"Comics are a cultural embarassment"

[DKB]

National Review article

 

Found the link to this on the the Bendis board. Figured if any group of individuals would be opinionated about this, it would be those that frequent these boards.

 

 

Calling the new Spider-Man film the best comic-book movie ever made — and it is, without a doubt, the best comic-book movie ever made — is a little like calling a Chicken McNugget the best processed fast-food poultry product ever produced. It's praise, but how substantial can the praise really be, given the source?

 

Movies and television shows based on comic books constitute the worst single genre in the history of filmed entertainment (with the exception of porn). Okay, maybe movies and TV shows made from video games are worse, but they've only been around a little while. There have been horrendous comic-book movies since Superman first emerged as the avatar of this new form of pop-culture junk in 1938.

 

The only way Hollywood could succeed in making such entertainment minimally palatable was to camp it up like crazy, which is what the makers of the Batman TV series did in the mid-1960s and what Gene Hackman did so gloriously as the scenery-chomping villain of the Superman movies in the late 1970s.

 

In 1989, the comic-book movie took a big step up by abandoning camp for the macabre. Tim Burton's version of Batman made a zillion dollars at the box office by going gloomy when it came to Batman's inner struggle and creepy when it came to the villainous Joker's scheme to disfigure all of mankind. Jack Nicholson scored the highest paycheck in the history of cinema up to the time for his performance as the Joker. My friend Rick Marin allowed as how Nicholson was pretty good, but really, he was no Cesar Romero. (Romero played the Joker on TV.)

 

Ever since, it's been one gloomy and dark and depressing and dank comic-book movie after another. They seem to take place mostly at night, and there usually seems to be rain falling. You get a lot of brooding and scowling from characters who are able to perform supernatural acts — and as far as I'm concerned, if I had a supernatural power or two, I'd be pretty damn happy about it. Not these guys.

 

The first Spider-Man movie, released two years ago, broke the dour mold by being — wonder of wonders — very charming. Maybe it was the fact that its primary setting is the homely New York City borough of Queens that kept it down to human scale. Maybe it was the goofy sweetness Tobey Maguire brought to his triumphant turn as Spider-Man and his alter ego, science nerd Peter Parker. The villain (a cackling guy in a green suit flying around on a surfboard) wasn't much to write home about, and the scenes where Spider-Man flew around were incredibly cartoon-looking, but it was impossible to complain when this good-natured romp captured the hearts of American moviegoers.

 

Spider-Man 2 is more gloomy than its predecessor, and things seem to take an ominous turn as Peter Parker starts getting all complain-y about his lot in life. But for once, you understand why he's feeling the pain. The brilliant stroke here is that because he feels he has to save everybody who's in peril, Peter Parker can't even hold on to a pizza-delivery job. He's broke, he lives in a dump, and his friends and loved ones are furious with him because he never shows up anywhere on time and has no good excuses for his absences.

 

Peter Parker's struggles are truly the struggles of any 22-year-old trying to make a go of it in New York — money and punctuality. And Maguire is a wonderful Average Joe, who conveys with a look and a sigh the intolerable loneliness of being someone with a dangerous secret. Spider-Man 2 has one of the most satisfying endings of any Hollywood movie in years because director Sam Raimi and screenwriter Alvin Sargent (who was helped out by novelist Michael Chabon) plays off that loneliness so beautifully

 

Still, this is a story about a guy who can shoot spider webs out of his wrists and swing around the city, facing off against a villain who looks like a human octopus. No matter how effectively the movie does what it has to do, it can't transcend the essential stupidity of its central conceit.

 

I know, I know, I'm supposed to pause here to pay obeisance to the wonders of supercharged adolescent fantasies as embodied in the comic book. They present archetypes of heroism, focus on the hidden power of the social outcast, yada, yada, yada. At best, we have been told, they are the contemporary version of the Norse sagas. Their fans use terms like "Golden Age" and "Silver Age" to differentiate them, and can go into extraordinary detail about the difference between your Marvel comic and your DC comic.

