No more Reading Rainbow!

I'm extremely sad to hear that after 25 years, Reading Rainbow is going off the air. Like the passing of Mr. Rogers, a part of my childhood is gone.

Wholesome and unassuming, the show was a complete antithesis to today's prototypical programming which usually has to have some sort of hook or attitude. But I recall even years (or decades ago) when watching, I sensed that it didn't try to have any kind of edge or gimmick to compete with Sesame Street or other shows.

I had heard years ago that the show was in danger of being cancelled and LeVar Burton begged and pleaded for funding. I feel such disappointment for the passing of a great program that fostered a love for reading. I'm sad not just for my own sense of nostalgia but for the kids today who are going to miss out.

And who's mind wasn't blown when you first saw LeVar in a Star Trek uniform?

Books

I shamefully admit to have not been reading much lately...

2666
The highly praised final work of Roberto Bolaño. It’s an engrossing, slow burn of a read, that I was drawn into, but somehow got sidetracked. Divided into four parts, I only reached the middle of the third section which chronicles the grisly deaths of young girls. I think that’s what did me in. I was reading the book in the evenings before bed and this section really fucked with my head to the point where I couldn’t sleep and had to stop reading. I need and want to finish the book, which I’ll try to undertake next week.

Naked
I’ve been in dire need of catching up on the genius of David Sedaris so started with this one. How can he so masterfully portray his life of quirky, dysfunctional behavior in such an entertaining, humorous way? I feel that if I undertook this, I’d just come off as sad and disturbing.

The Fountainhead
Another in the long line of books that I just inexplicably missed out on in my past. This book was actually the perfect thing for me to read when recently laid off. The exploits of an artistic genius who unflinchingly faces obstacles and adversaries, and comes out triumphant with his soul and integrity intact definitely inspires a person like me. I’ve fought several artistic battles in previous jobs and have always suffered with the mediocre compromised “solutions” so can cheer on a character like Rourke, even though he’s an obviously idealized image of man. As romantic as the story is, I have to wonder how successful his approach would be in the real world. This book merits multiple readings, especially at times of waivering on my beliefs and goals.

The Professor and the Madman

Wow. The Dark Knight was one of the few movies in recent years that had excited me enough to warrant me seeing it on opening day. That anticipation was paid off in spades.

Heath Ledger was transcendent in his role as the Joker. His interpretation and depiction of the insane villain was one of the most enthralling I’d ever watched, which makes his passing all the more tragic. Sadly, before this I’d never paid much attention to him as an actor. Working with Mel Gibson in The Patriot sort of condemned him for me.

The Joker has always been the definitive adversary to Batman. I once found that puzzling. Here you have a hero steeped in dark, serious, noir stylization, yet he gets paired with a (frankly) hokey concept villian. Think about it: the “world's greatest detective” faces off against a man with a giant, red-lipped grin in a purple suit using killer hand-buzzers and acid spewing flowers?

Batman has been developed over the decades into a meticulous strategist, utilizing technology and science to overcome anyone he faces. He’s bested seemingly more powerful characters, even Superman when such clashes occurred.

So I had assumed that the Joker’s pairing with Batman as an unfortunate result of the campy tone that dominated the 70’s comics, culminating in the Adam West television series.

It wasn’t until I read the graphic novel, Arkham Asylum, that I began to understand the Joker’s potential as a valid antagonist. Even while purchasing the book, the book store employee commented that this was the first story that ever made her frightened of the Joker. I had only been drawn to the book because of it’s artistic, collage styling and poetic narration which was completely different than the typical comic fare.

The story places Batman, trapped in the insane asylum where all of his captured villains have broken free and taken over. The Joker was featured sparingly, but just enough for me to realize that the guy was seriously homicidal and insane.

Which is why he is the perfect foil for Batman, the Yin to Batman’s Yang. The Joker has no rhyme or reason to his actions. He breeds in chaos and madness, not for money or power or comic book typical world domination aspirations, but simply for chaos and madness. He is the complete antithesis of Batman, the detective who believes that there is always an answer through science and logic.

For a well done documentation of the Joker’s many incarnations check out this write up on Comic Book Resources.

As for the rest of the movie, I will agree with other reviews that this is one of the best comic book movies ever made. Unlike X-men or Spiderman, this movie is steeped in realism. There’s no need to suspend belief so that men can cling to walls or shoot laser beams out of their eyes.

