I heard of the situation currently unfolding, the grim similarities below came to mind...

For those of you unaware, there has been a sickening tragedy connected with The Dark Knight Rises - at a midnight premiere of the movie outside Denver, Colorado, a gunman entered a movie theatre and opened fire, killing 14 people, and injuring another 50.  He wore bulletproof gear, apparently a variety of weaponry, and had some sort of smoke bombs.

You cannot Google The Dark Knight Rises without coming across various news encounters of this event.  It will now be forever seared into the movie - much like the tragic death of Heath Ledger and The Dark Knight.


At this point, nobody knows the motives of the gunman.  In fact, it doesn't end there - upon capture, he mentioned something about "explosives" and his apartment building.  Police have vacated the building and are cautiously performing a sweep.

What bothers me the most is motive.  Why Batman?  Was it because it was a heroic movie?  Was it because of the actual hero himself?

Although Batman Begins shows the murder of the Waynes occur after leaving an opera, the traditional, comic book version actually occurs after Bruce and his parents leave a movie theatre, after viewing a movie featuring the masked caped hero, Zorro (which movie it is changes from tale to tale, and is for the most part irrelevant).

Once again, we have a life imitates art/art imitates life situation.  But I ask this: Was this the gunman's motive?

In M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable, a comic book themed movie, Bruce Willis learns he has some sort of super strength and invulnerability due to his encounters with tragedy.  And in Shyamalan's "What a twist!" moment, it is revealed that Samuel L. Jackson has orchestrated these events because he believed a hero like Willis existed in the world, and he was trying to inspire him by causing such tragedies.

Moreover, my much-beloved DC Animated Universe (consisting of Batman: The Animated Series, Justice League, Batman Beyond, etc) unleashed a surprise reveal during the first season of Justice League Unlimited, in an episode titled Epilogue.  Terry McGinnis, the Batman of the future, finds out Bruce Wayne - through genetic twists and machinations, not traditional intercourse - is his biological father.  Outraged, McGinnis locates the source to seek answers, and discovers that beyond nature, there was an intent to nurture this path by mimicking Bruce's past, and have Terry witness his parent's gruesome murder.  The only problem was the gunman couldn't pull the trigger, so to speak, and the plan was aborted.  Years later, however, fate intervened, and Terry's father was murdered by another party, igniting the flame within Terry in the end.

Bruce Wayne becomes Batman because of a tragedy.  Other stories mimic this idea.  Could somebody actually be that insane to try to inspire this event?

Do I really believe this is the cause?  No.  And would it actually make it any better?  Of course not.  Lives are lost, and people will mourn them all the same.

It's just during these tragic times, sometimes, you'd like to think there's more of a purpose than some random event, some coward with a gun, that can just upset these people's lives and cut them short - a theme Bruce deals with constantly.

In the end, whether or not there is some sort of sick motive or not, you cannot ignore the similarities.

"The Amazing Spider-Man" - Will it translate to "an amazing movie?"

This blog will be about the upcoming movie The Amazing Spider-Man.  I will discuss the movie, the movie's similarities to the past Spider-Man films, some predictions, and discuss if the movie should even be made.  If you like "going in fresh," perhaps you should skip this blog until after you've seen the movie.  But definitely read it later.  Never, ever just skip one of my writings altogether.  That would be a crime most heinous.




On July 3rd, the fourth Spider-Man film will debut on the silver screen.  However, instead of a continuation of the previous adventures, we will get to see a new take on the Spider-Man story.

Here's a four-minute preview recently released:

From previews, we know/can speculate the following:

- Peter becomes Spider-Man
- He meets Gwen and shares his secret
- Her father, police Captain George Stacy, doesn't trust the masked vigilante, Spider-Man
- Dr. Curt Connors becomes the Lizard, and Spider-Man must stop him

Ever have déjà vu? Ever have déjà vu?

How much of the above is new material, unseen by the majority of the public in the first Spider-Man trilogy?  