 

Comic-book snobs of the 1970s always preferred Marvel, though my friend Tod Lindberg always had a soft spot for DC because DC had created a superhero character with the incredibly uneuphonious name of "Matter-Eater Lad."

 

There's no question that superhero comic books offer pre-teen and teenage male a very potent fantasy outlet — the idea of a powerful man who is hidden inside a frightened, neurotic boy's body. Gerard Jones's terrific book Killing Monsters makes an unimpeachable case for the depictions of violence in these fantasies, arguing that they offer a comforting outlet for those who feel totally powerless.

 

Comic books developed a bad reputation because of the violence they depicted, which was and is a silly reason to dislike them. Here's a better reason: They're a cultural embarrassment. They weren't when they were the province of powerless boys, but they have become a cultural embarrassment because the common culture has unthinkingly and stupidly accepted them as an art form. This was a natural outcome of the youth-worship that took over American culture in the 1960s, because if you're going to immature and illiterate energy in all its guises, why not go all the way into the most immature and illiterate of cultural forms?

 

I've always been an anti-comic-book snob, and I paid a price for it. Unlike many of my friends, I didn't preserve comic books from the 1960s and 1970s in little clear plastic bags. Friends who did have subsequently made thousands of dollars on them by selling them to comic-book stores whose owners and managers always seem to resemble Jabba the Hut — if Jabba the Hut wore a t-shirt with a Metallica logo on it. So maybe I'm a little bitter.

 

 

Its hard to even begin to point out what load of [!@#%^&^] this is. Actually, check that, its easy to begin, its just hard to stop.

[nik]

What a Donkey

[Foolkiller]

What I think is interesting about the article is that there is little actual development of the author's criticism. He says that comic books are an embarassment because they've become an accepted art form -- but fails to back up in anyway the genesis for his thought or his rationale.

 

The article is poorly structured to deliver his point as well because it spends a great deal of time rehashing the gloominess of comic book movies. On top of that the author has gone out of his way to sound educated on this topic, when in fact, he is recalling the comic books that were simple in their plot lines and dialog. This comes through when he cites comic books as the choice material for those who are "illiterate" which was a common criticism back in the 50s and 60s.

 

Again, the author goes on to look at the stereotypical comic shop owner as fat and resembling Jabba the Hut -- but of course has probably only seen Comic Book Guy from the Simpson's as a point of reference. I would guess that the author probably had some sort of conversation with a friend or a colleague recently regarding all the hype about Spider Man 2 and is bewildered by it. He can't understand how a juvenile medium has been launched into mainstream popularity. He has a deep dislike for comic books because he is probably a pseudo-intellectual snob and is closed off to the imagination and possibilities that exist in comic books.

 

I think the author wrote a poor piece and did nothing more than convey his dislike for comics -- without offering any substance to back up his thoughts, he decided to write an angry piece. In that vein, I got his point.

[Aman619]

I actually could only read the first few paragraphs. His point is way off base. Super hero movies are no more infantile than all th eother effects adventure action films being made. They're thrill rides to watch, and people like em. Does he list movies which he deems WORTHY of praise? I bet Fahrenheit 9/11 isnt one of them. (not that its a great movie, but just a guess that he wouldnt like it)

[Foolkiller]

I wonder if the author feels that comic books are a cultural embarassment for Japan as well... or are they not comic books since they call them "manga". This piece was thrown together without a lot of fault -- but it's not all that surprising that a columnist wouldn't take the time to do his/her homework, it's all too often the case these days.

[delekkerste]

He has a deep dislike for comic books because he is probably a pseudo-intellectual snob and is closed off to the imagination and possibilities that exist in comic books.

 

Well, I agree with the gist of your comments and those of the previous posters that this was a very poorly constructed argument. However, I hope that people don't think that this guy is some kind of lone, anti-comics gunman out there, because the fact of the matter is that most of the rest of the population do not worship and revere comics like we do here. Furthermore, I think there are plenty of comic collectors who are equally as guilty in their own way of mischaracterizing comics as this author.