Although I felt the last act started to get convoluted and faltered a bit, the movie as a whole was gripping. I felt tense with anticipation throughout the whole film. There were a few gripes here and there, but minor. I wasn’t a huge fan of Maggie Gyllenhaal but she was light years more tolerable than Katie Holmes.

Aaron Eckhart's portrayal of Harvey Dent was well done. I enjoyed the build up of his character and how it mirrored Batman's role in Gotham. The filmmakers seemed to fully understand how his role poetically fit in with the theme of the story. I was thinking that they were building up his character for the next sequel so was surprised that it was paid off in this film. Maybe because of that expectation, I felt that it was a bit rushed and shoe-horned in. The development of Dent’s story was well handled but I think that the result was a letdown and not executed as perfectly as it could have been. The main antagonist of the film was the Joker and it was obvious to me that this hurt Two-Face’s tragic resolution. I applaud the filmmaker’s ability to intertwine the two villains’ stories though.

It was a great match of villains story-wise. Two-Face’s back story is so explicit that it took nearly the entire film to depict. Whereas the Joker had no real insight into his progression. As another masterful move, the filmmaker’s heightened each character by contrasting them with each other. Two-Face has always been propelled by his origin: a great hero that has fallen so far into evil. The Joker's motivations are based on madness that he needs no history, and in the many decades since his introduction, still has no definitive origin.

There will be the inevitable comparisons to all of the previous Bat-films. I have to say that as a kid, I loved Tim Burton's movies, but can admit today that they haven’t aged well at all. The visual style he created still appeals to me, especially the depiction of Gotham City so I kept wanting to see parts of it in Nolan’s films. But I also realize that the current films are much more grounded in our reality and that a realistic city backdrop fits in visually. Danny Elfman’s score in the Burton films is still iconic Batman for me. Otherwise, Nolan’s films surpass the previous attempts in every way. I didn’t even bother with Batman and Robin so can’t comment there.

The story with The Dark Knight is still Heath Ledger’s amazing performance, which will unfortunately be forever linked with his tragic death. If he winds up getting nominated for an Oscar (which I think he should) I can imagine there will be chatter about it only be spurred on by his passing. That will be very upsetting because I can’t recall in recent history such a powerful and mesmerizing performance.

Bravo, Heath.

Reviews: Daredevil and Y: the Last Man

Two of the best stories I’ve read in a long while come out of the comic book industry. While I’ve resigned from collecting comics, these two books shouldn’t be dismissed just because they fall into a stereotyped genre.


After years of hearing how Daredevil was the best comic on the shelf, I became curious enough to check out what the hype was all about.

During the height of my comic collecting years, I never strayed too far out of the X-men circle so Daredevil was a character that I didn’t have much exposure to. I wasn’t the only one either. The blind lawyer with heightened abilities in a red suit was mainly regarded as a B-level character in the Marvel Universe.

But in 1979, Frank Miller created a run on the book is now a hallmark story because it took the medium to places it normally didn’t go. Good guys actually died, heroes actually killed and it wasn’t a happy ending. He did such a good job that no one could follow up his act for another 20 years.

Now, writer Brian Michael Bendis and artist Alex Maleev take over the title to combine a tense, compelling story and gritty yet sweeping visuals to create a great, cinematic noir style unlike anything I’d seen in comics before.

Bendis sculpts a 3-dimensional character that doesn’t speak or act in a clichéd comic book fashion. I discovered that Daredevil is infinitely more interesting than the likes of Superman. Daredevil is a hero but is also an arrogant asshole. He protects innocent civilians but also jeopardizes his friends and family. His actions are never purely black and white and his thoughts never fall into easily discernible emotions.

In contrast, Kevin Smith (of Clerks fame) wrote the preceding story, which relied on lots of dialogue and cheesy villains standing over our hero and explaining his evil plot like a 007 villain. Smith gets credit for revitalizing the interest in Daredevil, but I think pales in comparison to Bendis’ efforts.

In the storyline, Daredevil’s secret identity is revealed to the world and we observe the aftermath. Each time the character seems to find a way to snake out of his predicament, the writer throws another wrench into the gears and you wonder again how things will turn out. The focus away from costumed antics and deals more on how his “normal” life is affected. The plot is truly intense and engrossing.

