Under My Umbrella – Academy

IF YOU KNOW anything about Crazy Davis by know, it’s that he loves comics!

Sci-Fi, Superhero, even Tintin comics! Big or small, I’ve read ’em all.

Well, almost all of them. Until last week or so, the Umbrella Academy series was one of them.

But I’m very glad to say that now I have indeed read every issue available of the Umbrella Academy comic book series and it was a blast from start to finish. So now, and only now, do I feel like it’s only right to give that new Netflix series a try. How bad could it be?

…

Yeah it’s fine, I suppose.

I’d like to clarify first and foremost that I haven’t finished the series yet. Hell, I’m not even up to Season 2. So no spoilers, y’hear? Otherwise I’ll bar you for life from me carpet shop. And trust me when I say you don’t wanna miss the deals I’ve got coming up this summer!

Where was I? Ah yes, the Umbrella Academy. The series. The TV series! Always a pleasure to see a comic get the television adaptation over a movie, for reasons I have made abundantly clear beforehand. But if I’m being honest with myself, I think I went into the show with measured expectations and as such, I haven’t strictly been blown away thus far.

Now before you raise your pitchforks, let me make my stance clear: I don’t hate this show. I’m enjoying it quite a bit and I’m interested to see how it’s gonna progress. I think I’m about seven or so episodes into Season One and it’s very intriguing.

However, when it comes to being a comic book adaptation and bringing to life the aspects of the comic book I so readily enjoyed, it skips a few beats that make me a teensy bit irritated. Not enough to write off the show, but enough to compel to make a stand and say some things from the comic I really wish the show decided to include.

I gotta say it, but the Academy’s costumes in this show are pretty lackluster. It’s barely a step up from the whole X-Men bundled up in black leather phase from the early 2000’s. The Academy’s costumes in the comic are iconic silhouettes that make distinct visual statements about their characters. Spaceboy AKA Luther AKA Number ONE is basically Soldier: 76 with Winston’s body, The Kraken, or ‘Diego’, as the show hasn’t used his badass codename from the comics yet, has a striped shirt with a skull and crossbones, long blond hair and a fierce set of stubble. Furthermore, Diego’s power in the comics is that he can hold his breath indefinitely, making him a gritty, knife-throwing Aquaman, to quote Gerad Way (the original writer of the series, who also co-created Peni Parker & SP//dr!). I much prefer the comic incarnation of the character. The show’s portrayal of him is good, but I feel there’s more that could be done with him.

I certainly feel that way about Allison AKA Rumour AKA Number Three. So far I’ve only seen her use her power once in the bank robbery scene, whereas she uses it frequently and bodaciously in the comics when she uses it to defeat the Lincoln Memorial, which sprung to life and began attacking Washington:

Funnily enough, this was only the second monument the Umbrella Academy kids destroyed. But it wouldn’t be the last president that Rumour would assassinate…

A choice that the show made in establishing her as the celebrity and most glamourous of the Academy is something I’m warming up to, but again, I think her depiction in the comics is a more realistic trajectory for her character. She also is divorced from her husband and has lost custody of her daughter, but she’s more downtrodden and listless in the comic, which I think is more on par with her actions of manipulating her husband with her power.

I could go on about the things neglected from the comics but I’ll change my tune for your sake and talk about the stuff from the show I really like.

I believe Klaus is a better character in the show than he is in the comics. I also just realised that this is the second show Robert Sheehan has been in where he can talk with dead people. Does anyone remember Misfits. Now that was a ‘superhero’ show with a different tune. Anyhoo, Klaus is great in this show. He’s vibrant, complicated and very sympathetic. It was a neat choice to have him be the only one to travel back to Vietnam, as in the comics he, Diego and Spaceboy are stranded with him. Five is basically the same but a tad older, which is an understandable choice and Vanya seems to be getting a lot more attention than she’s given in the comics. She’s pretty much just the villain of the comic book’s first arc and judging by the title of the Season One finale, I look forward to seeing how the show portrays the “White Violin” herself.