[jimm94]

It's hard to believe someone got paid to write that. Hate-based op/ed pieces are nothing more than hit generators for "news" web sites. I doubt that even this author's editors take him seriously.

 

BTW - It's obvious that he doesn't know what the heck he's talking about. Jabba the Hutt has two "T's", not one. Sheeesh!!!!

[Darthdiesel]

Does he list movies which he deems WORTHY of praise? I bet Fahrenheit 9/11 isnt one of them. (not that its a great movie, but just a guess that he wouldnt like it)

 

I don't think ANYONE would/could put Farenheit 9/11 on any list referring to praise...

[Darthdiesel]

Furthermore, I think there are plenty of comic collectors who are equally as guilty in their own way of mischaracterizing comics (e.g., as belonging in the realms of high finance and/or fine literature/art) as this author.

 

you mean guys who come out and state that comics are better investments than traditional stocks?

[Aman619]

yeah, but 90% of comics DO suck. We know that....and 90% of all media and art sucks too. Why single out comics. It was just a cheap little article of the moment. I dont get the feeling that the author has any deeper feeling for the subject than this weeks paycheck.

[GOODBYE!-migration]

The National Review is a cultural embarrassment

 

They are as unbiased as some of those people that took out the Romanovs in 1917 if you get my gist.

 

I'm glad that nest of jerks doesn't like comics as they are the biggest bunch of reactionary fools.

[OldGuy]

yeah, but 90% of comics DO suck.....

 

Let me guess, you're referring to the 90% that you don't collect, right?

[delekkerste]

yeah, but 90% of comics DO suck. We know that....and 90% of all media and art sucks too. Why single out comics. It was just a cheap little article of the moment. I dont get the feeling that the author has any deeper feeling for the subject than this weeks paycheck.

 

It's all part of an elaborate conspiracy to crash the comic book market. I'll have to remember to get the author's son a birthday present next week.

[Darthdiesel]

I'll have to remember to get the author's son a birthday present next week.

 

Get him a buttplug.... it may stem the flow of diarrhea coming from this imbecile

[sterlingcomics]

Does he list movies which he deems WORTHY of praise? I bet Fahrenheit 9/11 isnt one of them. (not that its a great movie, but just a guess that he wouldnt like it)

 

I don't think ANYONE would/could put Farenheit 9/11 on any list referring to praise...

 

Regardless of your political affiliation though you have to give the movie enough props in that it makes you think.

[sterlingcomics]

I'll have to remember to get the author's son a birthday present next week.

 

Get him a buttplug.... it may stem the flow of diarrhea coming from this imbecile

 

[COI]

Why single out comics.

 

Because he happened to be writing about Spidey 2.

 

Who cares, really. This article dosen't anger me in the least. If it did, that would imply that I needed some validation from the masses, and I really couldn't care less about outside perceptions of the hobby. It's not a crime to not like comics, to consider them second rate entertainment, or to even go so far as to call them a "cultural embarassment". When I put myself in the shoes of a non-collector, I can see the absurdity of the hobby, ESPECIALLY when I hear discussions about comics being achievements in literature or being referred to as "fine art". I love the hobby, but let's get a grip.

 

And in regards to the stereotypes.......they ARE partially true, and if you've been to a show you know it's impossible to deny.

[chromium]

he lost me when he started knocking porn-movies.....

[Darthdiesel]

I would disagree - Schindler's List made me think, the Passion of the Christ makes me reflect - Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 is in a class of movies that I would consider propagandist and for entertainment purposes only, even if a poor attempt at that, like overdrawn out scenes to make points these movies represent the vision of how one man sees something in this country and focuses on making his point. He doesn't represent or capture my view of America or my life in his movies. He just happens to have the talent, money and influence to get the ear of the powers that be to allow him to air this garbage in the form of a movie. I find it laughable and even worse I marvel at the people who actually consider anything in his movies seriously and take it as unbiased fact

[Fan4Fan]

he lost me when he started knocking porn-movies.....

 

Yeah, me too!

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan