The Four Color Media Monitor

Bounding Into Comics describes the latest Batman special, which is one of the most heavily politicized stories DC's sent to press lately, proving how bad Marie Javins truly is as an editor:

Batman’s first stop is to a rooftop overlooking an electronics store that is being looted with neighboring buildings, some of them appearing to be apartments, being set on fire. The rioters are even shown waving blunt objects in the air.

Batman rationalizes that he shouldn’t put a stop to the rioters because there are more than likely bigger fish to catch out in Gotham City, despite having no knowledge of where these big fish might be, given the power and communication black outs.

Whitta writes Batman’s interior monologue, “Haven’t seen a night like this in a while. Last time it was this bad was with that damn fear gas in the water supply. Only so much I can do. Need to prioritize. Hunt the big fish. Protect the little fish.”

“These places all have insurance. Not my job to protect their profit margins. In my father’s day, the American Dream used to mean something. An honest wage for honest work. Food on the table. Liberty and justice for all. Now it’s an illusion, a carrot on a stick, attainable by a few, dangled just out of reach for everyone else.”

“A bigger TV. A faster car. Shiny objects to keep the masses distracted, while the world burns. You want to blame them for grabbing the carrot when the lights go out? Go ahead. But don’t look to me to stop them. That’s not why I do this,” he concludes.

This has got to be some of the dumbest dialogue I've seen attached to the Masked Manhunter since Identity Crisis attached an awfully stupid line to his narrative thinking. And it's made worse when viewed within the context of whether there could be civilians trapped in buildings burned down by the mobs:

However, the comic also depicts the crimes being committed by the Antifa and Black Lives Matter-like mob as worse or could be arguably worse than the crimes committed by Joker and Penguin. The mob isn’t just looting an electronics store, it appears to be burning down apartment buildings too. It’s also unclear if there’s any staff in the building that have already been brutalized by the mob.

Penguin is attempting to murder one woman and Joker has a bus full of kids. How many women and kids are in these apartment buildings that the mob is burning down?

So according to the story's narrative, only supervillains like Penguin and Joker qualify for battling, while the Antifa-style mobs are to be ignored, presumably because they're "civilian" themselves? This is sick as it's illogical.

To make matters worse, yet not unexpected, the book's writer, Gary Whitta, has defended his angle for Batman's conduct, with all the expected blatancy, including the following double-standard:

Not only that, his decision also shows that he’s a hypocrite as earlier in the issue, Bruce Wayne and Alfred defended Wayne Manor from a couple of thieves who believed the home to be empty and decided to do some looting of their on.

Whitta defended this depraved and hypocritical depiction of Batman on Twitter writing, “Any negative review I get from a right-wing critic who can’t stomach the thought that Bruce Wayne might have a social conscience goes into my positive review file.”

He added, “Thanks for this!”

Whitta would also add, “I honestly didn’t expect it to be that controversial but some readers *really* didn’t like the choice Batman made in Fortress #1 to pass up putting a beatdown on people stealing big-screen TVs and saving a busload of kidnapped schoolchildren instead. Telling…”

Whitta’s dismissal of the criticism as being unable to “stomach the thought that Bruce Wayne might have a social conscience” is an outright lie given the entire criticism is that Bruce Wayne would actually stop people from committing crime.

Not only is it a lie, it’s a projection because the criticism is that he removed the social conscience from Bruce Wayne by having him flee from rampaging criminals that are burning down the city putting people’s lives at risk.

If Bruce Wayne truly had a social conscience, he wouldn’t leave innocent civilians to the whims of a bloodthirsty, angry, fire-bomb throwing mob.

Even if you remove the fact that these Antifa style rioters are roaming the streets with blunt weapons and have fire bombed a number of buildings, Whitta depicted Batman as defending his own home from theft earlier in the issue, why would he randomly approve of it when they are stealing from someone else?

It makes absolutely no sense. He wouldn’t be endorsing theft, looting, and rioting while at the same defending his own home from theft.

Sadly, this kind of politicized writing was bound to happen, and lest we forget, even under previous editor/publisher Dan DiDio, some of this was already turning up. I hope serious Bat-fans who haven't dropped the franchise titles yet will do so now. This is some of the most shamelessly political stuff DC could've put out, and has to be boycotted.

Labels: bad editors, Batman, dc comics, moonbat artists, moonbat writers, politics, terrorism, violence

The Australian youth magazine Happy spoke with cartoonist Spiegelman at a local convention, and he still seems oblivious to valid queries whether his own side of the political spectrum has anything to do with Maus getting banished from Tennessee school libraries:

Spiegelman went on to share what he thought were a few of the main reasons the Tennessee Board of Education wanted Maus banned.

Firstly, to keep children in a position of powerlessness, lest they ever think it’s okay to question authority or to question or stand up to their parents in any way.

Second, he sees it as a push for parents to take their children out of public schools and re-enrol their children in Christian schools. Where there’s less chance of reading books or other material that they consider unsafe or unchristian.

And thirdly, to Christianise Auschwitz, much in the way he thinks they did with Schindler’s List. Because let’s face it, Maus is an eye-opener if there ever was one, with first-hand stories taken from real-life conversations with Spiegelman’s father, making for a very compelling, astonishing, and deeply moving work of art, as much as it was when it was first published in 1980.

Oh, good grief. So he believes Christianity - and only Christianity - is responsible for this unfortunate ban on his book at the Tennessee schools? Let's be clear. Nobody's saying religion's incapable of leading to embarrassments like this one, or that it never did. But if Spiegelman were serious, he'd recognize secular-minded liberals can perform censorship too, for very unaltruistic reasons, and does he think it's okay if children grow up to be vulgar? That's practically what led to the prevailing mentality during WW2 and the Holocaust. If there's no education provided on why it pays to be polite and good natured, it is any wonder there's bound to be a lack of respect for human life somewhere around the corner?

In addition, if Spiegelman believes children should be allowed to question authority, does he also believe they should be allowed to question the left-wing takes on authority? Same with left-leaning parents who could have questionable MOs. These queries go unanswered in these discussions with him.

So how can we be certain Spiegelman's a realist if he won't question his own side of the political spectrum? If he thinks only Christianity's the problem, then he's missing some much bigger boats sailing around out there, including what happened with a few of Dr. Seuss' classic tales last year. As a result, some could wonder if all Spiegelman really cares about is his own writings and art, and not anybody else's.

Labels: censorship issues, Europe and Asia, history, libraries, misogyny and racism, moonbat artists, msm propaganda, politics

According to a writer at the Federalist, Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is laced with what the emphasis on what America Chavez was built upon should make clear, and just as disturbingly, horror-genre elements:

Raimi changed all that in the sequel, as Wanda possesses an innocent mom, torturing and murdering people in gruesome ways. “Doctor Strange 2” gives us all the hallmarks of a stereotypical horror flick, but without the suspense that makes them great, and then leaps back into an incoherent fantasy. This witchcraft keeps the plot afloat, distracting from holes in the storyline. If you’re going to take on a multiverse, you shouldn’t use sorcery as a crutch to hide the parts that don’t make sense. [...]

In short, the film is a trifecta of graphic, creepy, and cheesy. If Marvel wanted to merge with the horror genre, it should have debuted a new series instead of messing with an old one. The jump is jarring.

On this note, I've noticed there seems to be quite a few horror-themed movies turning up lately (including a remake of Stephen King's Firestarter and Crimes of the Future), and it's honestly worrisome, because it symbolizes the bad influence all the concentration on darkness has upon entertainment of recent. However, if the 2nd Ghost Rider movie of the past decade was a dud, putting an end to more such adaptations in a hurry, then there's little point in remaking them now, if a horror film is such a big deal.

Worse yet is the message of the film delivered to us through the hypocritical hands of Strange as he stops at nothing to save the day. Wanda’s insatiable self-deception becomes almost a relief in comparison to the sangfroid of Strange, who breaks no sweat at crossing the very same line that makes Wanda the bad guy.

“You break the rules and you’re the hero,” Wanda says. “I break the rules and I’m the enemy. Hardly seems fair.”

On its face, the film doesn’t seem that woke, and to its credit, it’s not a feminist propaganda piece. There’s just one brief flashback to Chavez’s lesbian “moms,” but nothing more — we think.

But America Chavez is not a Stan Lee creation. She’s a lesbian character from Joe Casey and Nick Dragotta’s 2011 comic “Vengeance #1.”

And all of a sudden, we realize what door Marvel just opened. The sexuality of Marvel’s newest female superhero now has protection in any future production from one of the biggest of the Marvel franchise: “Doctor Strange.” Any pushback to an overtly lesbian character can now be fought with the assertion that she’s already in “Doctor Strange 2,” and she’s lesbian in the comics.

