The Latest Comics-Op Is UP

• My fabulous idea to revolutionize the industry!
• Can men write "women?"
• Cover incentives!
• The First Dog!
• And much much more!

In: Comics-Op!

Roger Ebert Writes ANOTHER Post On "Transformers 2"

From "This Just In: Hip-Hop Robots In Transformers Only Robots"

Reader: "And just for your info, the two “black” characters in the new movie are not black, they learned how to talk through the World Wide Web, which is why different Transformers talk differently..."

Ebert: "You mean the two robots from an alien world are in fact not actual black people?"

Okay, I think we can all safely say that he's baiting the fanboys at this point...

Seriously, this is becoming like Captain Ahab and the big whale.

EDIT: originally, I referred to this as his 4th post on Transformers 2. But then I realized that I lost count.

The "Balance Sheet" Paradox

OK, I've had my distance from the whole Michael Jackson thing. I was really shocked and sad that he died; I mean, the road he was going down, it seemed rather inevitable. But it was still a shock.

Watching his memorial on TV, however, brought to mind something that has always puzzled/troubled me. And that's the Balance Sheet Paradox.

Do the things you do in life that are extremely awesome "balance out" the things you do in life that are extremely not awesome? Or further: not merely "balance out," but eclipse, bury the badness?

For example, I've read a lot of online debates recently regarding whether Jackson's huge contributions to music & extensive philanthropic acts more than "make up" for the facts of his obvious massive narcissism, drug abuse, and, at the very minimum, behavior towards some children that was (if not overtly sexual) sort of really weird. I've even read opinions where Michael Jackson was such a larger-than-life star with such larger-than-life needs and stresses, that if he needed to "blow off some steam" in a number of different ways he should be forgiven for it; that it's the price of us having such an important, world-changing individual in our midst.

Often lost in this balance sheet are individual victims. They are, in the face of the balance sheet, "not really that important." A necessary price to pay for greatness. For example, I've often heard the line of reasoning that compared to all the good President Clinton did, one affair with a White House intern was not a big deal. (In fact, what was that hussy doing, trying to seduce our president, anyhow?) I've heard this argument from not a few women. Monica Lewinsky, in this line of reasoning, was simply "collateral damage."

Another example I remember from my early twenties, as I attended an academic function that was in tribute to a particular teacher. The popular teacher had brought tremendous acclaim and funding to the school, and had performed many charitable acts. He was lionized as a saint, a rockstar, at this party. But I knew that he also was a serial seducer and manipulator of a number of his young female students, leaving them in various states of confusion, distress, shame, etc. This included destroying a marriage, and, in turn, destroying the woman in question's ability to visit her own children.

When I brought this up to my boss, the public relations director of the school, he said he could give me no easy answer about it. He never told me to be quiet about it, because he agreed it was a problem. On the other hand, he pointed out that the school would be severely hit with scandal and misfortune if such a high-profile person was revealed to be abusing his position. I agreed. I loved my school.

I have never seemed to get away from the Balance Sheet paradox. It seems to be something that has always dogged my life, demanding from me some sort of committed stance. Can we have and approve both: the sacred and the profane in the same person, good and bad wrapped up in equal measures? Can we love the good and ignore or condemn the bad? Or are there certain absolutes or lines that, once crossed, stains every other act?

And what about the "collateral damage?"

My Big SDCC Post!!!

I can't go.
Maybe next year!
(Actually, definitely next year)

"Jennifer's Body" Covers from Boom!

Which alternate cover to the comic book adaptation to the movie "Jennifer's Body" do you prefer?

Frank Cho:

Eric Jones:

Not liking Megan (gak) Fox is not reason enough to abstain from voting. :-D

Also, no Ferraris were washed in the making of either comic or movie.

---->reference related Bleeding Cool article here.

Classy

From the NY Post, in regards to how Megan Fox got her role in "Transformers":

When the sizzling star of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" went to director Michael Bay's house to audition for the part, "He made her wash his Ferrari while he filmed her..."

I'm not surprised, but can you imagine if he tried that crap with another actress? Then again, maybe I'm just being naive. Yeesh.

"Picture you're giving Optimus a sponge bath..."

That Archie Guy Gets Around

From the Archie Comics press release:

Perpetual teen and all-American comic book icon Archie Andrews may have sent shockwaves around the world when it was recently announced he will propose to fussy heiress Veronica Lodge in the 600th issue of the 68 year old comic book (and not girl-next door Betty Cooper), but don’t tell Universal Republic singing sensation Colbie Caillat. The platinum-plus, award winning singer/songwriter has ‘fallen’ for the red-headed Archie in a big way, and will be ushering in her new single “Fallin’ For you” and upcoming new album, BREAKTHROUGH, due out August 25th, by literally ‘fallin’ for Archie in a historic singing match-up splashed inside the pages of Veronica’s very own comic – VERONICA # 196. The combustible issue features Archie and Colbie on the cover playfully readying for their musical debut together while a very wary Veronica looks on!

So is the linchpin of the "Archie mystique" jealous females?

Close-up of Veronica on the cover of the issue in question:

FEAR THIS WOMAN!

