Slightly Off the Mark

So, here's why I haven't read many books so far this year: Because I've read fifteen volumes of Schlock Mercenary, a web comic turned graphic novel. Did I like it? Well, I'm on my fifteenth volume, so there you go.

In the very first strip Schlock joins, as you might expect, a group of space mercenaries called Tagon's Toughs. To paraphrase the old A-Team opening, if you've got the money--and if you can find them--you can hire Captain Kaff Tagon's army-for profit. But you won't have any trouble finding them, because they leave disaster in their wake.

Meanwhile, the rest of Tagon's Toughs range from humans, to aliens of every type, to Earth animals who gained sentience. The company's biggest antagonists are also its biggest allies: Artificial Intelligences running ships and worlds, which communicate through avatars that mostly look like humans (although one resembles a super-cute koala).

Writer and artist Howard Taylor covers modern problems ranging from politicians to nanobots, using parody, satire, and just plain laugh-out-loud humor to deal with a violent universe that's always on the edge of blowing up--sometimes literally.

Taylor himself admits to being weak on the artistic side when he first started out. But the art gets better, and the writing is on the money right from the get-go. He happily tackles just about every science fiction concept ever invented, hard and soft, and as the series goes on the challenges and players get bigger and bigger. Taylor's not afraid to kill off characters, and those that eventually come back do so in a convincing way--or at least, a way that may be possible in the future. It's clear the author has a good grasp on technology, even if he happily strays from known science for a story or a laugh.

Meanwhile--and this might be the most surprising part of Schlock Mercenary--Taylor gives us relatable, engaging characters along with the well-plotted stories. As the scale gets bigger and bigger, the characters change and grow and, as mentioned earlier, the art gets better.

Check out the strip or order the books here:

https://www.schlockmercenary.com/

You can click on "Schlock Mercenary Begins", which will take you to a redone version of the first strip, and below that is a link to the original strip. Did I mention the art gets better? It does.

• Amazon:  https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B0058CL6OO
• Barnes & Noble:  https://www.barnesandnoble.com/s/"Mark R Hunter"
• Goodreads:  https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/4898846.Mark_R_Hunter
• Blog: https://markrhunter.blogspot.com/
• Website: http://www.markrhunter.com/
• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ozma914/
• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MarkRHunter914
• Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/markrhunter/
• Twitter: https://twitter.com/MarkRHunter
• Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@MarkRHunter
• Substack:  https://substack.com/@markrhunter
• Tumblr:  https://www.tumblr.com/ozma914
• Smashwords:  https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/ozma914

 Remember: Reading keeps you from turning into a big pile of poo.

I like my Batman about halfway between the camp of the TV show and the relentless pain and drama of the most recent movies: My favorite was the 1989 version. It's probably no coincidence that the first Michael Keaton Batman movie also gave us my favorite Joker, in Jack Nicholson. But that's all a matter of taste, of course.

In this version Batman is just two years into his crime fighting career, and already questioning whether he's doing any good in a crime-ridden Gotham City. Most of the police hate him (with the exception of Detective Jim Gordon, well played by Jeffrey Wright). His seemingly only employee, Alfred, warns of the Wayne fortune's impending collapse, and now a serial killer is sending the Batman notes with strange riddles along with the bodies.

One of Batman's nicknames is "The World's Greatest Detective", a part of his persona often ignored in screen versions. But this movie is more a detective story (and psychological thriller) than a superhero flick, and we get to see Batman using his powers of observation and detective skills as much as his fighting abilities and cool devices. He allies with Gordon and the enigmatic Selena Kyle (Zoe Kravitz) to find answers he might end up not wanting to know.

It slows the movie down compared to most superhero moves. In fact, Batman often resembles more of a mix of James Bond and Sherlock Holmes, as he follows clues and questions suspects.

I'm not a fan of making superhero movies more "realistic" ... they're superhero movies. In particular I'd like the villains to be at least a little bit more like the originals, although you can't fault the casting (including Colin Farrell, John Turturro, and Paul Dano.) Many were surprised at how good Robert Pattinson is as Batman, but not me--I remember the same criticism of comedy actor Michael Keaton, who's still one of my favorites to play the role. As Bruce Wayne, not so much--Pattinson plays him as a single minded and perpetually downbeat mess--although, to be fair, that's exactly what the character would be like at this point in his life.

So there it is: I found The Batman too bleak and grounded for my taste, and yet it's a brilliant film, evidence that "comic book movies" have grown up. I hear there might be a TV series spinoff from this movie, and yes: I'd watch it.

Make sure you wear an adult diaper, though--a lot gets packed into a bladder-filling three hours.

My Score:

Entertainment value: 3 1/2 M&Ms out of four. From the fights and chases to the characters and Gotham City itself, it's a treat--although it's dark both figuratively and literally.

Oscar Potential: 3 M&Ms. It should be four out of four--The Batman is full of Oscar level work.

 Now all new and spoiler free!

Okay, let's get this out of the way right now: They should stop making superhero movies. Just give it up.

Because Avengers: Endgame is the perfect superhero movie.

Or at least, as close to it as a work of entertainment can get. In fact, it's a damn good movie period.

I'm trying to make this spoiler free, so chances are good I'm not going to say a specific thing about the plot past the first, oh, hour. But that's okay, because once I got started I'd have to divide this up into three or four parts, and besides: I already made my view known in the last few paragraphs.