They didn't mention, however, that, as previously noted, the 2 lesbian moms were killed off in a cliched showbiz setup wherein lesbians are killed as plot devices, and that can also be tasteless and reprehensible. But, the reviewer has a point that the politicized structure of this film, relying as it does on characters developed for political points, serves to further woke agendas, and if Disney/Marvel Studios use the global box office gross as justification, it's no wonder we'll be swamped with more of this agenda-driven use of homosexuality in any upcoming films allegedly based on Marvel products. That aside, it sure is ironic how, for a movie as woke as Multiverse of Madness actually is, they had no qualms about victimizing Scarlet Witch's reputation full force, depicting her as a murderous madwoman instead of an admirable heroine fearlessly battling sci-fi criminals in a fictional world. It just shows how even today, many of the writers and editors responsible for bringing down the quality of Marvel's comics to dismal levels are still getting away with it.

I'm as big a Dr. Strange fan as the next person is - and proudly own a big portion of the stories from up to the turn of the century in trade paperbacks - but that's exactly why I don't want to watch movies like these. Because the sad truth is, they do the source material a terrible disservice.

Labels: Doctor Strange, golden calf of death, golden calf of LGBT, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, politics, violence

While reporting on Tidal Wave's new bio-comic about Ukraine's president, the Willamette Week said the following:

Comics have a history of intersecting with world events, whether it’s Captain America punching Nazis or Spider-Man combing through the wreckage at Ground Zero. So it was only a matter of time before Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, got his own comic book.

These superheroes may have such a history, but before the turn of the century, most past writers usually avoided putting the fictional heroes directly in the middle of WW2, since here, you have superpowered beings who could knock down dozens of enemy soldiers in most surreal fashion, and it wouldn't look good in comparison with real life where USA soldiers were experiencing hell on the battlefield in Europe with no such luxuries as you'd see in science fantasy. Yet the 2019 SyFy network article linked to by the Oregon-based weekly makes no attempt to acknowledge mixing characters from a sci-fi world with real life issues can come off as incredibly awkward. What they do say is the following:

Nearly two decades ago, the 9/11 terrorist attacks left the nation reeling. New York City was particularly hard hit, with the deaths of almost 3,000 innocent civilians and senseless destruction. Because Marvel Comics and its heroes had become synonymous with New York, the publisher felt it had to respond to the tragedy. And it had to be Spider-Man who addressed it.

And why specifically must Spidey's title be the choice series for what turned out to be an insult to the intellect? Why not Iron Man or Wolverine's solo series? Obviously, because Spidey's long been considered one of the most recognizable Marvel creations by far, and that's how they concluded it would be only fitting to make the web-slinger's title the one for focus on the issue, in number 36. Of course, they couldn't bother to clearly name who exactly oversaw this whole project, which would've been mainly Joe Quesada and Bill Jemas. In any case, by employing a flagship title so noticeably for conveying this kind of story only makes it look all the more blatant.

Now, I know Spidey's physical strength isn't enough to hold up a collapsing building as tall and heavy as the WTC was, and Shell-Head's mechanics may not be either, but Thor could handle it with his strength, and so could Dr. Strange using magic, and considering various other heroes like the Avengers make appearances in the book, whose powers could possibly avail in keeping the building up long enough to evacuate the occupants (don't be surprised if Quasar's came in very useful for such a task), that's one more reason why this was a long range embarrassment. Besides, what did it actually say about the Islamic jihadism that led to the tragedy? From what I could tell, all they really did was subtly imply the same kind of talking point George W. Bush used, that "a great religion was hijacked."

The result was Amazing Spider-Man #36, aka The Black Issue. J. Michael Straczynski was tasked with writing the story, and he initially balked at the idea. But Straczynski’s story soon came to him, and he, artist John Romita Jr., inker Scott Hanna, and the rest of the creative team finished the issue in under a month.

SYFY WIRE’s Behind the Panel recently caught up with Romita and Hanna as they shared their memories about Amazing Spider-Man #36. Romita’s father, John Romita Sr., was one of the seminal Spider-Man artists. However, the elder Romita was initially against the idea as well. It wasn’t until Romita Jr. showed his father the finished project that he became proud of his son’s accomplishment with the issue.

Honestly, I'm disappointed with both Senior and Junior for approving this in the first place, given how farfetched it turned out to be, right down to the sight of Doctor Doom sobbing under his metal mask. And on that note, SyFy's writers made sure to sugarcoat that part too:

Romita Jr. also admitted that the famous panel of Doctor Doom with tears in his eyes was his touch of artistic license. While that panel has been the topic of debate since it came out, the artist still believes it was the right choice. It set a line between comic book villainy and the real evil that struck New York at its heart.

Both Romita and Hanna pored over the details to accurately capture the mood of the city and its people. Straczynski’s story was so moving that Hanna found another way for the comic to spread its message of strength and unity

I wonder how a tale relying on stealth victim-blaming can be considered a work of strength and unity? Unfortunately, that's what the tale contains, whether in terms of moral equivalence or otherwise, and it solves nothing. To imply we have to bear the burdens, as the panel on the side does, is tasteless, and minimizes the seriousness of the issue.

Considering all the stories in the past where the despot leader of Latveria visited carnage and mayhem upon innocents, including but not limited to the Fantastic Four, why would it look plausible for him to feel sorrow over other tyrants committing the same thing? It wouldn't have made sense if Kang the Conqueror were illustrated doing that either, considering he too was depicted in the past employing deadly force in later stories coming after the Silver Age. Why, what about Bullseye? If he'd turned up in the story, after all the assassinations he'd been depicted performing for mafia syndicates ever since he debuted in Daredevil in the mid-70s, wouldn't that too look bizarrely insulting?

And the part near the end, where writer Straczynski urges, "do not do as they do, or the war is lost before it is even begun", is also insulting. Especially if he sees nothing wrong with Islamic veils, as the panel suggests, and won't consider they're hurtful to women. Yet it's hardly a surprise somebody coming from an ultra-liberal background could conceive a story featuring only so many woke talking points, subtle or direct, though of course, that doesn't make it any less of a problem. What it does do is demonstrate how bad the influence of leftism is in modern times.

It's a real shame some artists like the Romitas, whom I've considered impressive in the past, had to participate in this, or more precisely, that they'd be so accepting of the political approach employed by the writer of the story. And similarly, it's a shame the MSM sources who've covered the history of this Spidey story approach it all through such a dishonest lens, refusing to consider that, while comics villainy may not be exactly the same as real life, it doesn't make a science fiction world any more plausible a spot in which to tell a story like this drawing from reality. Nor does it help to make use of such naive leftist beliefs as Straczynski did over 2 decades ago.

Labels: Avengers, Europe and Asia, history, indie publishers, islam and jihad, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, Spider-Man, terrorism, Thor, violence

IGN did some interviews with Miller, as well as his poor choice of a publisher, Dan DiDio, about their plans to do followups to the former's Sin City series and also 1983's Ronin, and the news about their new indie FMP publishing outfit tells the following:

Any new comics company faces great pressure and expectation that comes with trying to make a dent in a business dominated by two major players. But when the title of the company is Frank Miller Presents, well, the expectations are just a tad bit higher.

The new venture bears the name of one of comics’ most celebrated storytellers. Miller is renowned for revitalizing Daredevil and Batman in the 1980's, as well as for indie comics classics like 300 and Give Me Liberty (with artist Dave Gibbons). Together with former DC Comics co-publisher Dan DiDio, who has now signed on as the publisher of FMP, Miller aims to launch a company that empowers and inspires artists and writers to push the medium to new limits.

“The goal here is to create a vehicle for the readers, run by the talent, that will explore the potentialities of our beloved story and art form,” Miller tells IGN.

This honestly sounds little different than what Bill Jemas surely wants everybody to believe when he co-founded AWA with Axel Alonso, and besides, something tells me neither Miller nor DiDio want to publish anything even remotely similar to the former's 2011 graphic novel, Holy Terror, which Miller's all but disowned after just several years, and all for the sake of getting back into the good graces of the far-left, for all the good it did him after a UK convention disinvited him at the demand of an Islamist. It may not be so shocking he'd boomerang, but it's still made me lose a lot more respect for Miller than I wished to.

That said, look who Miller's hired to illustrated one of his new Sin City projects:

For the first new Sin City stories in more than twenty years, Miller is writing a special one-shot illustrated by legendary Italian artist Milo Manara. That book is called Sin City in Color, because it will detour from the noir series’ usual black-and-white format for a full-color printing.

How about that, he's tasked the artist whom Marvel threw under the bus for the sake of SJWs who hated Manara's cover for a Spider-Woman series that didn't last long, left no impact, and no SJWs seemed to lament its eventual cancellation. It may be impressive on the surface that Miller's willing to do business with Manara. But DiDio, lest we forget, still casts an unpleasant shadow over the proceedings, and, he seems to have turned out an entry of his own for this new publisher in the role of a writer:

Joining the new Ronin series on shelves in November will be the company’s first brand new title, Ancient Enemies. The series, also a bi-monthly $7.99 book, is created and designed by DiDio and artist Danilo Beyruth. It centers on an ancient war between alien civilizations that have made their way to Earth. The final conflict ends up being the spark for the birth of new super-powered beings.

