There go my Heroes

In hindsight, that would probably make a better title for the post about the next season finale of "Heroes." Of course, there's nothing to say I won't use it for that too.

So, I've been playing Justice League Heroes on the PS2, and I've quite enjoyed it so far. The game's certainly not without its flaws, but I'm playing through a second time (got to beef up those unlocked characters and see the alternate costumes), which I don't usually do immediately after beating a game.

In fact, the last game I started playing a second time immediately after the first was Marvel Ultimate Alliance, easily one of my favorite superhero video games of all time. Given the similar game mechanics and subject matter, comparing these two games is inevitable. Unfortunately, that's not so great for JLH.

The biggest, most obvious difference is in the size of your teams; Ultimate Alliance gives you four-hero squads, while JLH, probably because of its multiplayer feature, limits you to Dynamic Duos. I applaud the decision to include a two-player option, but limiting the teams to two heroes makes the game feel a heck of a lot more like "Brave and the Bold Heroes." Allowing for larger teams might have required some creativity or flexibility with the multiplayer option, but it would have justified the latter half of the "Justice League" name.

One of the neat ideas in MUA was the team bonus: by combining characters who fit thematically (all women, all spies, etc.) or historically (the Fantastic Four, the X-Men, etc.), you'd get some benefit to your stats. While this obviously makes the most sense with larger teams, there's really no reason that it couldn't have been adapted to the two-person system in JLH. Superman + Batman = World's Finest bonus; Hal Jordan + Green Arrow = Hard-Traveling Heroes bonus; Batman + Huntress = Gotham Knights bonus; and so on. I really think the only reason you wouldn't include such a feature in JLH is that the number of character options might give you more bonus-combinations than normal ones.

Don't get me wrong, JLH has a nice assortment of characters. You start with a pool of seven, ranging from the obvious (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman) to the slightly more obscure (John Stewart, Zatanna), and you can buy six more by collecting icons in the game. Unfortunately, I've been spoiled by the sheer number of characters included in Marvel Ultimate Alliance, where in addition to playable characters, you run into all sorts of other superheroes and supporting cast members in the game. MUA is chock-full of easter-eggs and shout-outs to the fans, which really enriches the feel of the universe. JLH has only a fraction of that (though the messages on the Watchtower recorder are fun). And some of the choices made are a little on the odd side; for instance, John Stewart, Kyle Rayner, and Hal Jordan are all separate characters with separate voices and dialogue (albeit with the same powers), but Jay Garrick is just a costume for the Flash. I can't for the life of me figure out why they did that, unless it was to save on game size or something, but how much space do a few new lines of speech really take up?

As great as it is to be able to unlock new characters and some cool costumes (black suit Superman is teh awesome; biker suit Wonder Woman, less so), the game isn't exactly new-character-friendly. There are very few missions where you get to choose your own team (and their costumes), and none of them happen until fairly late in the game, which means any newly-unlocked characters are at a severe level disadvantage. MUA offered frequent chances to change your team's composition during missions, allowing quite a bit more flexibility, and making new characters a little less disadvantaged when they entered the fray.

The story is neat (though it borrows liberally from a couple of JLU plots and "Rock of Ages"), and with Dwayne McDuffie at the helm, it's no wonder that the characterizations are pretty well spot-on. Unfortunately, the game is rather short (and rather easy, for that matter), and a bit repetitive. While I don't necessarily have a problem with all the punch-'em-up action against largely indistinguishable grunts, drones, and robots, I do wish there were a bit more problem-solving. The bosses are tough and varied, but I couldn't help but wonder, in this Justice League game, where all the Justice League villains were. There are two Superman foes (Doomsday, Brainiac), a Flash rogue (Gorilla Grodd), a Firestorm villain (Killer Frost), and Darkseid. The only League villains are The Key and Queen Bee, and arguably the unnamed White Martians. Where are the Weapons Master, T.O. Morrow, Starro, Amazo, Kanjar Ro, and the host of other villains with names ending in "o"? It's not as though the existing villains were picked because of name recognition (the Key? Really?). Picking almost exclusively the enemies of individual heroes rather than the League's villains only contributes to the feel that this game is more "DC Comics Presents" than "Justice League."

Like I said, it's not a bad game; I've had quite a lot of fun playing it (both times). I just hope that DC's next Justice League game takes some hints from MUA, and provides the fans with larger teams, a larger cast, a longer story, more flexibility, more Justice League villains, and greater immersion in the universe. I'd also like to see a Legion of Super-Heroes game along the same lines. So get on it, DC!