What’s left to say? Umm… I like Pogo, the chimpanzee butler. He’s also got an expanded role from his comic book counterpart it would seem. And the circumstances of Ben’s death and his powers very much intrigue me. Looking forward to more of Ben AKA Number Six AKA The Horror. I just love his power. Being able to release an eldritch abomination or two would really drive up sales down here.

So with all hat said and done, I think I’m done wagging my chin about the Umbrella Academy. It’s time to jump back in and binge it! I hope you enjoyed what I had to say about the series and I reckon if you like it too, why not give the comic book a try?

Stay out of the Rain,
CD

 

PS: Recommended Reading

The Umbrella Academy: Apocalypse Suite
The Umbrella Academy: Dallas
The Umbrella Academy: Hotel Oblivion

Origins are Overrated: Part 2

THE MANY YEARS I have spent reading comic books have taught me one thing: Superman’s costume looks way better without the red underpants.

It’s also taught me that some supervillains are just as compelling as their superhero counterparts, and in some cases, even more so.

I’m not gonna tell you that old cliche about “every villain being the hero of their own story” because it’s redundant and very obvious. But I would like to talk about why we find it so compelling.

In fact, I would go as far to say that some supervillian origins are actually pretty damn good, if not better, than superhero ones. They kind of have to be in order to convey a somewhat decent motivation for going crazy, slipping on an animal themed costume and attempting to kill a brightly coloured wise cracking crime-fighter for decades. And that’s kind of unsettling.

It really makes you stop to think about certain supervillain origins and reflect on how tragically intricate and heartbreaking they can be. Or even just beautifully simplistic to the point where it seems like a genuine thing that an average person would decide to do one day. We all have a breaking point, after all.

The chief example of a practically perfect supervillian origin is of course, Mister Freeze. I’m sure some of you more savvy readers of this blog thought of him first too. Depending on the incarnation, the tragic tale of Victor Fries (Yes, it’s pronounced “Freeze”) is one of heartbreak, desperation and woeful denial of reality. All Mister Freeze wanted to do was save the life of his cryogenically frozen wife, but a system of abuse, neglect and a freak accident thrown in for that comic book flavour turned him into a relentless killer, determined to achieve his goal by any means necessary, losing his very humanity over the course of his futile quest. I’m not crying, you are.

On the completely different end of the spectrum is the origin of Spider-Man villain, the Shocker. While probably not as renowned as one Mister Freeze, Shocker remains to this day as one of my absolute favourite Spider-Man villains due to the fact he’s just so utterly… basic.

Let me finish: The Shocker’s simple nature is so appealing to me because he really is just the every-man of supervillains. Think Ant-Man from the MCU but without the heroic motivation of providing for his daughter, instead being motivated by pure lust for the almighty dollar.

Shocker is the antithesis of your grandiose and tragic villain like Doctor Doom or Thanos. He doesn’t want to take over the world or balance the universe’s population, nothing like that. He just wants to rob banks with tech that he built himself and that’s it. He’s a clean template for any writer willing to use him in their stories and he’s ripe for a plethora of different interpretations. It’s a shame about the name though, but he was called the Shocker before the internet. 

So, taking all this into account, I believe the perfect supervillain origin should lean towards either the Mr Freeze or Shocker territory. Tragic or simple. If you want to get it any more complicated than that, then any villain you make has to stand in direct contrast to their hero in order to portray a captivating dynamic. This is where we get into Joker territory.

Hoo boy.

Now, I haven’t seen his latest movie and I really don’t want to. Not because I’m squeamish or I think it’s ‘problematic’, but purely because I don’t think it pays any heed to its source material and completely misinterprets the character or at least uses him as a stand in for other social issues that he’s only peripherally related to. 

The Joker is a definitive example of why a supervillain doesn’t need a good origin to be an amazing character. The only thing they do need is a nemesis that is the complete opposite of them. Think about how many times you’ve seen a Batman origin on the screen. The list goes on. Now think about how many times we’ve seen the Joker’s origin on screen, and if it’s even comparable to the depths that Batman’s origins have been explored. It’s not even close, and that’s the way I believe it should be.