I don't know how many pages this book'll have to justify its cover price, but I do know somebody with a mindset like DiDio's doesn't deserve a buyership any more than he did when he was still publisher at DC, and even wrote at least a few series which were more like self-indulgent vanity projects that nobody seemed to put much value on. Not even Sideways, which got cancelled pretty fast. But this sure is funny how he's changing his tune for this indie venture to something different than what he emphasized when he was DC's publisher:

“Even though it's a big high concept, what we're really focused on is the individual characters that rise from the stories themselves,” DiDio says. “And that's the fun part of it because what we were able to do is a contemporary take on the rise and the advent of superheroes and the superhero world with a much more contemporary tone and understanding of the events of today and how they might play out in the course of these stories.”

[...] DiDio stresses he’s less concerned with building a universe than with just creating a comic that hooks new readers. “The way the story's being told is pretty similar to the way Darwyn Cooke told New Frontier where you're telling this long arching story and the characters that are introduced [in that story] are the ones that take us through the story.”

At this point in the conversation, DiDio notes the advantage his new gig has over his old one. “When you look at DC and Marvel, I mean you have characters that are 70, 80 years old, and you're trying to contemporize them and tell modern-day stories with them, even though their origins come from a different time period. With [Frank Miller Presents] we’re creating characters for today in a story that relates to people and situations that are current.”

Gee, that sure is evasive coming from somebody whose repulsive idea of how to tell "modern" stories was to soil the backgrounds with jarring violence, sexual assault, and other disturbingly crude, dark elements. And who once said he believed superheroes shouldn't lead happy lives. And, whose former staff once employed a member who said they market to 45-year-olds. Something tells me that's exactly what he intends to continue in the context of an independent publisher now, and let's consider Miller practically built a whole career in that vein, based on what Sin City is like, in example, ditto the Dark Knight Returns. The main problem with DiDio's past approach, of course, is that his flawed belief in how to tell a story was that it's got to be "realistic", in ways that turned out to be selective - that is, not in terms of character drama, but rather, in terms of violent content. So why should we expect any different from him this time? Towards the end, while discussing NFTs, he even put in:

“You don’t have to buy the NFTs. Just read the book because we built the story first. Spice DAO saw the designs and the story and they built their ideas for the NFTs around that, not the other way around” he says, adding that he views NFTs as almost a modern-day version of DVD extras. “The NFTs are just a way to license these characters out and reach out to new markets. The main goal is to write books, create books and build something that is really a fabulous reading experience, and I think that’s really important for comics right now.”

If his previous writing efforts were shunned by the audience, and he didn't put convincing emphasis on merit before, there's no reason to assume he'd go about this any differently now. In fact, if they're interested in selling NFTs as a springboard into more mediums, that brings to mind once again how Jemas is approaching things with his AWA venture, and it wouldn't be surprising if DiDio and Miller are hoping to develop projects that'd appeal to Hollywood by extension, despite any suggestions made to the contrary. Which'll just prove a point that a lot of modern comics are really being prepared with the goal of seeking movie/TV adaptations, not serious homegrown audiences.

The biggest problem with DiDio, however, is surely that he remains unrepentant over his poor conduct as an editor/publisher for DC in the past 2 decades, and it's unlikely he'll turn out quality entertainment under his own writing pen. That's why any arguments he posits about quality ring hollow, because he never offered any during the time he ran DC into the ground. A terrible shame Miller had to partner with him. Don't be surprised if there's superhero genre fans out there who remember the harm DiDio caused, and would be rightly discouraged from buying FMP's products as a result, no matter what they think of Miller.

Labels: bad editors, dc comics, history, indie publishers, islam and jihad, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, terrorism, violence

The Sydney Morning Herald interviewed one of the worst SJWs employed by DC/Marvel of recent, and who's even developing animated TV programs. But what was really surprising, amid all the fluff-coating, was the following:

Well, this is what I’m talking about. You are a huge success, but you deliberately fly under the radar in your home country?

Yeah. I don’t want things to be weird for my kids. I certainly go to conventions and sign autographs and stuff. Pre-pandemic I flew around the world and did signings. But I think we have a thing in Australia about tall poppies and people who take themselves too seriously, and I don’t want that kind of ego. If it’s something important – I did a lot of press for when we had Superman come out as bisexual, I did radio in Australia, or when Stan Lee died I agreed to go on The Project. But as a general rule, I like to keep my head down and do the work and just write every day and not do too much press.

I feel quite privileged then.

You shouldn’t. I try to avoid me.

Everyone who's a realist should avoid him, maybe for being such a hypocrite. Let's see if I have this correct. He's married with kids, and despite his radical leftism, he doesn't want his own children to view the heavy-handed woke politics he's injecting into comics like Son of Kal-El? Well at least we know he's bizarrely different from the kind of far-leftists you meet in the USA, who have no qualms about indoctrinating children with the propaganda he's specializing in. What does this mean? That it's okay to foist this upon unwitting westerners other than his own immediate circle? Now that's surely got to be the biggest form of hypocrisy you could find coming from somebody like Taylor. Who goes on to brag about injecting homosexual propaganda into the Superman franchise:

Speaking of Superman coming out and the reaction that got – in your line of work is it an occupational hazard to risk the wrath of fans?

Oh, of course. That’s daily, on Twitter and everywhere else. Superman coming out was an incredible thing for the LGBTQIA+ community. We had so many positive messages from people all over the world, people from countries where they couldn’t come out, but just wanted to contact me to let me know I’d made their world a little bit better. People who came out in their 40s, as well as a host of young people. But obviously that comes with a lot of negativity as well, a lot of nasty. But the positive far outweighs it, and just the positive of doing something like that far outweighs it. You take the slings and arrows and try to focus on the good.

Whether or not he wants his own family reading this stuff, his gushing, boasting and just plain virtue-signaling is quite insulting. As is both his and the interviewer's failure to clearly distinguish between Clark Kent and his son with Lois Lane named Jon Kent, after Kal-El's earthly father. Taylor has certainly established himself as one of the most shameless scribes now in the business. And how peculiar he doesn't back up his claims everybody responded in the positive by presenting sales figures. Which could partly explain why he says he prefers to retain a low profile; that's pretty much how propagandists like him get their trash published. And then, in another note about the cartoon he's written:

It’s quite an unusual thing in Australia, The Deep – adventure-fantasy-superhero story, we don’t get a lot of that locally.

Yeah, this is what I love, though: action-adventure-comedy, with a lot of heart and a lot of hope, is what I set out to create with the comics originally, back in 2009. I was writing them because there was nothing for my kids. This idea of “all-ages books” – I’d pick up these all-ages books and they were so safe, and they were so boring. I’m like, this isn’t all-ages, I don’t want to read this with my kids, this will just insult people. So I really set out to write a story, and a family, that was exciting, and that parents could sit down with their kids together and be excited and transported and get into the mythology of it all. With this great diverse family who love each other.

Again, assuming what he's stated so far about having a family is correct, there's something pretty weird about this too. Because when he speaks of "diverse", what if that implies more social justice propaganda? And what if it turns out that's what he considers the opposite of "safe" and "boring"? Something a lot of mainstream comics suffer from today when it comes to heterosexual relationships, which are being shoved aside for the sake of the LGBTQ propaganda he's emphasizing in comics like Son of Kal-El. If it turns out The Deep builds on the woke themes particularly seen in USA entertainment, that'd surely stand as contradictory to what he said earlier. But then, Taylor has made clear before he's a pretty fishy type. One more reason it's a tragedy comicdom's in the dire political state it's been in for years now.

Labels: animation, dc comics, Europe and Asia, golden calf of LGBT, marvel comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, Superman

Hyperallergic wrote an item about the Marvel movie franchise producers getting rich off the creations of writers and artists, both old and new, yet paying little of the box office grosses to the people responsible for bringing about the characters and such they're using in the movies:

Within about 10 minutes of the trailer for Thor: Love and Thunder dropping online, comics fans noted how one shot was identical in composition to a panel that artist Esad Ribić drew for his run on the series Thor: God of Thunder with writer Jason Aaron. Some sites have already lauded this for the “comic book accuracy.” To others, this feels more transparently like an artist being taken advantage of, with Ribić serving as “the cheapest possible designer” for one of Hollywood’s most expensive ongoing projects. Too often, the creators who forged the foundations of the Marvel Cinematic Universe are given a “special thanks” credit and little else, and that’s being thrown into sharper relief as these films double down on lifting imagery from page to screen.

It’s even part of the press cycle for these films at this point — Marvel Studios will prove their “loyalty” to the source material by perfectly replicating something from it. The increasing pride with which the studio uses exact replicas of artists’ work leads one to wonder whether those artists are being fairly compensated for that usage, if at all. While it’s not easy to find concrete numbers, the first answer that comes up is often a resounding “No.” The Guardian reported that artists have been receiving “thank you payments” in the range of $5,000, along with invites to the premieres of the movies based on their respective works. Measure that against the billions that Marvel/Disney makes off these films each year.