Let's analyze:
Peter is bit by a radioactive/DNA-altered/mutated spider. (Spider-Man)

Grossest. Pimple. Ever.
Or
"I've got no strings to hold me down..."

Peter learns he has powers, and develops them. (Spider-Man)

When the subway hand rails are too sticky to touch, grab the ceiling.

Peter meets Gwen Stacy. (Spider-Man 3)

Wanna stay alive?  Appear in the third movie...

Peter meets Gwen's father, George Stacy. (Spider-Man 3)

"Hey, if staying alive worked for Gwen, I'll follow suit."

Peter befriends Dr. Curt Connors. (Spider-Man 2, Spider-Man 3)

"Villains die in your movies?  I'll just avoid becoming one altogether."

And, judging by the trailer at the beginning of this blog, it appears half of New York will see Spider-Man unmasked, a recurring problem of all the movies in the original Sam Raimi trilogy.

"Can't.... keep.... mask on...."

What's New?



It appears that this film will be a little more faithful to the comics than the original trilogy.  A little.

Gwen Stacy will be shown as Peter's first true love. This is the legitimate first major relationship in Peter Parker's dating career before he gets involved with Mary Jane Watson, as portrayed in the original trilogy by actress Kirsten Dunst.

"Face it, tiger, you'll have to wait to hit the jackpot."

Dr. Curt Connors will actually undergo his infamous experiment with lizard DNA on himself, in an effort to grow his missing right arm (as lizards regrow their missing limbs). The experiment, however, will cause him to mutate into the Lizard. Judging by the picture below, it also appears the Lizard will not be a mindless beast, but instead be self-aware (which has been depicted in the comics). While Dr. Curt Connors appeared in the original trilogy, the experiment and inevitable conflict with Spider-Man did not (though it was rumoured to have been the plot of Spider-Man 4, had it been filmed with the original cast).

In the comics, police Captain George Stacy likes Spider-Man. This similarity was portrayed by James Cromwell in Spider-Man 3. Instead, The Amazing Spider-Man will have Captain Stacy and his police force pursuing Spider-Man (though the idea of the police after Spider-Man has been seen in comics before). Though unlike the comic books, this incarnation will offer a new angle.

Absent from this film appears to be J. Jonah Jameson, expertly portrayed by J.K. Simmons the first time around. With the absence of JJJ, it appears the role of "war against Spider-Man" will be filled by George Stacy, as mentioned above.

Perhaps the greatest change from the movies but best aligning with the comics is that we will see Peter Parker develop his web-shooters, one of the fundamental things Spider-Man is known for. The first time around, as you recall, the web-shooting came from his actual wrist, another super-spider power that developed alongside his spider-sense, wall-crawling, etc. Having Peter develop the web-shooters truly shows his other defining trait outside being Spider-Man - being a science whiz - which was (in my opinion) underdeveloped in the original trilogy.

See, kids?  Stay in school.  Science is awesome.

Are These Plot Points Enough to Reboot the Franchise?


Well that, I suppose, is the multi-million, possibly billion dollar question, isn't it?  I, in particular, have set my sights on comic book mega-blockbusters The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises this summer.  The Avengers is the round-up of five movies (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America), whereas The Dark Knight Rises is the bookend, the denouement of the current Batman franchise.

The Amazing Spider-Man, however, is showing us a lot of what we just saw 10 years ago (some elements as little as five years ago), from the beginning again.

However, the appeal seems to be there.  Comicbookmovie.com has indicated that early tracking estimates The Amazing Spider-Man to make $125 million in its opening weekend.  They argue that there are enough Spider-Man fans to buy tickets, as well as younger females interested in the real life off-screen relationship of the two lead stars, Andrew Garfield (Peter Parker) and Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy).

But outside of hype, is there really any need to go through this on film?

Here's the potential movie spoilers as we go over some comic book history:

In the comics, Captain George Stacy is killed during a conflict between Spider-Man and Doctor Octopus when debris falls from a building. Will this happen in this film? Will this be the "with great power comes great responsibility" moment? Judging by this photo, who knows...