Joker’s nothing more than an agent of chaos with a sick sense of humour. At times, he represents the peak of crime in Gotham, just as Batman represents the peak of justice. And while there have been stories about Joker’s solo adventures, barely any of them  have been about his origin, because that is not why we like the Joker. His origin is not what makes him interesting. Any origin stories he has had have always featured Batman or the Wayne family in some capacity. The latest Joker movie is perhaps the most conceited and tacked on way its been done yet, with Thomas & Martha Wayne being murdered in what, the last five minutes of the film?

It doesn’t take a genius to tell you that supervillains only exist because the superheroes need someone to beat up. But it takes a maniac like me to tell you that some supervillains out there have redefined what it means to be an antagonist to the point where they are just as compelling and artfully constructed as any protagonist. Black Manta. Doctor Octopus. Even Bizarro. I could go on all day, but I feel like I’ve rambled for long enough. 

Basically, you don’t need to try too hard when thinking of a supervillain origin. But if you happen to latch on to a good idea, it’s a win-win situation for both reader and writer.

Manically Laughing,
CD

Moon Knight’s TV Debut: What Will Disney Do?

MOON KNIGHT ROCKS! 

The fearsome lunulated lunatic has been kickin’ ass and taking names in the pages of Marvel comics since the ’70s. He’s enjoyed a reputation as being one of the most flexible and experimental heroes out there.

 For the most part, his characterisation remains consistent as a mercenary named Marc Spector who was left for dead in an Egyptian temple and resurrected by the god of the moon, Khonshu. Returning to the Big Apple, Spector adopts the mantle of Moon Knight to honour his god and fight crime. Where it gets interesting is the inclusion of the characters Steven Grant, a wealthy entrepreneur and Jake Lockley, as humble taxi driver.

In a unique take on the concept of a superhero’s secret identity, Both Steven and Jake are in fact separate personalities within Marc’s mind in a form of dissociative identity disorder. His mental state also raises the question of whether or not he’s speaking to the actual Khonshu or another persona his mind has created, a question that has been explored over the character’s fascinating and mind-boggling history.

Personally, it boggles my mind that we’ve gone for this long without a live action adaptation for this fantastic character. Until now.

That’s right, Moon Knight is officially getting his very own Disney+ original show. my salvation has at last been delivered in my time of need. At last, an entire TV show dedicated to the Fist of Khonshu himself.

But is this a blessing a disguise? This is a Disney+ show we’re talking about, and I’m telling you now, the stories of Moon Knight haven’t made an effort to be particularly family friendly, to say the least.

While I am eternally grateful he’s been granted an adaptation by our overlords at Disney, I am also slightly apprehensive. Can Disney deliver a satisfying portrayal of my boy in white while also keeping things PG?

For starters, I don’t think it’s impossible to have the best of both worlds. The Mandalorian is a great example of having a no-holds-barred and gritty take on an established universe without relying on too heavily on extreme gore to convey its mature tone. I’m hoping they lean towards shows like The Mandalorian in terms of its tone.

However, I have prepared a short list of things that I hope the creative ‘wizards’ at the House of Mouse do not decide to do:

