Marvel vs. DC

Marvel vs. DC is always a big deal with comic book fans. Super man is unbeatable some say then others will say the hulk can take him. This conflict and others like it get solved in a few crossover comics. Some of the matchups come with objectionable outcomes (ex. Wolverine beats Lobo in one of these crossovers) but others just make sense. Is this sort of closure what we really need though. Most of the matches victories were voted in as well which explains some of the upsets. Lets say if I want the Hulk to beat up Superman I dont need my dreams interrupted by a crossover comic. What I am saying is making a comic like this takes some of the imagination of reading comics. For instance Lobo comes and kicks Superman's butt on a dare. In Marvel vs. DC Wolverine beats Lobo. That is interesting I dont think anyone in their right mind would believe that Wolverine could beat Superman. Yet he beats a guy who can beat up Superman. The Hulk kicked Wolverines butt too and he lost to Superman in Marvel vs. DC. These things are better left to the imagination.

Just throwing this out there:
WHERE ARE THE WOMEN?
Seriously. In Dark Knight Returns the only female character worth squat is Robin/Carrie. Selina Kyle/Catwoman is reduced to acting a a Madame for the greater Gotham area, something that should really piss off anyone who follows the character for crap. Kyle has a code of honor in the same style as Batman, and would not allow herself to be anything as ordinary as a glorified pimp-ette.
In Watchmen, women are demoted to the status of sex toy bimbos. Sally Jupiter is noted for being a busty slut of a stage mother, and Laurie has the interesting job of playing the harpy who sleeps with Dr. Manhattan. Not to mention the supporting cast of characters in both books who are nagging, unpleasant, or hookers.
It isn't an author thing though. Both Miller and Moore are capable of writing intelligent, brave, and interesting female roles. Anyone who has read League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or Sin City would know better. I just question why these two writers, who are capable of so much more, have done the ladies so wrong in some of their most noted works.

Fifty points if you guess who wrote this little rant ;)

Thinking about the Code

We discussed the Comics Code Authority today in class, and I found this website that has the full transcript of the 1954 Code. If you pay attention to "General Standards Part B," you can see how the code rather successfully killed the horror genre and the publishers that focused on that particular subject.
The section I found extremely interesting was "General Standards Part C," especially the section subtitled "Marriage and Sex." You can definitely tell the code was passed during the height of the "Leave it to Beaver" era.
Another major hit to the comics industry as a result of the Code was the income from advertisers. There was a ban on alcohol, tobacco, even fireworks advertisements.
One of the sources I read regarding the code alluded to it being more strict than the 1930's Production Code, also known as the Hays Code which is another link that is pretty interesting to look over.
The Code has been "liberalized" several times, sparked by Marvel Comics and Stan Lee's decision to run three issues of The Amazing Spider-Man without sanctioning by the Code, but was endorsed by the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
In 2001 Marvel Comics dropped the seal entirely, favoring their own system that follows the system of rating movies and video games. Archie and DC Comics are the only two major companies that continue to run books with the "Code Approved" seal, though DC has been known to simply run books without the seal if they do not pass.

What is very intriguing about the Code is the lack of means for actual enforcement...
...That's right, people just let the Code run how they did business because of social pressures, many that continue today.

The Dark Knight Returns with some improvements.

I remember as a kid watching reruns of the original Batman tv series, the Scooby Doo/Batman crossover, etc. and thinking to myself "Are they serious?". Even then I had trouble believing that this perfect looking, overly polite, rich white guy actually survived in a city with even a semi-serious crime problem. His sidekick was this typical all american who used horrible one liners in a poor attempt at seeming witty and humorous and all the villains were a joke, never really causing anything other than a minor inconvinience. I was never really that into Batman.

That is, until I read Frank Miller's take on the Batman.

In Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Frank Miller takes a much more realistic look at into who Batman has to be in a real Gotham. In a real world, Batman would have to be a ruthless, vicious bastard to strike fear into the hearts of less than decent men, and that's just how he's presented in this graphic novel. No more goody goody, stop the bad guy before dinner with the family. Here we have a man who has suffered real loss. Not just the loss of his parents but also of his sidekick, Robin. We get to see a gritty old man give the seedy element of Gotham a well placed kick in the groin without stopping to ask if it's ok.

And amidst all this ass-kickery, we see that the Batman is still clothed in the traditional blue and gray. A very nifty touch.

I guess all I really want to say is I like this new direction with this established character. Batman is finally someone the readers can relate to (and considering the fact that he's a billionare who has anything he could want, besides his parents, that's a big thing).