There's just one thing: as noted, Marvel/Disney are relying upon the work of one of the worst SJWs employed by the former over the past decade, who went out of his way to exploit Thor's title for the sake of identity politics, and that included turning Jane Foster into a pagan deity using the very same name as her male counterpart. You have to wonder why Sif wasn't elevated to such a role, even as it would be equally absurd if she sported a male name out of the blue. It may not be right to cheat these wokesters out of bigger sums, but even so, it's hard to feel sorry, considering all the harm they've done till now. Let's not forget what Aaron and company did with Nick Fury to justify their direction either. Another SJW cited in the article are one who conceived America Chavez, and another who mistreated Captain America:

A more recent grievance came from Joe Casey, the co-creator of America Chavez along with Nick Dragotta. Chavez made her cinematic debut in the recently released Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. Casey spoke about receiving an “insult of an offer” from Marvel, which he declined. As noted in a writeup by AIPT, Casey is fully aware of Marvel’s legal ownership of the character (a point defensive fans often argue). But that doesn’t make it right for them to stiff these creators. Author Ta-Nehisi Coates, who wrote the Black Panther comic beginning in 2016, who also speaks of being treated well himself by Marvel, calls it a moral obligation, not just a matter of legality. Speaking to the Guardian last year, Coates said, “it doesn’t seem just for them to extract what Steve and Ed put into this and create a multi-billion dollar franchise … just because it’s in a contract doesn’t make it right. If I have some kind of leverage over you, I can get you to sign a contract to fuck you over.”

Again, I'm wondering why these specific creators are among those we should care about. However, even if there's a valid argument to make regarding whatever they're offered in residuals, this does give something to think about - no matter how ultra-liberal and woke one is, that doesn't mean they won't be cheated by the higher echelons when their creations make it to the silver screen. So why do these wokesters even remain on the left? Either way, it's a wonder somebody like Coates would care, though his reasons don't sound altruistic. If the creators were right-wing, he'd likely turn his back on them entirely.

In any event, this does show how only so many recent creations at Marvel are being introduced solely as a platform for which screenwriters can make movies, far more than in past decades, and today, the biggest problem is how, unlike any prior creations, these new ones are created with political intentions. Which could explain why recent box office receipts for their films seem to be slowly declining, including Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, which as noted earlier, saw a steep drop of over 80 percent in its 2nd week. Hopefully, the public is waking up to how pretentious the Marvel movies really are.

Labels: Black Panther, Captain America, Doctor Strange, history, marvel comics, moonbat artists, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, Nick Fury, Thor, women of marvel

Rebel News warns that something we could probably have predicted already would happen is taking place in the Batman books:

With characters like Harley Quinn and Robin coming out as bisexual, DC Comics has been attempting to provide more representation for the LGBT community in their comics lately. And now, fans suspect that Bruce Wayne may be the latest character to come out in the new Batman comic.

According to Yahoo! News, Issue #5 of Batman: The Night by Chip Zdarsky, Carmine Di Giandomenico, Ivan Plascencia, and Pat Brosseau, a scene takes place during which Bruce Wayne, after a failed mission, leans in for a kiss with his fellow trainee Anton but is “interrupted by Avery Oblonsky, the ex-KGB agent training them.”

[...] Screen Rant also points out that this moment arises after “flirty interactions between the Dark Knight and John Constantine in last week's Batman: Urban Legends,” further making the case for fans' speculations.

Well I knew Zdarsky was already proving himself a most extremely pretentious [left-wing] scriptwriter, and this is clearly an example of his desire to virtue-signal, along with leaving his SJW mark on one of the most prominent DC properties. But the fans alluded to? Those who gush and/or act as apologists for this stunt are not "fans". And whether or not it happens in this story, it's the writer, Zdarsky, who's making changes, not the character "coming out".

And all this coming shortly after the new movie starring Robert Pattinson came out, just to show how badly DC's editors, led as they are by Marie Javins, want to embarrass the property as badly as they are now with their woke themes. Anybody who's truly a Bat-fan should distance themselves from DC with the way they're going now, just as Super-fans should too, after they foisted the same themes upon the recently created Jon Kent. This virtue signaling is not how to market entertainment.

Labels: Batman, dc comics, golden calf of LGBT, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics

Looks like pretentious and aggravating scriptwriter Marz continues his far-left journey after all these years, as he posted the following in the past few days:

For years we've heard squealing about violent media poisoning our youth. Turns out it was true, but the violent media is cable news.

— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) May 15, 2022

So only news programs could possibly cause violence in youth, not the entertainment medium? About what you could possibly expect somebody who's contributed at least a few of the most notorious moments in comics history, like the Major Force fridging Alexandra deWitt scene in Green Lantern, to say. Yet one can only wonder if Marz would appreciate that a writer for the Federalist is arguing that children shouldn't be watching news reports about mass shootings, because it can be bad for their mental health? Sadly, I get the feeling he wouldn't thank the site, based on their conservative leanings. He later wrote:

Thinking about how a racist executed 10 people, and then the GOP had to go into damage control about both white supremacy and gun control. If that's not an indictment of the party, I don't know what is.

— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) May 15, 2022

So here, he opportunistically blames conservatives in every way for the actions of a violent maniac in Buffalo, New York, but refuses to blame the state's disastrous law enforcement as it stands now for anything bad that's happened in the past number of years, ever since Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo really set things on a collision course for a fiasco. Why are men like Marz so lacking in ability to level any criticism against Democrats who enable these situations? And then:

Well, I guess we know which side leaked it now. https://t.co/op8iHJSOOK

— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) May 16, 2022

And with his insult to Matt Gaetz, he implies he believes only conservatives could've possibly leaked info regarding a possible SCOTUS decision to reverse Roe vs. Wade. On which note, why does somebody who supposedly complains about violent crimes occurring at supermarkets suddenly have a problem with people who oppose abortion? Life isn't valuable? There's a whole plurality in the USA public who're opposed to abortion for valid reasons. He'd do well to consider that. And here's an insult Marz wrote against author Jordan Peterson:

Aww, somebody hurt Jordan's widdle fee-fees. Too bad, so sad. https://t.co/CCYYu8dJca

— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) May 17, 2022

Wow, and here, Marz sides with those who think obesity is literally a good, healthy influence for women. In that case, why'd he ever write comics where leading ladies were hot? Let us be clear. Obesity is unhealthy, risks illness for the heart, and can be even worse for women than men in some cases. And if we're going to let political correctness entirely impede upon our ability to educate why good health is beneficial, then all this is going to do is result in more health problems everywhere. I won't say Peterson was perfect in how he approached this whole issue, but again, that's no excuse for obscuring health issues and invalidating them.

All these years on, and Marz still proves to be one of the biggest leftists around. And while not unexpected, it's still very sad.

Labels: misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, politics, science, terrorism, violence

Chemical & Engineering News wrote about how science is employed in comics, and how it can be put to use in education as well:

This Newscriptster has always loved a good fantasy epic or sci-fi adventure as an escape from ordinary reality. But sometimes it’s fun to mix fantasy and reality. In fact, there’s a whole subgenre of science communication exploring how stuff from books and movies stacks up against real-world science.

“Movies are cool, everybody’s watching those, everybody can talk about them,” says Ricardo Castro, a professor of materials science and engineering at the University of California, Davis. He’s taught an intro-level engineering class based on Marvel comics and movies since 2016. Bringing his love of superheroes into his lectures “opened a whole new universe” for connecting with students—especially those who wouldn’t normally sign up for an engineering course.

One of the materials Castro discusses in his class is vibranium: the main component of Captain America’s shield and Black Panther’s suit and part of a long-standing tradition of miraculous metals in fantasy and sci-fi that are superstrong but lightweight. Discussions about real-world analogs often start with titanium, which is about as strong as steel but half as dense, then move on to talking about composites and alloys in which small amounts of other elements can add strength to a metal without changing the weight much.

Read more at the site. It's certainly an impressive way to put fantasy to use in discussing science, yet a terrible shame the modern comics starring these protagonists don't live up to expectations, which would make it a lot more engaging, and even the movies are beginning to come apart at the seams. That's why I hope the guy just employs older stories in his classes for the educational ingredients. It's far better to do it that way.

Labels: Black Panther, Captain America, marvel comics, science, technology

The Jerusalem Post's announced there's a new comics biography special from Tidal Wave about the life of Ukraine's 6th modern president, Volodymyr Zelensky:

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky's life story - from comedian to war-time leader - has been given the graphic novel treatment in TidalWave Comics' latest biography, "Political Power: Volodymyr Zelensky." [...]

"This book means a lot to me because of my Ukrainian heritage," US-based publisher Darren G. Davis said in a statement.

"Both sets of my grandparents immigrated from Ukraine. I wanted to use this medium to not only tell a story but to somehow donate to the cause at the same time."