1. Simplify it to the point where it’s nothing more than a watered down version of Netflix’s Daredevil. That show works as its own entity, and trying to replicate its tone but without its mature themes and violence would be a misstep as it would undermine Moon Knight’s own violent history as well by being a censored copy of a standard supershow show, like Arrow. 
2. Improperly balance the supernatural and the realistic elements of the character. Moon Knight has been known to fluctuate from religious fanatic to hyperviolent vigilante, so I’m hoping the show can strike a balance between the two worlds that define Moon Knight. I am hoping for a ton of Egyptian iconography and the logo seems to hint at that, so I think we should be right for that. But I’m also hoping Marc’s mercenary past, his relationships with others and his arch nemesis aren’t forgotten. Marc’s best friend Jean-Paul AKA Frenchie and lover Marlene are integral to his origin and even more so is Raul Bushman, who is responsible for killing Marc and inadvertently letting Khonshu revive him. You just gotta leave that in.
3. I am tired of these adaptions that are supposedly within the same universe as the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) but never go any further in establishing this than the occasional reference to ‘the ‘magic guy with the hammer’. Just call him Thor! Now that rights are no longer an issue, I want a definitive entry into the MCU that feels like its a part of the same universe and not an appendage hanging limply off the side. That being said, I’m willing to make a concession if the show choses to make it ambiguous as a stylistic choice, given the flexible nature of Moon Knight’s character. Not really holding my breath on that one, though.
4. Finally, I don’t want this show to ignore the fact that Marc has a mental illness. Mental health is a pressing and relevant issue in this day and age and having a protagonist that suffers from a distinct mental illness could be a great way to address it. This hearkens back to my first point about how I don’t want this show to be another standard superhero affair, Moon Knight is not a normal superhero, he has a serious mental condition that is a foundation of his character and ignoring that would be downright disrespectful.

Truly a triple threat (credit to u/snotso_goodmans on Reddit).

Look, when it’s all said and done, I am immensely happy Moon Knight is getting something at all. And a TV show too, thank Khonshu! Infinitely more preferable than a movie. If the series is good, I’ll chalk it up to another successful win in the history of the Lunar Legionnaire. If it isn’t, I’ll shrug it off and just go read literally any one of his comics.

I’m glad this show is being made and I’m gonna watch the hell out of it. It’s a win-win situation for me. I’m either gonna be satisfied that he’s finally got a worthy adaptation, or I’ll be satisfied that in the realm of comic books, someone else out there knows how to make a good Moon Knight story.

Except for you, Bendis. Stick to Spider-Man.

Go Howl at the Moon, 
CD.

What’s the Deal with Movies?

THIS WHOLE PANDEMIC thing has given me plenty to think about over the past few months.

Why is no one buying my custom made Ribena stained Persian rugs? Why is no one talking about Ahmed Best’s new role in that new Star Wars Scorpion Island-esque game show that’s on YouTube? But most importantly, why is everyone obsessed with movies?

Look, I may not be one to talk. I’m obsessed with a whole ‘nother kettle of fish, just take a look at literally any other post on this cesspool of a blog.

But seriously, 9 times out of 10, I’ll take the book or tv show over the medium of film. I’m just saying, from my position as aficionado of the comic book arts, movies are the be all and the end all for some fans. It’s as if they’re some all access pass to the big leagues and that’s a shame, cuz a character shouldn’t have to have a movie in order to validate their existence.

Yeah yeah, I know it’s great publicity. You wouldn’t have even heard of the Guardians of the Galaxy or the Avengers or frickin’ Iron Man if it wasn’t for their movies. But because of their big screen success, their movie counterparts come to define their characters as a whole, leaving behind their inspirations and source material to be cast aside and forgotten, which is something that I cannot abide.

I think movies should stick to their lanes, by which I mean I am so fed up with syndicated and condensed comic book adaptations of superheroes which are a digestible simplified summary of the character that can be consumed by the masses. Movies work best when they are contained and have a single point of reference for inspiration, something like The Thing. Otherwise you have a film which draws from too many separate influences which clash with a director’s unique take, leaving you with a bizarre hodgepodge of character that’s barely connected to their core tenets. See Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice to see what I’m getting at.

I don’t subscribe to the belief that I have to enjoy films above all else when there are a plethora of other mediums in which I can enjoy longer, fundamentally profound and exceptionally crafted stories. I think patience and investment in a story is something that’s undervalued in a film. Granted, that depends on the film’s length, but generally, you can expect a relatively swift resolution to the film’s plot in a couple of hours.