Needless to say, I’ve become a fan of this comic. I just hope that Bendis’ contribution, like Miller’s work, doesn’t become such a juggernaut that no one can maintain the level of quality. I’ve read a few issues by the next writer, Ed Brubaker, and it seems like he’s doing just as great a job.


The other title that has me hooked is Y: The Last Man. Written by Brian K. Vaughn and penciled by Pia Guerra, there are no costumed heroes with super powers or evil villains. Like Bendis, Vaughn injects as much realism as possible into the book. The greatest strength of the book is Vaughn’s ability to write modern, realistic, natural dialogue. No cheesy super hero one-liners, except in self-aware sarcasm. The characters act and speak in a manner that can easily be scripted from my own circle of friends.

I don’t find anything spectacular about the art, but no crippling flaws either. Guerra’s visuals seem to merely support the story, which is fine since the story is amazing. But after seeing how Bendis and Maleev created such a perfect union of story and art, it’s hard not to wonder what other level this book could’ve been taken to.

Now, on to the actual plot...

Due to unknown circumstances, all of the world’s males (animals included) die in an instant, throwing the entire world society and infrastructure into chaos and panic. Yet we find out that one man, Yorick (and his pet monkey) somehow survived.

The book follows Yorick, a scientist and an agent of a shadow government operation race to find out the cause and the cure for the catastrophe.

Vaughn expertly handles all of his characters, never relying on the obvious. You’d think that as the last man, Yorick would be in a Male Paradise and go screw as many women as he could. Yet Vaughn creates a man is actually a romantic and goes looking for his girlfriend (conveniently halfway across the world).

Vaughn treats the remaining women with dignity, not falling into a Helpless-Without-Men mentality. Not that a lot of crazy shit doesn’t happen. Think about half the world suddenly dying a horrible death, with planes falling from the sky because both the pilot and copilot were men, or how the government would cope with the Presidential line of succession landing on a low level Congresswoman.

The story is planned to last for 60 issues and while I’m only halfway through, I can sense that the story is dragging out a bit in order to cover the amount of pages. Probably reducing the number of issues to 40 would’ve helped keep a good pace. Still, it allows the book to create and fill out great characters.

Even with the lags, there are some great cliffhangers throughout the story. I don’t want to spoil any of them but will say that the writer has done a masterful job of crafting and executing a unique idea.

The first issue pacing is unparalleled and will have any person hooked into the story. The publishers are so confident of that fact that they have the entire first issue available to download in PDF format (which I’ve also provided a link to at the end of this post). Read it. You won’t be disappointed.

Most people will scoff at the idea of reading comics, but these two books are examples of how far the medium has come. Yeah, originally it was to entertain kids with the visuals, but over the years the story has taken precedence and, like anime, has hooked in an older audience. I find myself not even looking at the art and jumping to the next line of dialogue because I’m completely invested in the story. Definitely worth checking out.

Y: the Last Man #1

Lincoln logs

Every red blooded American knows the importance and achievements of Abraham Lincoln. We grew up listening to his heroic leadership during the dark times of our nation and the resulting steps towards a more equal and harmonious society. But somehow the true greatness of the man was always taken for granted by me. It’s just something that people easily agree to. "Yeah, yeah, he was great." But what made him such a remarkable man?

There have been countless biographies and retelling of Lincoln’s life so it’s hard to view him with any clarity. We all know about the Civil War. The Gettysburg Address. The assassination. What’s new to ponder over?

Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals strives to shed new light on the President by exploring the men around Lincoln and their perspectives on him. What’s amazing is that the people Lincoln appointed to his cabinet were the men that ran against him for office. It reveals how they all disregarded him as some country hick and eventually acquired a deep respect for who he really was.

"When Lincoln won the nomination, each of his celebrated rivals believed the wrong man had been chosen... That Lincoln, after winning the presidency, made the unprecedented decision to incorporate his eminent rivals into his political family, the cabinet, was evidence of a profound self-confidence and a first indication of what would prove to others a most unexpected greatness... Every member of this administration was better known, better educated, and more experienced in public life than Lincoln. Their presence in the cabinet might have threatened to eclipse the obscure prairie lawyer from Springfield."

The book intrigued me because it’s easy to draw comparisons to our current President. I can see the parallels and the divergence of the two men who are needed to lead this nation. We’re in a time of war, deeply divided, and have a man in the Oval Office that many shrug off as an unqualified countryboy. Still, while I’m sure many people during the Civil War were afraid and uncertain of what might come, I have a feeling that more than a few could take heart in the fact that there was a good man to guide the country. I wish I could say the same for our current state of affairs.