While I'm sure this could have potential, depending what issues they're willing to raise, this is still the same publisher that to date refused to do any illustrated biographies of Melania Trump, and no matter how sincere Davis is being when it comes to his own heritage, it's regrettable if he's not willing to be altruistic when it comes to other notable figures. No doubt, even now, Davis' outfit is unwilling to serve up respectable biographies of certain figures on the right in the west, and while this bio of Zelensky may offer some insight into what's wrong with Russia, now that Vladimir Putin's waged war upon Ukraine, what if Tidal Wave's never published an honest look at what's wrong with the Islamic religion, let alone a bio of figures like filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who was murdered by a jihadist in the Netherlands for daring to produce a documentary about Islam with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. One of the worst things about the political correctness that's befallen comicdom as much as the rest of the US entertainment industry is that it would no longer be possible to create characters like Captain America today, because in sharp contrast to the WW2 era, there's only so many leftists in such industries who in sharp contrast to yesterday's, are no longer willing to defend freedom's advocates. And if Tidal Wave won't develop comics bios of figures like Van Gogh, they've only proven what's gone wrong in modern times.

Producing a comic bio based on Zelensky is welcome, but if they're only willing to work on "safe" subjects, that spoils everything, and proves they're not sincere in their intent and beliefs.

Update: here's an extra article about the Jewish elements provided in this Tidal Wave publication.

Labels: Europe and Asia, history, indie publishers, islam and jihad, msm propaganda, politics, terrorism

IGN's posted more needless speculations about where the Marvel movie machine could be churning next, and gives some more reasons why this whole franchise should be avoided. First:

Multiverse of Madness ends as a heroic Wanda brings down the Scarlet Witch’s temple onto herself. Eagle-eyed fans noticed a red flash, and that combined with the fact that we didn’t see a body has folks speculating about Wanda Maximoff’s survival. Similar to how Hulk won’t let Bruce Banner die and the Phoenix Force protects Jean Grey from harm, Wanda’s Scarlet Witch persona is unlikely to go down without a fight. Thankfully, the comics could hold the key to how Wanda fits into the future of the world’s highest-grossing franchise.

Or maybe they couldn't. For now, Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness certainly doesn't, seeing how it depicts Wanda murdering people, going far beyond what was seen in Avengers: Disassembled and House of M. Why do they think she's depicted "heroically" in view of that characterization? And on that note, here's where their news turns really sickening, and sums up why this film franchise is best shunned:

Olsen herself has said she’d love to say the legendary “no more mutants” line in the MCU, which is a nod to House of M’s catastrophic events. Even though a lot of that 2005 arc has been adapted across WandaVision and Multiverse of Madness, the depowering of mutantkind that occurs as a result of that line seems like too popular a storyline for the movies to not cover in some form eventually. In terms of dealing with Wanda’s family troubles, House of M is also a way to (re-)introduce major characters including Magneto and Quicksilver into the MCU. Avengers Disassembled ends with a catatonic Wanda being taken to Genosha under the care of Professor X and Magneto, while House of M picks up with the latter warning that her reality-warping powers need to be stopped with a permanent solution.

Well how about that, Olsen is okay with a controversial storyline that didn't appeal to all Marvel fans 17 years ago. Something IGN clearly wants left down the memory hole, and they take no objective view of the storyline either.

One thing is clear: We’re far from finished with Wanda and her potential as the Scarlet Witch. Alongside those continued rumors of a Young Avengers project and a Scarlet Witch standalone, there’s also the Kathryn Hahn-led Agatha: House of Darkness spin-off in the works. WandaVision ended with Maximoff saying she’d know where to find Agatha if she ever needed her, and a role for Olsen or her onscreen sons in that series could neatly queue a riff on The Children’s Crusade. Going with the tried and true trope of “if you don’t see a body,” someone is sure to be digging Wanda out of the Mount Wundagore rubble. It doesn’t take the brainpower of Professor Xavier to figure out the MCU isn’t done with Ms. Maximoff just yet.

I'm afraid the potential was destroyed after the scriptwriters began turning Wanda into a lethal villainess. This is repellent, and IGN's refusal to approach the topic through an objective lens only worsens the affair. Most infuriarating is how they threw away the potential for depicting a serious romance and partnership in crimefighting between Wanda and a boyfriend who's a superhero (or even a civilian co-star, something past writers may never have tried developing to pair with Wanda), all for the sake of depicting Scarlet Witch in a sterile role of a villainess that doesn't need serious work in character development. A problem that's occurred in mainstream comics in several cases before, where, if the writers/editors don't want to depict an honest character in a story where he/she will need the challenge of character growth and focus in writing, they'll instead put them in the one-dimensional role of somebody turning evil. It's a brand of cheap sensationalism that's become a quite an Achilles Heel in mainstream comicdom, if you know where to look (I remember Magenta, a former girlfriend of Wally West when he was Kid Flash, pretty much fell victim to the trope as well), and something that's got to stop.

And with that told, I just discovered another bit of eyebrow raising info about the Dr. Strange sequel that reeks of tasteless moral equivalence. I was reading Wikimedia manager Danny Horn's Superheroes Every Day site, where he posted a review of the movie, and, while I may not agree with him on everything, it seems he's revealed something involving America Chavez that even the most left-wing apologists for the film don't seem dismayed at in their gushy reviews:

On her jacket, America is wearing an up-to-date queer pride flag pin, which nobody remarks upon and is not important. There is no romantic plotline for her; the only romantic story thread in the movie is Stephen and Christine, which they invited me to care about and I declined.

They do mention her two moms, which is nice, but they instantly die and have nothing to do with the rest of the movie, so “kill your lesbians” is still alive and well in our corner of the multiverse.

I read that Saudi Arabia asked Disney to distribute a cut that didn’t include the 12 seconds of America’s two moms, and Disney told them to go pound sand, so they didn’t release the movie in Saudi Arabia. That’s great and I’m happy that they stood up to anti-queer censorship, but the fact that the queerness all took place during 12 seconds that could easily be excised with no impact on the plot is still irksome, and I am irked by it.

Let me guess. Wanda's the guilty party in assassinating the two moms along with various other civilians, right? Next thing you know, we'll discover the filmmakers secretly wrote Wanda as a metaphor for an extreme right-winger. Either way, this part of the screenplay sure reeks of tasteless moral equivalence. Even if the same-sex parenthood emphasized in all of 12 seconds is a poor example, that still doesn't justify wiping out the 2 moms. It reminds me that I'd done studies on tropes and stereotypes in classic TV over past years, and as I've written a few times before, there's entertainment writers who were far more willing to subject lesbians to roles like committing murder (and I still shudder at the memory of an atrocious episode from Nash Bridges where something like that occurred), while male homosexuals, by contrast, were hardly ever depicted in criminal roles since the mid-70s, and if they were, it was very sparing and non-committal. There were some reports several years back about TV shows where lesbians are wiped out, and if this new movie is any indication, a trope that's anti-female is still very prevalent in Hollywood and other entertainment mediums. I get the feeling that, if the same-sex parents in the Multiverse of Madness screenplay had been a pair of men, and a son instead of a daughter, it'd never have made it past the screenwriting committee at Marvel Studios. That's basically "male privilege" for you, here in the form of a studio division producing comics movies and TV shows.

And if they're wondering why it was so common, well gee, why don't they blame the leftists who've greenlighted such a crude bias? They're the reason why there's so many inconsistent standards applied in how certain types of people are portrayed in showbiz, and why women continue to suffer unfair treatment, even long after the Harvey Weinstein scandal made headlines.

And if the steep 2nd week drop in box office receipts is any suggestion, this proves that if Marvel Studios was hoping to please everyone, they failed, because it's impossible to please everyone when you adhere to political correctness.

Labels: Avengers, Doctor Strange, golden calf of death, golden calf of LGBT, history, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, violence, women of marvel

Breitbart's reported the UK actress Zara Phythian, who along with her husband were both charged by UK authorities with sexually abusing an underaged girl, was convicted by the British court overseeing the case:

British film actress Zara Phythian – who appeared in Doctor Strange alongside Benedict Cumberbatch – has been found guilty of grooming and sexually abusing a girl in tandem with her husband Victor Marke.

The latter was also found to have sexually abused another girl on his own.

The Times reports Phythian, who is 37, was found guilty of 14 sexual offences at Nottingham Crown Court while her husband, who is 59, was found guilty of 18.

As I'd said before, this won't reflect well on the first Dr. Strange movie going forward, when there's a performer in a notable role there who committed a serious crime in real life, leaving the film tainted by her actions. Come to think of it, this could also look bad for Disney as the owner of the franchise, viewed in context of where they're going today. Not many movies and TV shows end up getting tarnished this fast within just a few years, but this is certainly a standout example of one such film, and comes off far worse than the case of actress Amber Heard smearing Johnny Depp, embarrassing the Aquaman movie with her behavior behind the scenes.

Now since the movies based on the Sorcerer Supreme are in discussion, it's fascinating to discover that, while Multiverse of Madness may have opened with a lot of money in its first week, it appears to have plunged very low in its second, according to the following date from The Direct:

Marvel Studios' Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness grossed $16.7 million on Friday, dropping a steep 81% from the $90.7 million earned domestically during its opening day. This marks the second-worst second Friday drop for an MCU movie. Projections have the film dropping around 65%-69% this second weekend, eyeing a gross of $60-$65 million.