There’s something about that which irks, the condensed nature of a film. I like things to be drawn out, I want to see how the passage of time affects a character, how their struggles are portrayed almost in real time. The trade off is sometimes television and comics can get sidetracked with filler and expansive back story, but more times than not it is the context and how the character’s react to situations detached from the main arc of the their story that enhances the potency of the show or series at large.

Despite all this, I still really wanna see Tenet. I’m interested in Christopher’s Nolan’s work and his latest venture looks to be even more of a mind bender than the legendary and confusing masterpiece that is Inception. But in the meantime, I am more than happy sifting through my comic book and novel collection and vast repertoire of tv shows to satiate my imagination. Anything’s better than vacuuming the carpet shop.

That’s a wrap,
CD

Origins Are Overrated

HERE’S A QUESTION for you all: What is your favourite super hero origin?

Take your time, I’m not going anywhere.

Right, now answer me this: What is your favourite super hero story?

Okay, once you’ve had a good thinkin’ session, think some more about how your answers relate to each other.

Unless your answer to both questions was Spider-Man 2, chances are your choice of origin and favourite story didn’t match up at all, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence. Yet what I do think is this: In the grand scheme of things, superhero origins don’t matter.

I mean, they matter a little. A bit of context and motivation never hurt anybody. But the origin shouldn’t be the make or break of a character: What comes after the origin is the truly interesting part. I believe a character should be defined by their actions in the present, whether or nor they’re influenced by the events of their past.

The two super hero origins which I believe are evidence to the contrary are the origins of Spider-Man and Batman. These origins both involve an anonymous criminal and a young boy suffering the loss of a parental figure (or two) which motivates and shapes the rest of their life, either spurning them to maintain a code of great responsibility or learn karate so they can beat up a murderous clown.

But look at any other superhero origin and try to convince me it has the same level of emotional impact. 

Yes, Superman was rocketed off his exploding planet, but then he lands in Kansas and is raised by farmers! Boring!

Green Lantern gets a magic ring from a dying alien and receives his powers on the spot. Snore!

Moon Knight nearly dies but decides to get back on the horse and become the personal hit man of a moon god. Cool, I guess.

While these other origins nearly always involve death or a last minute reinvention and a call to action, they’re not all that exciting. That’s why you’ll see these origins being retreaded countless times to add some extra beef to them. But I’m telling ya, it ain’t all that necessary.

Another counterpoint that can be raised is the coming of age story. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is a fantastic origin story for Miles Morales which outshines his comic book origin by, well, miles. But that origin has the advantage of A) Being the focal point of the entire movie and B) Playing upon the well-established origin of original recipe Spider-Man. It has the advantage of a strong foundation and a movie format. A lot of super hero origins do not have that luxury. Sure, Shazam! was a good enough movie, but a kid who can turn into a super hero by saying a magic word is more of a novel and amusing concept than a tragic backstory.

Some super heroes don’t even need origins. Because they were born with their powers and have kicked ads since the beginning. Does the name “Wolverine” mean anything to you? He went for years without having one and we all know what happened when one was finally written for him (2011 was a bad time for us all). Hell, the entirety of the X-Men don’t even have a proper ‘origin’. All you need to know is they were born different, they go to school, and fight evil.

Origins don’t even matter in real life, people! Do you ever stop and look at your best friend and wonder “Gee, what a great guy. I wonder what the exact circumstances of his life were that led him to become this exact type of person.” If you do think that, you’re weird. You should just be happy that they’re a cool dude you can hang out with and not define them by the sum of all their past experiences. That’s for them to do. All you have to do is decide to like them in the moment. 

So the next time you sit down to watch Batman’s parents die for the one thousandth time, think about your other favourites and ask yourself why you like them. 

Is it because of their heavy and comprehensive backstory or is it because of what they do in the present moment, regardless of where or what they may have come from? Food fro thought.

Basically, what I’m saying is don’t obsess over the joys of an IKEA instruction manual; Enjoy the Lommarp in its completed state and all the fun you can have with it.

But what about super villain origins? Don’t even get me started. I’ll save that for another post. Until then, I’ll catch ya next week!

RIP Uncle Ben,

CD