Also in comics, after getting serious about their relationship, Gwen Stacy, too, dies, after falling off a bridge during a skirmish with the Green Goblin.

Note: Recall that the first Spider-Man film paid homage to this scene, with Mary Jane Watson falling from the bridge while Spider-Man and Green Goblin battled - except in this scene, he saves her.

And the reason why Peter's parents are dead/missing, and Peter lives with his Aunt May and Uncle Ben? Why, his parents were spies! It appears that some of this secretive aspect will play into the movie, as Peter's father, Richard, and Dr. Curt Connors were partners in projects together.

Final Thoughts

Growing up, Spider-Man was one of my favourite heroes. He even rivaled Batman for top spot! And when he first made his theatrical appearance on my birthday, 2002, I was blown away.

That said, rehashing a lot of the same plot points only a few years later doesn't excite me the same way. I'm aware the movie will be fun, and there will be a lot of new twists and turns, but completely rebooting this film still has me shocked.

On the other hand, what could they do with a new cast had they filmed Spider-Man 4? The intent was to use the Lizard, as Connors was established, but who is the love interest? Gwen? What happened to Mary Jane after three movies?

Spider-Man is too hot of a franchise to let sit on the back burner, and Marvel knows it has to keep pumping out movies to milk this cow. I don't blame them for this. And I'll even forgive a reboot - so long as it doesn't unnecessarily mull over how his powers work, how he develops them, etc. Give him powers, a reason to fight, and let him fight.

I'm not saying omit his origin story, far from it.  Just don't dwell on it!  You know the reasoning everyone, comic fan or not, knows Parker gets his powers from a radioactive spider?  Because it's been done a zillion times in comic book reboots, various cartoon reincarnations, and already on film!  We get it!
Do your scene, show the spider-bite.  Don't change it to something drastic like a family history of spider bites, or an alien spider, or anything too wacky (look at the backlash Michael Bay is already getting about Ninja Turtles by saying they will be aliens, and the movie hasn't been made yet).  But do the scene, and move on.  We've got CG tussles to see.

I will say this, however: If Peter jacks the web-shooters from somewhere/someone instead of inventing them himself, I won't be impressed. As mentioned, this is a perfect opportunity to indicate that he's a science kid - even though he's in high school - and using his talents to develop web-shooters will highlight this.

Protecting the Innocent: Great Fathers in Comics!

Here's a post to honour all the Fantastic Fathers and Daring Dads out there.

I remember a PSA when I was a kid stating, "Anybody can make a baby, but it takes a man to be a Dad."  Truer words never spoken.

In comic books, the role of father impacts various superheroes:

Jor-El, Kal-El's Kryptonian father, was a scientist who predicted planet Krypton's doomed fate.  Unable to convince the science counsel of the impending destruction, Jor-El and his wife Lara, in an act of love, placed their infant son in a rocket ship bound for Earth.

Kal-El would be found by Jonathan and Martha Kent, and raised as their own son, accepting the Earth name Clark Kent.  Jonathan (in many incarnations) allowed Clark to develop his abilities and talents, but all the while made sure Clark knew the value of hard work and the importance of humility.  His Kryptonian DNA and the Earth's yellow sun may have given Superman his super-powers,  but it was Ma and Pa Kent who gave him his morality and the essentials to be the hero he is today.

Orphaned as a young boy, Peter Parker lived with his Aunt May and his Uncle Ben.

Uncle Ben was Peter's mentor, and taught Peter the iconic principle that "with great power comes great responsibility."  Spider-Man would use this as his mantra for the rest of his life.

Thomas and Martha Wayne, Gotham City's high-profile philanthropists, loved their son, Bruce.  Thomas was always protective of Bruce, and when he fell down a well as a child, Thomas went in after him.

After their passing, a grief-stricken Bruce would take up the mantle of Batman.  As Bruce Wayne, he is always mindful of their charity and good will, and himself tries to bring fortune to the less fortunate to continue his family's campaign.  As Batman, he never seeks vengeance for their passing, but rather strives to honour their memory by making the world a place his parents would want to live in.