Like Lincoln, Bush relies on his easy-going Southern manner to disarm people and make his point. But unlike Lincoln, Bush fails to impart a sense of intelligence disguised under the facade. Bush refers to "liberty" and "justice" often in his speeches, but those words sound more hollow than virtuous when he speaks them. Lincoln was reknown for his powerful and moving speeches. Analyzers often talk about how gifted speakers like Kennedy can accurately hit the right stress points of a sentence to convey the meaning and how Bush often misses those marks.

Lincoln made a bold move by surrounding himself with his rivals, men who contemptuously believed they were better than he. He wasn’t afraid of them. And he wasn’t afraid of sharing the power with them. So what of Bush? Has he opened himself up to a forum of perspectives to help him find the best way to lead the country? After returning for a second term, Powell, the only one in his cabinet that seemed to dissent from Bush’s policies, stepped down. Consequently, Bush plugged the vacancies with the trusted and loyal. Yes, that probably streamlines the process a bit, but is it better for our country?

During the country’s various wars, the nation has had the benefit of great leadership at times. Lincoln, Washington, Roosevelt. But there have also been the Wilsons and Nixons that have failed to unite and guide the country in those times. Where will Bush stand in a historical perspective? And if he’s not the one to do it, will there be a Lincoln, Washington or Roosevelt ready to take the mantle?

Sorry to sound so anti-Bush, but it wasn’t always this way. I didn’t know enough about him when he first gained office so was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Now, rediscovering the actions of a far greater man serves to accentuate how Bush seems like just a spoiled child. Lincoln assumed the mantle of power with a respect and gravitas for what it meant, and I sense nothing of the sort from G.W. People are waiting for the next chance to get a new guy in the Oval Office. I guess I can be counted among those who are ready for change. More than that, I’m ready for a leader who has my respect.

Confessions of a vacuous mind

Here’s the thing. You can get immersed in city life pretty easily. Especially New York city life. People all around you are gushing, "New York is pretty fucking great." You even catch yourself thinking "New York is pretty fucking great."

But a line has to be drawn somewhere.

How is it that a person can sit down at 6 pm on any given night and manage to fill up the next SIX HOURS watching shows about New York? Even without cable, you can surf between episodes of Friends, Seinfeld and Sex and the City, or if you’re very clever, watch five episodes in a row of Friends. All of them filled with fun, young, energetic people living the beautiful lifestyle in New York. Or TV New York. That means nothing below 42nd St. No subways. No ugly or poor people. And by no means Brooklyn.

Okay, here comes the confession: I’ve caught myself sucked into the New York lovefest marathon more than once. It’s so easy, it took me by surprise. Seeing as how we don’t have a couch, living room or desk for me to do my computer work on, I have found that I use the bed for everything: sleep, eat and work. So I have the TV on while I do other things. Just in the background, I tell myself. Then it happens. All of a sudden I’m able to formulate that Chandler uses humor as a defense mechanism to cope with psychological and sexual issues stemming from his parents’ divorce, and site several sources to defend my theory. Of course they don’t make it sound so bleak. I guess if we all had a laugh track, our problems wouldn’t seem so bad either.

I wonder how many other people in New York are living vicarious New York lives through thirty minute installments on their TV. There needs to be some sort of hotline that can be called for a van to drive up to the victim’s place and have two people come in to shake him from his sitcom coma to tell him, "You don’t have a huge apartment. You have a finite source of income. You don’t have a group of beautiful friends with nothing better to do with their days than sit around and instigate wacky adventures. Not all New Yorkers are white. New Yorkers take the subway once in a while."

And I love how Sex and the City has managed to portray every single guy as having some sort of psychological deficiency or hamartia. I’ll stop complaining now. I actually think the show is written rather well. I just hate most of the characters. Go figure that one out.

It could be worse, I guess. I’m not watching the Apprentice or anything. And I don’t really have a gripe with the shows. It’s more about feeling guilty/ashamed that I’ve fallen into the habit of watching them. As a result, I’ve made an attempt at salvaging my few remaining brain cells by getting a library card. My first checkout: Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea. We’ll see how this one pans out. Of course, if it doesn’t I can always go back to The Great Gatsby, right Matador?