C2E2 Panel - Video

(Thanks to Beth for her excellent camerawork despite the less-than-ideal setting; also thanks to Cristal, Dawn, Daina & Michi for being excellent panellists) 

Cheapskate Film Festival - REEL INJUN

Right now, the topic that's driving a lot of conversation - and controversy - is that of representation and diversity in popular culture. Everything from female Ghostbusters to the casting of Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as Doc Savage encourages people to share their opinions.

(Mine? I thought Ghostbusters 2 was an unnecessary sequel, and the film was a great done-in-one....but female Ghostbusters work. I think Johnson is a great choice for Doc Savage. And people who complain about having their childhoods "ruined" need to get over themselves. But I digress).

However, 2006's Reel Injun, a Canadian documentary that was featured on PBS - is one of the best examinations of how movies (and other popular culture) have framed an entire group....and how having representation behind the camera is critical for driving greater diversity.

The history of Native American/First Peoples representation is a bit...well, at times it's very problematic. Although initial representations during the silent era were rather positive, eventually Hollywood turned to more negative portrayals, as well as highlighting the "whitewashing" of native peoples.

(Or, to put it bluntly, Johnny Depp isn't the first person to be accused of misrepresentation....and neither is Vanilla Ice. And there's a really good reason why several actors walked off the set of a recent Adam Sandler movie during production).

In addition, there are tales of actors who "presented" as native...but who were far from it. Like the silent actor who later committed suicide. Or even the tale of Iron Eyes Cody (which is especially surprising). But the most powerful part of this production is the input of several people from indigenous tribes. (And my apologies for my phrasing - I'm trying to be as sensitive as possible; any errors or lack of sensitivity in phrasing are clearly my own). Filmmakers and actors like Wes Studi, Graham Green, and Adam Beach (whose performance in 1998's Smoke Signals helped spark the renaissance and I have to admit - I like the actor so much I "cast" him in the lead in a recent short story)

Reel Injun might be a bit hard to find on DVD (which is why I'll also include a streaming link via Amazon), but it's worth it - it's a great hidden treasure that's well worth a look. It's both invigorating and revelatory, and quite honestly, probably the best film featured this week.

Go. Watch. Now.

Diversity in Comics, Thy Name is Monday

Probably the most diverse
comics have been in a *long* time

Granted, controversy online about comics can often be much about a tempest in a teapot - sometimes, there is a good reason for healthy debate; sometimes, it's "just Monday."

But today, it's a little bit of both.

First, there is a question posed by one of my fellow Comic Related. writers in talking about some of the woes of the comic industry - more specifically, why there is not a greater diversity in writers/artists/creators. Brock makes a really strong point by stating towards the end ...(major companies) should consider that diversity may be just the thing comic books need to regain their glory. In short, this post is dead on and dead right.

And nothing shows the need for more inclusive, expansive thinking all around than a kerfuffle on Twitter.

A comics retailer on the East Coast posted some racially charged material about a Marvel character...and then later deleted them, claiming that they were "good natured" in tone. (I'll include a link to my retweet to provide context) This retailer decided that rather than take the high road, admit poor judgment, and move on....they deleted the offending tweets and offered this lame, er, I mean, half hearted rationalization.

Sorry, Larry, but you missed the point...and paradoxically, made a much greater one.

Part of the issue with diversity in comics is the fact that, in many ways, fandom still acts as if it's an exclusive club, and if you don't quite "get it", you're not in. When I read the statements you made, I think of my fellow comic fans of various nationalities, and honestly believe that had I made those statements, I would probably receive not a "my, what a sharp, clever fellow you are" retort....but withering derision and disregard, and a lack of respect which I would deserve.

(Conversely, I would also avoid other questionable references to sexuality and gender - an offhand remark to a group of fellow Comic Related podcasters about "baking me cookies and doing my laundry" would be just as inappropriate. No, it's not being politically correct - being good natured means that you go out of your way to avoid charged language. And sorry, but what you said was just. plain. wrong.)

But let me open up this conversation to my blog readers - am I being out of line? After checking out my links, am I being too politically correct or uptight, or are these comments really that bad?

Because I'm willing to admit when I was wrong...and Massachussets comics store owner, you weren't. You did everything to hide it, and you compounded the act.

Let's take a first step - let's embrace the difference.

Sundays in the Village: The Schizoid Man

(Revised 01/04/2023)

When last we saw Number 6, he had successfully destroyed a major indoctrination project in the Village. He has repeatedly thwarted the attempts of Number 2 to learn about his resignation. In "The Schizoid Man," the new Number 2 arrives at a very devious, extremely malicious plan - turn Number 6 into a co-conspirator (through drugs, operant conditioning, and other means) and basically break him down through an extended mind game. Or, to quote the episode directly:

"Your job, Number 12, will be to impersonate him (Number 6). Take his sense of reality away. Once he begins to doubt his own identity, he'll crack"

This is one of those episodes of The Prisoner that is something of a mixed bag. If you gave the story a letter grade, it would be a B+, but only because of the last 15 minutes...and ironically, even though it misuses the word "schizoid" in 1960's terms, Number 6 seems to fit the DSM-4 criteria.