A grown-up himself, Bruce later took in a young Dick Grayson as his ward and eventual adopted son, and later, Tim Drake, as another adopted son.  And years after that, he would have a son of his own, Damian, further extending the Batman family.

Instilling a role of responsibility is what fathers do.  Dads are the original superheroes, protecting us when we're scared.  They educate and mentor us to become their sidekick when we're young, with the hope to eventually fill their role in society when we've grown up.  Our job is to heed their advice, learn from their experience, and aspire to obtain their level of wisdom.

So here's to all the fathers, especially my own.  Much love and a Happy Father's Day!

Comic Names You Should Know: Kevin Conroy!

Kevin Conroy

Kevin Conroy IS Batman.  You should take my word for it.  I shouldn't have to write much more, but I will.

If you grew up watching Batman: The Animated Series every day like I did, Kevin Conroy shouldn't be unknown to you, unless you're the type that just likes watching things and ignoring the talent behind it.  If that's the case, well, it's time to give credit where credit is due.

As mentioned, Conroy got the role for Bruce Wayne/Batman starting with Batman: The Animated Series beginning in 1992, but then followed the character into The New Batman Adventures, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited, and played an aged Bruce Wayne in Batman Beyond (though this show aired in real-time before JL & JLU).  He voiced Batman in the animated films Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, Batman & Mr. Freeze: SubZero, Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman, and Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker.  He also voiced Batman's cameo appearances in Superman: The Animated Series, Static Shock, and The Zeta Project.  Further, he voiced Batman in the video games The Adventures of Batman & Robin, Batman: Vengeance, and Batman: Rise of Sin Tzu.  All of these appearances as Batman are within the DC Animated Universe (DCAU), making them all within the same continuity.  For a bunch of cartoons, that's awesome, and it's a testament to his dedication to the character.

Watch Conroy go double-time here as Batman meets an elderly Bruce Wayne in Justice League Unlimited:

But enough praise.  So I enjoyed a cartoon as a kid - I'm obviously biased.  Wrong, mon frere.

Check out Conroy's Batman chops on imdb.com - Conroy has voiced Batman in over 25 separate shows/movies/video games, in various Batman tales.  Outside of the DCAU, the demand from fanboys to continue to see Conroy portray Batman had Conroy voicing Batman in comic book adaptation DTV features such as Superman/Batman: Public Enemies, Superman/Batman: Apocalypse, and Justice League: Doom.

Outside of his prevalence in animation, perhaps Conroy is best known for his recent voice-acting work as Batman in DC Universe Online, or more likely, in the critically-acclaimed and best-selling games Batman: Arkham Asylum and its sequel, Batman: Arkham City.

What's the best way to indicate WB feels Kevin Conroy is the superior Batman?  Make a DTV feature bridging Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, and have Conroy voice Batman instead of Christian Bale.  This feature is called Batman: Gotham Knight.  In fact, to rub it in, here's a video of Conroy and his disapproval of Bale's "rawr rawr rawr I'm Batman" voice:

What really made Conroy's depiction of Batman different than other past interpretations is the fact that Batman and Bruce Wayne have different voices (a concept Conroy came up with and implemented himself).  There's a definite distinction between the brooding tone of Batman and the light-hearted billionaire playboy.


It's because of Conroy's talent and dedication to the character (having first voiced Batman in 1992, twenty years ago) that comic book readers, myself included, hear Conroy's voice when Bruce Wayne/Batman carry dialogue.

Go on Netflix, rent an animated movie, or pick up your game controller - if it says "Batman" on it, it's likely Conroy you're going to hear.  If that's the case, you're in for a treat.  I'll leave you with one of his most iconic lines as the Caped Crusader:

Introducing DC Comic's new Gay Hero!

If you're here reading this article, and you have no idea what's going on, perhaps you are are better off to read my blog A New Gay Hero in DC Comics - Who is it?

Heroism can be found in every species, race, sex, religion, and sexual orientation in the DC Universe.