As much as it wasn't great to hear it took in money at all, considering how pretentious it already is, what with the way Scarlet Witch is portrayed, this does suggest audiences are beginning to wake up to how overrated these live action films were to start with. Deadline Hollywood, however, remains superficial in their estimations why it's taken a dive:

Doctor Strange 2‘s second weekend decline simply rests on bad word of mouth; the sequel receiving a back-to-back meh grade from CinemaScore for an MCU movie, B+ to Eternals’ B back in November.

Just that? What about the villificaiton of Scarlet Witch that began with WandaVision and continues here? Surely that's not something to consider? This is but one of the reasons I want nothing to do with these movies. It's not just because, IMO, they're live action films made for people who despise illustrated mediums. It's also because of the corruption heaped upon the source material, entirely at the expense of characters like Wanda, and, lest we forget, her creators, Stan Lee and Jack Kirby.

Labels: Doctor Strange, Europe and Asia, golden calf of LGBT, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, sales, violence

Coming just a few years after they'd regained a license for publishing new stories based on Robert E. Howard's pulp fantasies, Marvel's now lost the right to continue further, as reported by ComicBook:

The Hyborian Age is coming to an end at the House of Ideas. Monday, Marvel announced Conan the Barbarian will soon leave the Marvel Universe at the conclusion of Jason Aaron and Mahmud Asrar's King Conan series this July. The last issue will be King Conan #6, bring a definitive end to the character's latest batch of stories at Marvel Comics.

Despite the character's license leaving Marvel, the publisher also announced a new round of collection releases. This fall, Marvel's releasing its sixth volume as part of the Conan the Barbarian Epic Collection, featuring a collection of vintage comics from Roy Thomas, John Buscema, Howard Chaykin, and Gil Kane. Fast forward to December and Marvel is releasing another collection, Conan the Barbarian: The Original Marvel Years Omnibus Vol. 10 with a cover from Todd McFarlane.

[...] It's unclear what this means for the character's future in the Savage Avengers title, which is launching its latest volume this Wednesday featuring the Barbarian serves as its anchor character. Malmberg adds that he hopes Heroic and Marvel are able to work out a deal to have the character still appear.

Coming as this news has shortly after Aaron caused a whole embarrassment by caving to a woke mob, one could wonder if the estate controlling the copyrights decided there's a limit to all this. Well, they'd be right on that. Aaron has no business working in this career if he doesn't have the courage to remain true to challenging beliefs. Now, the current Marvel run's ending with a sputter, and it remains to be seen if any publisher who wants to adapt this classic creation for more comic adventures will show some more guts.

As for the Epic Collections Marvel appears to have retained rights to reprint so far, that's something far better, provided it's the 1969-95 tales they're concentrating on at this point. Thomas, Buscema and Kane did far better with Conan during the original run than SJWs like Aaron ever will in a fortnight. And the Avengers crossover isn't worth it with the way Marvel's going now. On that note, Newsarama says:

Interestingly, Marvel's announcement doesn't mention the upcoming volume of Savage Avengers, which kicks off with a new Savage Avengers #1 on May 18. Conan plays a central role in the series as he did its last volume. However, Newsarama has learned that Conan will still play a part in Savage Avengers and Marvel plans to provide more info about that series and Conan's role in it in the coming days.

Forget it, there's just no point bothering, considering what a PC staff Marvel's got running the store. I'm amazed that to date, they never reacquired the license to publish more Red Sonja stories, and probably not Kull the Conqueror stories either, though the former has suffered some harm from PC directions at Dynamite publishing at least a few times, no thanks to Mark Russell, and, lest we forget, whoever the editors/publishers are who agreed to hire him in the first place. Something that would surely happen had Marvel regained a license to the Sonja material too. It'd be interesting to see if whoever gets a license to continue publishing Conan tales will not only be more respectable, but also acquire a license to deal with Red Sonja and Kull to boot. Then, they could really resume any team ups and guest appearances in each other's books in a way that's plausible, and respectable of what the characters were built on. And maybe win over a sizable audience along the way. But better still would be if they'd just shift to a trade-only format going forward, which could improve how storytelling is handled in the future. As I've argued before, the monthly pamphlet format's long gotten way out of hand, and become outmoded.

Labels: Avengers, bad editors, censorship issues, indie publishers, licensed products, marvel comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda

The Washington Post is gushing over alleged LGBT fandom for Wanda Maximoff, and the article is predictably a snoozer:

“Wanda tried so hard to be normal,” said Martini, a 40-year-old government contractor and drag performer in La Plata, Md. “I think that’s also just very relatable.”

The Scarlet Witch’s popularity skyrocketed after her 2021 solo television series “WandaVision” — especially among LGBTQ fans. In interviews with The Washington Post, many say that Wanda’s experiences with loss, her nontraditional romance (with an android) and her search for family resonate with their journeys. As she returns in Marvel Studios’ “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” this week, many have hopes and fears about what she’ll face next.

“From a queer and trans lens, when we look at Wanda, we can see ourselves in her story,” said E. Tejada III, a 37-year-old equity and inclusion educator in Burdett, N.Y. Despite her hardships, “you can see that resilience, that she is still very much moving forward.”

“WandaVision” as a whole was a particular landmark for LGBTQ fans. Video essays on their love for the series have garnered thousands of views on YouTube. Articles abounded covering the MCU debut of Wanda’s son Billy, who is gay in the comics. Supporting character Agatha Harkness became not only the subject of a chart-topping song but also a queer icon in her own right.

Elizabeth Olsen, who plays Wanda, told The Post that she hadn’t known about the connection LGBTQ fans have to the character. “That’s really amazing. I think these stories have an impact in a way that … I somehow don’t [realize],” she said. “I’m so inside them that I don’t really get to step outside.”

It's honestly laughable how these ideologues obsessively attach themselves to characters they didn't create, and want to practically remake them according to their own ideologies and practices. So she's important to LGBT activists, but not to say, the Jewish brethren of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, who created her in 1964? Or even to eastern European citizens? We must be truly missing something here. Add to that how they imply being a mutant/possessing science-fantasy powers is literally and solely equivalent with homosexuality, and you have quite a propaganda vehicle going there.

Wanda isn’t any luckier in the comics. Eleven years after her 1964 debut, she marries Vision and has two children, but through both magic and old-fashioned supervillainy she loses her family and her memories of motherhood. When those memories resurface, an outpouring of grief leads Wanda to kill some of her teammates as well as swaths of mutants — a marginalized, superpowered race. The character has been on a long journey of redemption and healing ever since.

This alludes to Avengers: Disassembled and House of M without even clearly mentioning Brian Bendis and other Marvel staff who brewed up those awful stories, nor are any questions asked whether the storyline as first presented in 2004 was written well or not. Nobody even asks if Wanda should've been depicted as a cry-baby in the first place, as was seen back in 1989, when the development of children was reversed, nor whether John Byrne would've done better by having her pull together and get over it, and try to find a way to bear real children for real who could replace the illusions that passed for children instead. Most interesting indeed how that doesn't factor into these discussions.

“She goes through all this trauma,” said Michaela McFarland, a 21-year-old social media content creator in Detroit. “It builds up and it just keeps building where you can relate to her on such a deeper level.”

Wanda does move forward by finding loved ones in superhero teams. But given her past proximity to supervillains in early Marvel comics and her more recent attacks on her teammates and mutants, her allegiance to the good guys is often questioned.

A better idea would be to question why nobody seems disappointed how a character who'd been far from a murderess when she debuted would be reduced to such a repulsive role decades later, nor do they pan Bendis, Joe Quesada, Tom Brevoort and even Dan Buckley for greenlighting such an atrocity. And these are surely the same people who complain about sexism in entertainment. Now, inexplicably, the specific crowd suddenly has no issues when Wanda is depicted as a madwoman in new live action productions. Just what kind of "fans" are these, really?

Joseph Kim, a 24-year-old social media content producer from New York City, said this reminds him of biphobia, transphobia and racism within the LGBTQ community. In Wanda’s story, he said, “you have that same kind of metaphorical gatekeeping of, ‘You are one of us, and yet you’re not one of us.’”

Across comics and films, Wanda receives little support from other characters. The MCU portrays her grieving alone, and in the “House of M” comic-book storyline, other characters consider killing Wanda as she experiences a mental health crisis.

For Brandon Bush, a comic book journalist, this absence of support also mirrors systemic injustices. “When you see people like Wanda who aren’t getting the resources that they need, you relate to that because you see your own communities and them not getting the resources that they need,” Bush said.

The absence of objective criticism for the story itself mirrors systemic falsehoods in alleged fans. How come nobody supports improvements in writing quality for a change?