The Miller's Tale

So, we watched "300" on the way out to Colorado. I fell asleep at one point, and it was tough to see the laptop from the back of the bus, so I still feel like I haven't really watched the movie, but it got me wondering about several things:

1. Why was I the only one laughing? Do other people just not find humor in stilted, artificial dialogue? Not that it was all stilted, mind you, but there were some lines at least as hilarious as "you're breaking my heart" (see: "Star Wars Episode III" or "why George Lucas shouldn't be allowed to write dialogue anymore").
   
2. Why is there such a humongous overlap between manly macho films and blatantly homoerotic films? I'm looking at you, "Top Gun."
   
3. What is it about Frank Miller that inspires directors to fanatically preserve the integrity of his work? Out of the three recent films based in part or in whole on Miller's work ("Batman Begins," "300," and "Sin City"), two have been panel-by-panel transliterations from comic to screen. Meanwhile, you've got the Wachowski brothers replacing Alan Moore's subtlety with a sledgehammer and changing every major theme (ordinary people may be driven to do terrible things--prostitution, fascism, terrorism; anarchy vs. fascism), and you've got Fantastic Four movies that replace Lee/Kirby creations with space clouds. Why can't other (better) comic creators instill some modicum of the respect (if not the fanatical devotion) that Frank Miller receives?

Road trip!

So, I'm going to a conference up in Denver, CO tonight, and I won't be anywhere near my computer (I still don't have my laptop, for previously-enumerated reasons) until Sunday. I know, I know, posting has already been sparse lately, but I have been working on things. Shortly after I get back, I should have posts up about the "Justice League: Heroes" game and the third and fourth Superman films.

Anyway, while we're up there, we'll apparently be going to Coyote Ugly. I don't drink, and I'm told that if I order water, they'll spray me with it. That doesn't bother me, but I'd hate to see what happens if I say "I don't know."

Quick question

Blue Beetle: great comic, or the greatest comic?

Superman: Doomsday

So, I watched the new animated Superman movie a week or so ago. Right off the bat, I'm glad it distinguished itself from the Bruce Timm animated series, looking a bit less like the previous incarnations of Superman than the revamped Kids' WB "Batman" season looked like the previous Fox seasons of the show. I know some were concerned that it'd be jarring to hear new voice actors doing familiar-looking characters, as it was when they nonsensically replaced the Penguin in "Mystery of the Batwoman" or half the cast in "Superman: Brainiac Attacks" (note: I still haven't seen and don't plan to see the latter). The animation and character designs were different enough from the DCAU to make the voice changes unnoticeable. I also liked that the designs had a certain '90s sensibility to them--Clark's face and style, Lois's brown hair, little touches like that. My only real problem was that it ran into some of the animation problems that plagued the first season of Justice League, namely the inconsistently drawn S-shield.

I thought the voice casting was well-done; my only problem was with Anne Heche's performance in the first scene or so with Lois; it felt very stilted and unnatural, and really could have used another take.

The plot was very different from the comics, but it wasn't until I saw this that I realized just how different it would have to be, due to the crazy things that were happening in the Superman comics at the time. Consider the following important aspects of the Death and Return story in the comics:

• Lex Luthor was "dead," but living in a cloned body and posing as his own son.
  
• Lex Luthor II was dating Supergirl, who was a shape-shifting superpowered clone of Lana Lang from a pocket dimension.
  
• Clark Kent and Lois Lane were engaged.
  
• A secretive hi-tech cloning operation called Project Cadmus was a major behind-the-scenes player in Metropolis, and were responsible for a society of sewer-dwelling monsters, as well as the grave-robbing of Superman's tomb.
  
• The Justice League consisted of more or less the Keith Giffen team, who are largely unknown to the general public. They were brutally beaten in the Doomsday battle.
  
• The Eradicator, a sentient Kryptonian artifact dedicated to the preservation of Krypton, was lying dormant somewhere near Earth.
  
• Hank Henshaw, an astronaut, had previously encountered Superman after a failed space flight which left him and his family dying of radiation poisoning, but also gave him the ability to control machinery.
  
• Pa Kent suffered a heart attack shortly after Superman's death, and Superman's return from the grave was preceded by a battle alongside his father on the way to the afterlife.

And so on. Coast City, Mongul, Cyborg's betrayal...trying to do it all justice would have led to an incomprehensible mess of a film. The fact that I was able to follow the comics at all, not knowing who the Underworlders were or what Cadmus was, is nothing short of a miracle.