2009 Inkwell Awards Winners Announced

As mentioned on this blog before, I'm a big supporter of the Inkwells. Here are the winners for this year (visit this link for more info):

FAVORITE INKER (favourite inker over another's comic book pencil art from '08 material)

Wade Von Grawbadger (Ultimate Spider-Man) winner

Mark Morales (Thor, Secret Invasion) runner-up

MOST ADAPTABLE (showing exceptional ink style versatility over other comic book pencil artists in '08)

Tim Townsend (Amazing Spiderman) winner

Danny Miki (Incredible Hercules, Ultimate annuals) runner-up

PROPS AWARD (inker over others comic book pencil art deserving of more attention from '08)

Matt Ryan (Ms. Marvel, Wonder Woman) winner

Stefano Gaudiano (The Immortal Iron Fist, Daredevil) co-runner-up

Steve Leialoha (Fables) co-runner-up

THE SPAMI (favourite Small Press And Mainstream-Independent: '08 comic book cover-dated ink work over another pencil artist (Non-Marvel or DC work))

Tim Townsend (Witchblade) winner

Tom Van Zandt (Unhappy Gran’ma) runner-up

ALL IN ONE AWARD (Favourite artist known for almost-exclusively inking his/her own comic book pencil work and rarely the work of others in '08)

Mike Mignola (Hellboy: In the Chapel of Moloch) winner

Simone Bianchi (Astonishing X-Men) runner-up

THE JOE SINNOTT AWARD (a hall of fame designation for an inking career of outstanding accomplishment (lifetime achievement, 15-years minimum- not limited to '08 comic book material)- two winners chosen annually)

Terry Austin (winner)

Dick Giordano (winner)

Tim Townsend (runner-up

In addition the Inkwell Committee will also be presenting a Silver Inkwell Award to Bette Simons, in appreciation and recognition for her brother Dave Simons. Dave passed away recently and is greatly missed by many, both as a colleague and as a friend. The committee honors past members with such an award for their contributions and time served. In the past a Silver Inkwell was also bestowed to founding member Bill Nichols upon his departure.

Ebert: Transformers 2 Fans "Not Sufficiently Evolved"

The Ebert just won't let it go, will he?

In his latest column, "I'm A Proud Brainiac!" (complete with graphic of the DC Comics "Brainiac"), film critic Roger Ebert defends his stance on Transformers 2, among other things:

"Those who think "Transformers" is a great or even a good film are, may I tactfully suggest, not sufficiently evolved."

and

"So let's focus on those who seriously believe "Transformers" is one of the year's best films. Are these people wrong? Yes."

and

"Some of the posters at certain popular web forums are nine blooms short of a bouquet."

and

"But am I out of touch? It's not a critic's job to reflect box office taste. The job is to describe my reaction to a film, to account for it, and evoke it for others. The job of the reader is not to find his opinion applauded or seconded, but to evaluate another opinion against his own."

Facepalm Time Part Two: Claire's "Experimentation" in HEROES

Because a female character's sexuality shouldn't be organic to the story, it should be a gimmick to titillate viewers.

From Contact Music:

HAYDEN PANETTIERE is preparing for girl-on-girl love scenes in the next series of HEROES - her character will reportedly enjoy a smooch with her college roommate.
The 19-year-old actress plays cheerleader Claire Bennet in the hit U.S. show and TV bosses are considering working a lesbian storyline into the upcoming fourth season.
A source tells British newspaper the Daily Star, "It's just girlie fun at first. But it might progress into something more serious. It depends on how viewers respond."

That's right – Claire's lesbianism/bisexuality is such an intregal part of the storyline, we'll let the viewers decide. If they vote "HOT!", there will be more.

And sexual experimentation with a college roommate – that's BOLD! Plus: cheerleader!

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having more LGBT characters in sci-fi entertainment, across the board. And I think, overall, it's better to have more related characters and storylines than less, even if I think some are either promoted poorly or used purposely as a gimmick.

But I think the reason storylines like Willow becoming gay/bisexual worked for me is that they didn't issue a press release when it happened. It was just part of the story, and I don't feel it was used as a gimmick. If anything, BTVS was at the height of its popularity when Willow and Tara got together, and could have lost (and probably did lose) some viewers in the process.

That's just my 2 cents. I could be wrong. It just would be nice to have a high-profile gay character in a comic or TV show and not promote it as "TEH GAY CHARACTER OMG!!!!!!"

Facepalm Time

One Newsarama poster reacts to the announcement of the JLA/99 Crossover:

"Oh. God. No. Muslim pandering, anyone? Thank you, Time Warner, for showing us whose side you're on. I guess we can add you to the list of traitorous companies who have forgotten 9/11..."

Another poster, calling himself "The Mighty Dixon" (!) wrote,

"This is just further evidence of my criticism of DC political agenda that has driven this company away from solid stories of of the adventures of readers favorite characters that they we have always, no matter what generation, come the the shelves of our respective stores to purchase comics for. You would not have seen any comics reflecting German heroes during or proceeding World War II."

Of course, we cannot judge the majority of Newsarama users for the opinions or actions of a few.