Still, many LGBTQ fans don’t see the kind of representation they want in the MCU generally. Yes, more LGBTQ superheroes — including Wanda’s own children — have graced comic book pages in recent years, and a same-sex relationship shows up on-screen in “The Eternals.” Olsen was excited for the new “Dr. Strange” sequel to introduce superhero America Chavez (Xochitl Gomez), who is lesbian in the comics and whose same-sex parents are alluded to briefly in the movie. “We need to reflect the world in these films,” she said. “We have such a platform. To not use it in that way would be foolish.”

But many fans still feel such depictions are too rare. Which is why they fill the gap by reading LGBTQ themes and relationships into Marvel films and series — sometimes in ways that deviate from creators’ visions. In addition to relating to Wanda’s hardships, some viewers interpreted interactions in “WandaVision” between Wanda and Agatha as flirting. In other MCU titles, fans see sparks fly between super-soldier Steve Rogers and his best friend Bucky Barnes. And storylines featuring the X-Men — a superhero team that Wanda fought against in her comic book debut — are widely read as queer allegories. Noticing signs of romance between presumably heterosexual characters who express affection for one another has become crucial to their enjoyment of superhero media, they said.

The portrayal of Wanda’s identity has also faced backlash. In the comics, she was long depicted as Jewish — for decades, her father was believed to be X-Men antihero Magneto, who survived the Holocaust. But Marvel later established that Wanda’s father was someone else, effectively stripping her of her Jewish heritage, which angered some fans. She was also raised by a Romani family, but that has not yet made it into the MCU.

Two LGBTQ Romani fans told The Post that Wanda’s comic book appearances were formative for their love of the medium. But they were less thrilled at certain choices creators made in representing her heritage. Jayjay Colley, a 26-year-old teacher outside Boston, said that associating a Romani character with magic feels as if it is continuing a stereotype, and they have found some past Scarlet Witch costumes offensive. They worry the MCU has simply erased Wanda’s Romani identity out of fear of repeating those tropes.

Hmm, this is quite fascinating. Sounds like some subtle anti-sex propaganda made its way into the narrative, perpetuated by LGBT ideologues, no less, and exactly why is it wrong to depict a Romani character practicing magic? By that logic, even characters of Italian descent like Zatara and Zatanna shouldn't be magicians. Are these really fans, or are they just "public moralists" trying to force their beliefs on somebody else's creations? And contrary to their awkward allusions to publication history, I don't think Wanda and Pietro were ever actually portrayed as Jewish per se so much as they were depicted coming from Romani background. Even Magneto's background may have been simplified as more Romani up till the turn of the century. In any case, it's shameful anybody would hijack Wanda's status for the sake of their own insular ideology.

Since we're on the subject, Bounding Into Comics wrote about the repellent way Wanda's depicted in the Dr. Strange sequel, which is even worse than Avengers: Disassembled and House of M's rendition of her:

Wanda’s appearance in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness consists of two full-hours of her murdering dozens of innocent people – some of them with families – while pointing the finger at others and claiming her actions were justified because others have done bad things as well.

The film and its interpretation are a perfect example of what happens to society when people lose the ability to take responsibility for their actions.

Yes, but the tragedy is that the leftists who made it never crafted it as a mirror in which to view their own sorry state of affairs. If they thought they could get away with it, they'd make Wanda into a metaphor for right-wingers.

In Avengers: Infinity War, Strange explains to Tony Stark that out of millions of outcomes, surrendering the Time Stone to Thanos was the only way that the Avengers would win in the end.

By Strange’s own admission, saving Vision was impossible.

But Wanda refuses to accept this and instead copes with this reality by putting the responsibility of Vision’s death on Strange’s shoulders.

This is poor writing on the film’s part, done only to create an easy justification for the conflict between Strange and Wanda that didn’t really exist before.

One of the biggest complaints with WandaVision was, as mentioned above, the fact that Wanda suffered no consequences for kidnapping and torturing a small town for weeks.

The only way to correct this error was for Wanda to turn full heel and become the bad guy in the story.

While to the film’s credit Wanda does make this turn, audiences are continually asked throughout her villainous journey to hand her an emotional ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card because – wait for it – she’s been through a lot.

Ahem. On this, there's something totally missed here. Do serious fans of Scarlet Witch want her to be a literal villainess at all? One who practically murders people? As a Wanda fan myself, the firm answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT. I can make similar arguments about Jean Grey of the X-Men: if I'm a fan of the lady first known as Marvel Girl in 1963, why would I approve of turning her into a mass slaughterer of an alien civilization, as seen in 1979-80 during the first half of Chris Claremont's run? Thankfully, that was retconned away a few years later, although what followed with Madelyne Pryor changed into a Goblin Queen as the excuse for phasing her out, was admittedly very awkward. All done because at the time, Jean had to be restored almost immediately to the role of Cyclops' girlfriend, and not be her own agency. What they really should've done was take their time, and if Pryor had to be phased out, they should've just had her dying from cloning materials that weren't holding up well.

And why no consideration Wanda's a Lee/Kirby creation, and it was never their intention to depict her as a murderess as the movie does? Or that such a rendition dishonors the memory of the two famous creators? If I were Lee or Kirby, I'd be outraged.

To make matters worse, Olsen gave an interview to Hollywood Life (also via Bounding Into Comics) where she seems to be claiming that changing Wanda into a slaughterer was "empowering":

Elizabeth admitted that she loved embracing this new side of Wanda in the Doctor Strange sequel. “My goal is to always have her have some sort of evolution, and the evolution in this for me was really empowering,” Elizabeth said. “She has a new kind of confidence that we haven’t seen in 8 years, and she’s really not apologizing for anything. She feels very clear in her beliefs. I find it very admirable, and I enjoyed throwing her into this journey of madness. I think it’s okay to play characters that people get frustrated with sometimes. I enjoy that as an actor.”

A characterization where the lady's turned deadly is "empowering"? See, this is exactly what's wrong with all these pseudo-feminist ideologies these days - they confuse villainy with happiness and success, explaining perfectly why you see lesbian-like characters such as Harley Quinn/Poison Ivy and Destiny/Mystique regarded as admirable figures despite their crime careers, while male homosexuals get law-abiding portrayals far more often. Is this "empowerment" good for matriarchal figures either, if Wanda's role is such? No way.

And lest we forget, why isn't anybody complaining how a reformed crook turned heroine in the comics during the Silver Age is transformed into the role of a lethal villainess in Dr. Strange's film sequel? Obviously, a lot of the people who're supposedly fans of the franchise never actually read the comics, and certainly don't value the characters as storytelling vehicles in the original medium.

Strangely enough, Olsen flip-flopped in another interview with Variety, where the following is told:

What Feige did not reveal — and what Disney carefully obscured in its marketing for the film right up to its release in theaters — is that Wanda doesn’t show up as Strange’s compatriot in “Multiverse of Madness”: She’s the villain.

And that's the problem long before this movie was produced. The TV show was just the beginning. And then, here's the part where Olsen seems to have a different view of how they prepared this junk:

How did it feel to kill all of those characters? I mean, I will never get over the image of you snapping Patrick Stewart’s head.

I — I was — I was also supposed to kill more. I had a hard time with it. I was like, these are human beings and Wanda is okay with ending their lives? But I just had to buckle down and think all these people are in her way and she’s warned Doctor Strange not to get in her way. And he did. He didn’t listen. And so I just had to go from that point of view.

Was there a scene that you found especially challenging to play?

I think the hardest thing was — I know we’re doing this interview after it’s released, but I still get anxious talking about it without spoilers. But there’s a moment where I have to snap at people I love, and that was a difficult scene. One of the people that I love — the little people that I love — they were throwing things at me in the scene, and accidentally smacked my face really hard. And that was the best reaction. And I felt so bad that I used it as the actor and let it inform how I responded to these people that I love. Because they were terrified after. It really was something I did not enjoy at all, but I knew it’d be good for the scene.

Odd, that sounds different from what she said about the script being "empowering" in the previous interview. If Wanda's depicted slaughtering shiploads of innocent people, that's abominable, and the way the movie goes about all this, it's exceedingly hard to excuse it, even if Wanda may resurrect the dead bodies by the end. If anything, this screenplay is just insulting to the intellect. I so do not want to watch these overrated movies, which, IMO, even follow a stereotype of making a hot woman into somebody you can't admire.

It's most truly disappointing how questions whether it's in good taste to depict a character like Wanda Maximoff in such a vile way are being ignored here, as is whether this does a service to the memory of Lee/Kirby. Which it most absolutely doesn't do at all. This new Dr. Strange movie is one of the worst examples of where things are going now that Feige's in charge of it.

Labels: Avengers, Doctor Strange, golden calf of death, golden calf of LGBT, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, violence, women of marvel

I have in my collection a copy of the 26th issue of the Superboy series from 1994-2002, and in the letter pages at the back, there's a letter written by who appears to be Geoff Johns, at least 2 years prior to becoming one of the most insufferable writers at DC/Marvel: And it seems Johns was heaping praise all over a former DC editor, Eddie Berganza, who later embarrassed himself by committing sexual misconduct, and was finally fired 5 years ago from their employment after years of ignorance from the upper echelons, not the least being Johns himself, seeing as even he did nothing to ensure Berganza would face consequence for his offensive actions. Men like Berganza are part of the reason why comicdom's gotten to such a dire state where political correctness reins supreme. And Johns claimed Berganza "knows Superboy's character to a T"? I think not. He certainly didn't know how to be a gentleman to a T, and one can only wonder what Johns thinks of Berganza now, 5 years after he was dismissed.