Over the weekend, DC Comics announced the gay superhero to debut this month: Green Lantern Alan Scott, the first and original Green Lantern introduced in 1940.

Who's Alan Scott?

Green Lantern - Alan Scott

Alan Scott, a railroad engineer, discovers a magic lantern constructed from an alien meteor, and through a ring of the same substance he is able to channel the mystical power and fight crime as the Green Lantern.

Contrast Scott with Hal Jordan, who, as seen in the Green Lantern movie, is given a ring and lantern from the Guardians of the Universe, and Jordan joins the Green Lantern Corps, an intergalactic police force.

GL Hal Jordan meets GL Alan Scott

To read more about Hal Jordan and Alan Scott, go to my blog on The History of Comics Pt III: The Silver Age of Comics.

Why a Gay Character?

The primary response from the company indicates that the goal is to introduce a strong character for the gay community to identify with.

DC has other prominent gay heroes in the DC Universe including Renee Montoya, and Batwoman, who has won "Outstanding Comic" from GLAAD two of the last three years for her portrayal.

Green Lantern, however, is one of the most high-profile characters to be outed in comics.

Why Pick an Already Established Character?  

Why not create a brand-new hero and introduce the character as gay?  The answer to this could be because of the company's wish to spotlight a character quickly.  Others, including myself, saw this move as a marketing ploy more than anything else.  Marvel Comics, for example, is having its most prominent gay character, Northstar, get married this same month.

Or, it could be because the fear that a new character may not sell well (gay or otherwise).  As such, DC took a high profile and established character, Green Lantern, and during his reboot in The New 52 made the move.

In hindsight, perhaps it is too cynical to perceive this as a marketing ploy (though to ignore that aspect altogether would be naive).  If this is done correctly, Alan Scott could shine his green light on this aspect and provide a strong male role model for everyone, gay and straight alike.  James Robinson, the writer re-introducing Alan Scott to The New 52 DC Universe, says, "What I really want to do with this character is make that fact that he's gay to be a part of who he is and not to be the one identifying aspect of him" (article can be found here).

On a side note, Robinson also introduced the first gay kiss in comics in an issue of Starman.

Why Alan Scott?

In previous continuity, Alan Scott was not only Green Lantern, but he also helped found the Justice Society of America, and became the first chairperson.

In his personal life, Scott was also the father of two children: Jennifer-Lynn Haden, aka Jade, and Todd James Rice, aka Obsidian - Todd being one of DC's first notable gay characters.

Because The New 52 has retconned Jade & Obsidian out of continuity, writer James Robinson decided that Alan Scott himself would be a strong gay character, replacing the gap left with his son being retro-ed out of continuity.

How Jade and Obsidian will debut in The New 52, if at all, remains to be seen, though making them adopted to a gay couple would be a leap in the next logical direction.

Final Thoughts

Once comics get completely political in agenda, the heroism aspect is lessened in stories, and that's really why you're picking up the book in the first place.  From my other blog on the subject, I wrote this:

"...what makes these characters superheroes isn't their sexual orientation.  In fact, I read a comment somewhere that a particular reader always viewed heroes as asexual; the superhero fights evil, and isn't on patrol for men/women.

Eliminating factors like this will make storytelling one-dimensional, I'll concede that, and a romantic interest here and there helps to keep storytelling interesting.  But you shouldn't be picking up the newest issue of Action Comics and be looking for a comic primarily focused on the character's love life, straight or gay."

I will reiterate this point in another way.  Consider this: if a character is devoutly religious, that shouldn't be the absolute dominating point of every issue the character is featured in.  Zauriel, one of God's guardian angels, came to Earth and joined the Justice League of America, and every issue wasn't preachy and driving one particular religion down your throat.  In fact, for many, many adventures, the fact that Zauriel was an angel was altogether dismissive; Zauriel was the team's "magic" expert, and otherwise often acted as the team's Hawkman.

If Alan Scott can be utilized in the same manner, as a superhero that happens to be gay, hopefully this will achieve its desired goal and becomes a positive figure for everyone, both gay and straight, men and women.