(EDIT - looking at the 2023 DSM-5 criteria...possibly still relevant) 

The episode crackles along, with Number 6 and Number 12 (or "Number 6 version 2) playing an unusual game of psychological oneupmanship. The symbolism is sharp (both in terms of who wears which color jacket, as well as Alison or Number 24, "divided" by Numbers 2, 6, and 12), the dialogue crackles (Number 6's insults of Number 12 being from "the people's copying service" and "the economy pack"), and the irony of Number 12 "asserting" that he is Number 6 is subtle. The overall goal seems to begin with "Getting the information from Number 6" (on an "I know something you don't know" basis). Still, as Number 2 so malevolently points out, "By the time we're finished...he won't know whether he's Number 6 or the cube root of infinity". In these terms, the episode is a great example of psychological manipulation.

However, a few things about this episode ring slightly false.

First, this episode uses ESP as a plot point, and I have a slight bias against the use of ESP. Often, it is used as a "magical" device, and given The Prisoner's bias towards realistic science, it is slightly misused here. (There is an alleged "mental link" between Number 6 and Allison; however, given that the dialogue indicates a 68 - 74% success rate in mind reading, all it suggests is that Number 6 should never play poker with Allison). I can believe in the fantastic, whether it is a time-traveling alien in a box bigger on the inside than on the outside or that a ship can surpass the speed of light; I cannot believe that telepathy is given "serious" treatment in this episode.

In addition, the last fifteen minutes are rushed, with various plot points being hammered home in a variety of cliches. (And there's no first-time-for-this-cliche either). It could have used another run through the typewriter; the fact that it leads to a "failed escape attempt" on Number 6's part just seems rushed.

Finally - and this is more of a general complaint - we see a Haitian and (presumably) a Sikh. That's not the complaint - other than those individuals and a female Asian in "Arrival", the Village seems totally non-diverse in terms of its population. Granted, comparing a 1960s show (created by a man born in the 1920s) to 21st-century standards is unfair. Just to put in perspective: at that time, there was a pioneering African-American male in the lead of an espionage drama, a leading co-star in the major hit of the day (which also featured an Asian guest star in its first season), two shows featuring a mixed cast, including a show focusing on young people and one which featured a paraplegic detective.

All of those were "formula" shows, yet demonstrated some movement towards diversity. It's a shame that The Prisoner - focusing on the fear of "one world" - never approached that. Or was it deliberate?

Who knows: after all, “Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.”

Coming soon to Sundays in the Village:

“I know every nut and bolt and cog--I built it with my own hands!”

“I understand. The fact that you won't explain . . . explains everything.”

“To borrow one of Number Two's sayings: `The butcher with the sharpest knife . . . has the warmest heart.' ”

"A weak link in the chain of command. Waiting to be broken"

Be seeing you.

Proof That Evil Truly Exists

As I was perusing the blogsophere, I came across Thom's post which linked to Cheryl Lynn's post, about the new Hot Pocket ads.

After viewing them, I realized...

...that somehow, somewhere, not only did someone think such a truly stupid and offensive idea was worth pursuing, but that Hot Pockets paid a huge chunk of change to support these commercials.

(No, I'm not being politically correct - they're kinda dumb and uninformed)

The Ballad of Danny Blaine

I have to admit, my mind is still reeling a bit from the end of Justice Society of America # 2 - not because of the recap of Kingdom Come (which, quite frankly, has been referenced in most DC books for years), but because it resonates with one of my all-time favorite comics...and shows something of a lost opportunity for DC Comics.

We first meet our future Starman as a boy- a member of the Legion of Super Heroes, on an adventure with then-current Starman Jack Knight in the future. Jack, at the request of the woman he loves, is on a quest to learn the whereabouts of his predecessor, Will Payton. (One of the things I miss about James Robinson's Starman - it was able to delicately weave continuity into a coherent story, rather than feel the need to "reboot" the universe). In a discussion, Thom Kallor (or "Star Boy") learns that he is destined to be the Starman of the future...and is shocked. Imagine, a teenage/young adult male learning that not only is he part of history...but he is aware of how he is going to die. (This, I think, explains the "Danny Blaine" identity - it serves as an untraceable identity with no real links. Perfect for spoiling the plans of those villians who could travel in time and "prevent" Starman from happening).

But ultimately, we get our grasp of the future Starman in the final issues of the Jack Knight series. The Sons of the Father Sons of the Father trade paperback should be required learning for how to end a series - there are resolutions, revelations, and an overall sense of finality. However, when we meet Mr. Blaine, he reveals that his life has been all the richer, because he's led "two lives". Mr. Blaine (or Mr. Kallor) has returned Jack to his home time, and is off to die. His face, once he removes the mask, is scarred, his hair gray, but in essence, we see that he has fought the good fight - unlike Jack (who gets a happy ending), Danny Blaine will go off to...Armageddon.

I also have to admit that I am a little disappointed that DC chose to open the multiversal can of worms and not go with the post-Infinite Crisis Starboy-as-Starman. I can understand why, but in a way, it's a shame, especially with the way in which DC has pledged to be more "diverse". Just think of the storytelling possibilities - a man who is considered "just another" in the future goes back to a more barbaric past willingly, and who does not understand the dynamics that drive 21st century earth. Imagine conflicts with Courtney Whitmore - after all, she was given the "official" blessing from Jack Knight, and here is some unknown stranger taking over - imagine the dynamics. Yes, it would have the fanboys screaming, "But he's been portrayed as Caucasian in the past!", but what's more important - good stories that have resonance with our present, or an almost fanatical devotion to the past?

(And plus, there is precedent - having Captain Marvel, a boy-in-adult's-clothing, courting Stargirl very early on...where was the outrage? Yes, they broke up. All is well).

Maybe it's my current mood of letting go of the past, and moving back to my home city...but there's something about this new Starman that seems to have potential. I think I'll hang around awhile.

And don't forget - today is National Gorilla Suit Day.