As I've stated before, I believe Johns was one of the worst omens to befall comicdom over the past quarter century. And his letters to the editor, including the above example, are decidedly little more than the product of somebody who had no sense of rationale in writing, resulting years later in grimy stories that don't hold up well in retrospect. Why, if memory serves, didn't Johns later follow up on what he suggested in his letter, by establishing this Superboy as a clone of Lex Luthor during his Teen Titans run? That, of course, led to nowhere inspiring.

Labels: bad editors, dc comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, violence

First, Marvel's keeping on with their diversity-pandering with a LGBT special, as reported by Newsbusters:

It’s official folks. Marvel is gay.

In honor of pride month, which will, unfortunately, be upon us in just over three weeks, Marvel just announced that it will have a pride-themed edition of the acclaimed Marvel’s Voices podcast (created by Angélique Roché in 2018) that will attempt to highlight the voices of LGTBQIA+ artists and creators and the impact of several gay superheroes in the Marvel universe.

[...] It is truly disappointing that Marvel, a company that genuinely brought fans some of the most well-produced, intricately developed, visually pleasing, and genuinely inspiring superhero stories of the past 20 years is now selling out for this harmful ideology to cater to a small portion of America’s population. There is always hope that their business could suffer should audiences be displeased with this new initiative (like what happened when Disney), but only time will tell.

One more reason why it's ill-advised to give them an audience, since they're basically serving as an extension of Disney's current agendas. Anybody with common sense who hasn't seen the new Dr. Strange sequel at the movies would be strongly advised to avoid it, and of course, avoid the modern comics output to boot.

And on that note, it would seem the social justice-obsessed IO9's gushing over a transsexual creation in the special by one of their very own co-founders, Charlie Jane Anders:

Here’s a bit of incredibly cool news to end your day: the introduction of Escapade, a new Marvel superhero from the mind of io9 co-founder and award-winning author Charlie Jane Anders. The beginning of Escapade’s journey begins in Marvel’s Voices: Pride #1 which follows the young superhero’s career as a thief and explores her life as a trans mutant. Her story is written by Anders and drawn by artist duo and Eisner-nominated cartoonists Ro Stein and Ted Brandt, with colors by Tamra Bonvillain as the collection’s central story.

“I have loved the Marvel Universe for as long as I can remember, and may or may not sing the Spider-Man cartoon theme in the shower on a regular basis. So I was so thrilled to be able to introduce a brand-new hero to stand alongside all of my favorites,” Anders shared on Marvel.com.

This is another something wrong with Marvel's approach, and an extension of what first began in the early 2000s, when they started hiring "celebrities" like J. Michael Straczynski to write their book series, and look where it got them in the long run with Spider-Man, whose marriage to Mary Jane Watson was destroyed, while propaganda sites like these just stood by and made no serious effort to defend Stan Lee's creations from abuse by Marvel's undeserved heirs. Now, they hire news propagandists to write their books as well, and Ta-Nehisi Coates was just the beginning. A terrible shame, but this is where Marvel and DC are heading these days. The same press who served as their apologists in the past are now part of the writing contributors' group.

And it sure is telling when the writer depicts his creation as a thief, as though that were truly a good role model these days. If Harley Quinn and Poison Ivy, along with Mystique and Destiny, are any suggestion, there's too many such examples of lesbian pairings who're into criminal activity in comic stories. What Anders wrote is no better.

Labels: golden calf of LGBT, marvel comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics

Anime News Network's gathered information from industry analysts who believe manga's skyrocketing success is here to remain, and makes the following observations:

COVID isolation is not the only factor contributing to manga's growth in popularity, however. Many fans are simply choosing manga over comics produced by companies such as Marvel and DC. This could be for a variety of reasons. Manga is written by one author, as opposed to a company, which allows for more creativity and flexibility, a more consistent art style, and often bolder topics. The internet has also increased manga's popularity, with the availability of reading content online and the accessibility of online forums for fans to discuss their favorite series.

They come close to admitting why manga's surpassing US superhero fare in the mainstream, but it's also because, by sharp contrast, said superhero tales owned by conglomerates seen today are simply of bad quality, continuity's been ruined, as the stories and art become worse and worse. The repeated company wide crossovers obviously aren't helping either, as they're another reason for loss of creative freedom at the Big Two, along with divisive, woke leftist politics. Something which, for now, most mangakas and animators haven't been victimized by, but if their guard is let down, it could happen, and may have happened with at least a few video game producers.

So, good for Japan if they can hold firm on their committment to creativity, but if they falter, they can't be surprised if they too will eventually find more failure than success.

Labels: censorship issues, crossoverloading, dc comics, Europe and Asia, indie publishers, manga and anime, marvel comics, sales

David Betancourt, a writer for the Washington Post who's written about comics, couldn't resist injecting propaganda at the expense of the now sadly deceased artist George Perez, including the following fluff-coated notes:

It is almost impossible to find someone working in comics today who wasn’t in some way inspired by Pérez’s powerful portfolio. Industry giants such as Jim Lee, Brian Michael Bendis and Dan Jurgens paid their respects on social media at the news of his death Friday at the age of 67.

Gee, these are hardly people qualified to say they adore Perez if they believe in political correctness, as Lee's proven to be in over 20 years, and Bendis is definitely not fit to claim appreciation for Perez, considering some of the former's work was an insult to the latter's far superior work. Come to think of it, even Jurgens probably isn't either, considering there's a number of questionable items in his portfolio that force realists to take his work with a grain of salt. And then, Betancourt says the following about Perez:

As comics changed over the years, his art style remained classic — subtle and sophisticated. He never bowed to the pressure to draw oversexualized heroines in suggestive positions or heroes who looked as if they took superhero performance enhancers, which were the norms for many publishers in the very extreme 1990s.

Wow, sounds like this guy never read New Teen Titans, even if he claims he did further down the column, and saw how he drew Starfire, let alone Donna Troy, or even Raven, for that matter. And didn't read Perez's Avengers run in the late 90s, written by Kurt Busiek, where he could've seen the hot outfit Perez drew for Scarlet Witch. We must truly be missing something here. Betancourt's proving himself a disgrace here, because it suggests he doesn't really respect Perez's art and writing, nor does he recognize sex appeal can have advantages and a positive side. At worst, it suggests Betancourt's too embarrassed to defend the best of Perez's art. He does talk about how Perez drew Dick Grayson muscularly, but doesn't seem to discuss how Perez drew Starfire and Donna as sexy babes, the inclusion of a panel from NTT notwithstanding, doesn't say Perez's Good Girl Art is a great example to aspire to, and draw inspiration from, nor is there any mention of Wanda or Wonder Woman looking just as lovely in that sense.

Pérez wanted to make sure everyone felt as if they too could be a superhero, including someone like him, a kid from the Bronx whose parents were from Puerto Rico. After all, what’s the point of drawing Superman, Batman and the Avengers if you felt that someone like you could never be a part of the roster. Even back then in the ’70s, decades before the comic book industry took a true interest in diversity among creators and superheroes, Pérez pushed for inclusion.

Comic-book-turned-Hollywood-heroes Miles Morales and America Chavez owe a debt of gratitude to Pérez for showing the world a Boricua can dream of flying too.

As a Puerto Rican comics journalist who has also written a superhero story for Marvel, I feel the significance of Pérez’s body of work while recognizing that his success meant I could belong in places where I didn’t see many people who looked like me.

But the stark difference is that Perez didn't push for inclusion at the expense of the white protagonists as we see today, when it's become almost a tradition to repeatedly kick Steve Rogers to the curb in Captain America. However, as admirable as Perez was, he may have unfortunately taken the wrong approach to criticizing the characterization or accent of Vibe, a hero of Puerto Rican descent who appeared in the last years of the original Justice League of America volume set in Detroit. And that kind of approach did a lot of harm in the long run to mainstream comicdom. Also, why is it such a big deal everybody be a superhero, but not a civilian co-star, which can be just impressive with good writing involved, and maybe even more?

And while fictional characters like Morales and Chavez can't be faulted for bland and poor characterization as their writers can, I don't think their creation had anything to do with Perez. Nope, it had what to do with political correctness, of which Bendis, as creator of the former, has been quite an advocate for in over a decade.

This is far from the first time Betancourt's ever taken PC positions, but it's terrible all the same he opportunistically sought to stealth in anti-sex positions. And, he completely ignores one of the most crucial components for comics, that being good writing. That's why any of the worst story examples from the 90s turned out as dreadful as they were, not the art alone. Too bad Betancourt doesn't have what it takes to admit it.

Labels: Avengers, dc comics, Justice League of America, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, Titans, women of dc, women of marvel, Wonder Woman