And if you eliminate one thing, several others necessarily fall thereafter. Take out Lex's clone (a necessary decision, I think), and you have to remove his relationship with Supergirl, which makes her an utterly superfluous character to the story. Remove Cadmus, and you remove the whole Underworld subplot, Lois Lane's infiltration exploits, the Guardian, and Superboy. Ultimately, the plot ended up very streamlined, thanks to some of these editing choices.

I was surprised and impressed at the way they were able to roll up three of the four Supermen into a single character--a clone (Superboy) with incomplete memories and a more brutal idea of justice (Eradicator) who ultimately betrays the populace and must be taken down by the real Superman (Cyborg).

I really liked the black costume and Superman's headbanger hair (which I really don't think qualifies as a "Supermullet," it was generally drawn long all around); along with the electric blue costume, that look needs to be present in the DCU. I know the days of the dark-colored violent antihero versions of other characters (Venom, Vengeance, Strange, Thunderstrike, etc.) are over, but there's got to be someone to wear the black-and-silver outfit. Hey Kon-El, need a Kryptonian recovery suit?

Overall, I thought the film was pretty well-done. It compressed and adapted the story nicely, included some great battle scenes (and some real shocks, like with Luthor and Mercy), and more or less met my expectations. I could have done without some of the campiness of Luthor's framing monologues, but that's a minor quibble. It's no "Mask of the Phantasm," but "Superman: Doomsday" makes a decent intro to DC's newest animated endeavor.

And I can't wait for "New Frontier."

An incomplete list of things which cannot survive a fall off the top of my car

• A Fabergé egg
  
• A normal egg
  
• Most mirrors
  
• A snowball
  
• An intricate Lego or K'Nex structure which is not specifically made to survive a 5-foot fall
  
• Pie
  
• Peter Parker's ego
  
• Samuel L. Jackson's character in "Unbreakable"
  
• My new laptop

Next: An incomplete list of warranties I didn't buy!

Reasons to take away my comic blogger's license

• I'm actually kind of psyched about all the Tangent Comics stuff going on in DC these days. Now if only someone will revive Amalgam.
  
• I'm not exactly psyched about Jim Shooter's return to the Legion. I really like the Waid Legion, and Shooter's admission that he hasn't read the comics in quite some time makes me worried about how well the personalities will remain constant.
  
• Yeah, I still really liked "Superman Returns."
  
• I can't stand Kevin Nowlan's art, and I've never understood why he's so beloved. Same for Sal Buscema.
  
• I tried Nextwave. I thought Nextwave tried too hard. Yes, Fin Fang Foom wears purple underwear, very observant. Can you think of a new joke for issue two, please?
  
• Speaking of which, I've never read anything by Warren Ellis that I cared for. Granted, I haven't read much by Ellis. What I read of Authority was rather uninteresting (Joe Kelly was right to treat those characters as a one-note joke, as far as I could tell), his issues of JLA: Classified were utterly boring, and his episode of JLU was a low point in the season.
  
• And all that adds up to me having a better opinion of Judd Winick than I do of Warren Ellis, since I actually liked Winick's "Green Lantern."
  
• I don't hate Marv Wolfman, nor do I wish any harm to befall him.
  
• While I think the end of the Green Arrow marriage was ridiculous, stupid, and gratuitous (and, because of all that, utterly ineffective--my first thought was "okay, is it Everyman or Clayface?"), it was a superhero wedding, which means that something had to go wrong. It's in the superhero bylaws. The only reason Clark and Lois's ceremony went off without a hitch was because they agreed to sacrifice the honeymoon to terrorists. At least this time it was the groom in trouble; Black Canary fared better in that regard than Starfire and Linda Park.
  
• I like Adam Strange.

I think that's enough for now.

Jumping the Clark

When did "Smallville" jump the shark?

I recently purchased Season 5 (I stopped watching the show as it aired sometime back in Season 3, and have caught episodes in other forms since then) and I guess I'm a third of the way through or so. After episodes on vampire sororities and infiltrating strip clubs, it's become abundantly clear that the show is floundering, and probably should have ended before our intrepid heroes left high school.

But at what point did the show make its biggest misstep? I mean, the first season was pretty rough to begin with (what with the freak-of-the-week episode structure), but it seemed to hit a nice stride in the second and third seasons. What was the turning point?

Flipping through the booklet for the Season 4 set, I'm seeing loads of possibilities...