Alan's debut in The New 52

Besides, if any aspect of this is truly shocking, it's the fact that DC brought back Earth-2 and the Multiverse!

Friday Fun-day! Holy Spoilers, Batman!

STOP!!  STOP RIGHT NOW!!

IF YOU CONTINUE TO READ THIS, YOU'RE ACCEPTING THE FACT THAT YOU MAY BE READING SPOILERS FOR THE UPCOMING BATMAN MOVIE, THE DARK KNIGHT RISES!!


If you're okay with that, carry on, otherwise, get out now while you still can!

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

[Note that contrary to your belief I'm not a big-time Hollywood producer.  Some of what is written below has been given information, some of it is comic book fact, and some of it is pure speculation.]

Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy comes to an end this summer.  After giving us the mechanics of what makes Bruce Wayne tick in Batman Begins, and introducing more loss into his life in The Dark Knight, Nolan left Batman on the run from the fuzz at the conclusion of the last movie, his reputation in shambles.

So what's going to happen in the The Dark Knight Rises?


First, watch the latest trailer for the movie here, and then we can make some inferences.


Well, non-spoiler information, we know that Bane will show up and terrorize Gotham City.  We also know that Catwoman will enter the scene.

Movie details seem to indicate that eight years have elapsed between Harvey Dent's/Two-Face's funeral and where The Dark Knight begins.  Batman, while he's trying to stop criminals and save lives, has to do it while staying out of the police's line of fire, who are trying to take him in for the murder of Dent.  During that time, it wouldn't be surprising that Selina Kyle has been taking advantage of a Gotham City that hates Batman.

Bruce has never been in this for the praise.  Surely, something about his quest to prevent crime in his city makes him hope his parents would approve.  But he's never been at the job so he can one day receive the key to the city and have a parade.

Although his friend, Commissioner Jim Gordon, knows that Batman is not a murderer, the whole police force and the mind of the public all despise him for murdering a "hero."  It's likely that some plot device will appear where Batman goes to save a person who heavily resists his help out of fear, and the consequence may result in injury or death.

The police have no faith in him.  The public has no faith in him.  The death of a civilian may shake the faith of his friend, the commissioner, and after that, even Bruce may lose faith in himself.

And, with a weakened soul, enter Bane.

The Man Who Broke the Bat


A brief comic book history of Bane:

• Born on the fictional island of Santa Prisca, his father was a revolutionary who escaped capture, so Bane was sent to prison as a child to live out his father's sentence.
• In prison, he trained his body and mind, strengthening himself in the prison gym, educating himself by reading whatever he could, receiving formal "classroom" education by a Jesuit priest.  His fighting ability was sharpened by a hard life within the walls of prison.
• Eventually, Bane declares himself "king" within the walls of the penitentiary, which comes to the attention of the jailers.  Bane is then selected as a test subject in a new experiment where his is given the Venom drug, and, along with some shielding enhancements over his internal organs, becomes a super-steroid monstrosity (think Captain America's origin, but in prison, and becoming more closer to Hulk-sized than Captain America-sized).
• In order to continually fuel his drug-induced strength, he has a controller on his arm that injects Venom directly into the back of his skull.  He can toggle this to give him a super boost, which then causes him to rapidly increase his size and muscle mass (again, he can Hulk-out on command, if that helps).

Bane had the same fear of bats Bruce Wayne did as a child.  However, while Bruce decided to become that fear to conquer it, Bane decided he would conquer the fear by defeating the Batman.

Once in Gotham City, Bane decided he would first break down Batman mentally in a battle of attrition.  Literally blowing open the gates of Arkham Asylum, Batman spends the next three months rounding up Joker, Riddler, Scarecrow, Mr. Freeze and most of his rogues gallery and incarcerating them all over again, a feat which pushes Bruce to his physical limit.  During a fight with the Scarecrow, Batman is doused with his Fear Toxin, which makes Batman relive his greatest failure - the death of Jason Todd, the second Robin - mentally and emotionally exhausting him.  Meanwhile, Bane is observing Batman, his tactics, and even deduces that Batman and Bruce Wayne are one-in-the-same.

Having completed another day on the job, Batman returns to Wayne Manor, exhausted, only to find Bane waiting for him.  Bane pummels him, and, in the Batcave, Bane does the unimaginable:  He breaks Batman's back, leaving him a paraplegic.

Ow, my pride.

At this point, Bruce Wayne tours around the globe on detective missions in a wheelchair, and a new hero, Jean-Paul Valley, dons the mantle of the Batman.

Neat.  For comic book fans of the 1990s, this isn't new to you.  So where are the spoilers already?

Firstly, fans will likely go crazy if the iconic image above doesn't somehow play into the movie.  Any muscle-bound villain can be selected for the antagonist of the film, but by selecting Bane, the only villain to break Batman, you should be making a statement.  I must state now, however, that Bane DID appear as a henchman to Poison Ivy in Joel Schumacher's Batman & Robin, and he was grossly unused in the storyline.  However, as he's the front runner here, audiences will be expecting something epic this go around.

So if Batman/Bruce Wayne is injured, what now?  Villainy for the win?  Well, there has been a lot of speculation as to who the character John Blake is in The Dark Knight Rises, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt.  So far, all that has been mentioned is that he's a beat cop.  Many people aren't buying this though, as it seems curious to put in a high-profile actor for such a minor role.

This week there's been a buzz regarding who John Blake may be, and a lot of it stems from the release of The Dark Knight Rises action figure line.

On the right of Batman - JPV Batman?

Rumours quickly appeared that the action figure on the right of Batman may be the debut of John Blake's Batman suit.  Statements have already been issued that the figure is something along the lines of a "Stealth-Suit Batman," which, in the world of action figures, it's not uncommon for manufacturers to distribute a zillion gimmicky figures (underwater suit Batman, spacesuit Batman, plumber Batman etc).  However, the paranoid, or those who want to believe, aren't buying it.

In the comic book, Jean-Paul Valley was a college student who discovered he had been brainwashed as a child by a wacky cult into becoming a master assassin, becoming the cult's angel of death and "enforcing god's will" as Azrael.

JPV as Azrael

As disturbing as that may be, that's useful if you're going to put on Batman's cape and cowl.  JPV dons the cape and cowl at first, but eventually begins to make his own alterations and modifications of Bruce's iconic suit.

"Yeah, I'm still Batman, I've just got a flamethrower attach to my arm.
Big whup. Wanna fight about it?"

So is John Blake the new Batman?

The latest trailer shows Bane in the Batcave, walking away with a shattered mask.  He also has dialogue with Bruce Wayne himself, with Bruce asking, "Why didn't you kill me?"  It then appears that Bruce is thrown near-lifeless down a ramp, Bane standing over top of him.  I think it's safe to say we'll see the Bane-breaking-Batman-over-his-knee scene.  But will it truly cripple him?

More importantly, will Blake replace him?  Well, the comic book representation of Azrael-Batman and the picture of the above action figure don't look too far off, with the blue and gold highlights and full-cowl mask.  How a beat cop will replace Batman will hopefully be covered too - I know police officers go through some rigorous training, but I don't know any that trained for 18 years to become a crime fighter, and can use extremely advanced gadgetry and use throwing shurikens.  Outside of that detail, I think it's extremely plausible that John Blake may, in fact, be Bruce Wayne's replacement.

What else is possible is that instead of Blake completely replacing Bruce, it may be more of a Batman Beyond element, where Blake does the legwork (poor phrasing considering the paraplegic aspect) while Bruce monitors him from the Batcave computer through camera and audio built within the cowl.

The Bat insignia on the chest isn't too far off, and we've got an otherwise plain looking costume with a fully-masked cowl.  Could this be the case?

And the best part about this:  My wife was the one to look at the action figure and point out that it looks like Batman Beyond!  How awesome is she, right?  Right??  I'm proud of you, darling!  That means you've really been paying attention!  Have a chocolate.

The Batman Beyond storyline actually takes place in the future, with an elderly 80-year-old Wayne mentoring a young man, Terry McGuinness, as he takes the mantle of Batman for himself.  While surely Bale won't age historically in this film, the main fundamentals here are all still valid.  Curiously, though, the image below shows Bruce Wayne with a spot of grey in his hair, as he converses with John Blake.

"Seriously, my "Just for Bat-Men" product
will outsell the competition in no time."

One thing can be determined from this is that Bruce Wayne will not die.  Christian Bale previously made statements saying this will be his last venture as Batman, and that he's done with the character.  However, also this week, Bale stated in an article from Empire Magazine that if Christopher Nolan were to approach him and say that they have a story for a fourth Batman movie, he would be willing to do it.  While zombies are in right now, I don't think he'll be reprising the role as zombie-Batman (though it may be cool to think about...)

Ra's al Ghul

Another one of the action figures above has people talking.

Speaking of zombies....

Is that Bruce Wayne in his League of Shadows gear (from Batman Begins, hinting a flashback), a young Ra's al Ghul (Liam Neeson's character from Batman Begins, also hinting a flashback), or John Blake, undergoing some training?

Recall that Ra's al Ghul apparently died at the end of Batman Begins.  Despite this, it has been confirmed that Liam Neeson, as Ra's al Ghul, will be appearing in The Dark Knight Rises, but whether it is a return to the character or a flashback sequence is not yet known.

To me, the figure looks like Christian Bale.  Is this another flashback sequence for Bruce, or will Bruce go to the League of Shadows to retrain after being broken?

Talia al Ghul

Besides John Blake, the other most talked about character is Miranda Tate, played by Marion Cotillard.  As in the case of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, it seems unlikely Christopher Nolan hired this Academy Award winning actress to play a Wayne Enterprises board member, as the character profile states.

So who is she?  Many speculate she is Talia al Ghul, daughter of Ra's al Ghul.  

Talia al Ghul

Has she infiltrated Wayne Enterprises as a spy in a possible revenge scheme for the death of her father?  Or is she aiding him in his current quest (if Liam Neeson's Ra's al Ghul is actually still alive)?

Cotillard has denied any claims that she is anyone else but Miranda Tate.  One thing that raises eyebrows, however, is that imdb shows that a young actress plays Talia al Ghul in a flashback scene in the film.

The Scarecrow


Nothing new is here, we've already seen the Scarecrow in the first two movies.  In fact, so far actor Cillian Murphy isn't on the cast list on imdb.com or elsewhere indicating he's in this movie.

One website, however, indicates that he was on set for part of the filming.  Was he a major part of shooting, or just a brief appearance as in The Dark Knight?


Perhaps he plays a brief but important role - let's speculate.  As in the comics, he douses Batman and makes him relieve his greatest failure: in this movie universe it may be either the death of Harvey Dent, or more likely, the death of Bruce Wayne's love interest, Rachel Dawes.  While neither Maggie Gyllenhaal or Katie Holmes have been seen on set for the movie, there's no reason why flashback sequences from the previous movies can't be used.  In fact, if it's just a sequence to relive her death, then no new footage is really required.

Final Thoughts


Running through the possible outcomes, there certainly seems to be a lot of variables and a lot of ways this movie can go.  With over 70 years of Batman mythology, I guess that's not really all that surprising.

Having Batman coupled with a sidekick could be fun and interesting.  The idea of Robin, a tween/teenager, was dismissed by Nolan before writing any scripts as being implausible.  Catwoman, however, appears to fill this void.

Will Bruce Wayne have John Blake fight by his side as well?  Or will Bane break his back, and Blake has to step in to fill the gap himself while Bruce recovers?

Is Bane working for Ra's al Ghul?  Is Talia there to keep an eye on Wayne?  Will she steal the company from under Bruce's nose while he's got his hands full with Bane, leaving him hated by society, crippled, and penniless?

Of all the variables, I think only one thing can be confirmed:

This is going to be a wild movie.

Arm rockets too?  Beats shark repellent any day!