At the end of the last Avengers movie Thanos--who until then I'd always called Darkseid-Lite--collected all the fabled Infinity Stones into a gauntlet, snapped his fingers (curse you, Starlord!), and turned half of every living being in the universe to dust.

That's one heck of a glove.

But Darkseid doesn't have a cool glove.  (https://geeks.media/who-came-first-the-copycats-of-comics)

The very first scene is one of the most heartbreaking of the whole movie. We see Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye, who has no idea any of this has been happening, sharing a fun cookout with his wife and three kids. He's happily giving archery tips to his daughter, and debating and correct condiment to put on hot dogs ...

And that's when my heart froze, as I realized this was happening before the snap.

Fast forward five years. Hawkeye has disappeared, although there are disturbing stories about his activities. The rest of the survivors are dealing with the fact that they're survivors.

Tony Stark has retired as Iron Man, Captain America is trying to guide others through a new, darker world, and Black Widow is searching for Thanos and trying to keep the other heroes together. These three, in my mind, are the heart of Avengers: Endgame. But it's another hero, who's managed to avoid the entire disaster altogether, who comes forward with a way to save all those who've been lost.

I don't think that last part is a spoiler at all. Of course some plan will be hatched to bring the dead back to life. They're not going to let that whole group, especially Black Panther, Doctor Strange, or Spider-Man, just vanish without more movies. And there are a surprising number of light moments along the way.

So the survivors gather for a mission that will give them one chance to reverse the snap, even if it means sacrificing themselves, because that's what heroes do.

Yeah, I've left a lot out. The movie's three friggin' hours long, after all, although it didn't feel that long to me. To say lots of stuff happens is putting it mildly, and yes, some of the heroes get shorted (how could they not?) Brie Larson's Captain Marvel, especially, has less screen time than I suspected, although what she does get is spectacular.

There is, naturally, an epic battle at the end, but for me the most joy was the mission in the middle, which I just can't talk about and boy, is that killing me. The heroes are divided up, and we get to see some who aren't ordinarily paired working together. We also get lots of popular secondary characters, and they also sometimes get put together in ways that bring joy to my geeky heart.

I said this about the last movie, but how they managed to juggle all these characters and keep things straight is beyond me ... but they do. That must have been one heck of a diagram.

In the end, as with any great movie, the characters don't exist for the epic battle scenes. Avengers: Endgame is about people. With a combination of great actors and great writing, an amazingly unlikely number of characters get their chance to shine.

And yes ... bring tissues.

My rating:

Entertainment value: 5 out of 4 m&m's. My rating system, my ratings.

Oscar Potential: 3 out of 4 m&m's. This movie is Oscar worthy. Not only for the usual things like effects, but for several of the actors and even Best Picture consideration. Change my mind. No, don't bother trying.

At  last, a superhero movie starring a woman! Again.

I've mentioned before that I'm not a fan of politics in movies, including gender politics. I liked 1992's Buffy the Vampire Slayer despite its imperfections; I didn't like 1984's Supergirl despite loving the character. Still, you have to consider that the actual first female superhero movie, Supergirl, was a box office bomb. Could it be male fans just couldn't handle it back then? Maybe.

Just the same, my criteria for a great movie includes only: Do I love it? That's it.

From that standpoint, Captain Marvel is a great movie. 

Yes, if you're looking for female empowerment it's there in spades, but mostly in a below the surface iceberg kind of way that doesn't interfere with the fun. Brie Larson plays Vers, who's fighting on the side of an alien race called the Kree against the aggressive, awful, and certainly evil looking Skrulls. When a mission goes badly Vers finds herself stranded on the backward planet C-53, otherwise known as Earth in the 90s. There, while trying to hunt down the Skrulls, Vers stumbles across a young SHIELD bureaucrat named Nick Fury. 

They're working undercover; Fury even took his eye patch off.

From here on, Captain Marvel is at its best as a buddy comedy/adventure, with Vers and Fury working together to identify the Skrulls, who can shape-shifting into anyone. There are twists--one of them huge--and callouts to the comics and other movies along the way, while the amnesiac Vers also begins to uncover facts about her previous life.

There was some concern about Larson's ability to play Captain Marvel (she never goes by that name in the film), due largely to her youth, especially when we find out she's been a warrior for many years. It's baseless: Larson does a fine job, even holding her own against Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury. Jackson gets de-aged thanks to movie magic, which makes me wonder if I shouldn't get into acting now that I can be thirty again. 

See, you know the Skrulls are the bad guys, 'cause they're ugly, and green, and have pointed ears. Like Vulcans.

The other actors also do a fine job, including Jude Law as the leader of the Kree battle force, Annette Bening as Dr. Wendy Lawson, and Lashana Lynch as a former fighter pilot--the latter two figure into Vers' past. It was great seeing Clark Gregg again as Agent Coulson, this time as a green young agent in a sadly small part. Then there's the cat. Don't miss the cat.

Captain Marvel has the usual great special effects and action sequences, and it's fun to look back to 1995 and see what's changed since then. Although for me the opening sequences labored to grab my attention, the movie more than made up for it as it went along.

My rating:

Entertainment value: 4 out of 4 M&Ms. I enjoyed it even more than most Marvel movies, and that's going some. You can't beat a superhero movie that takes its world seriously while applying a nice layer of humor.

Oscar Potential: 2 out of 2 M&Ms. There's nothing wrong with Captain Marvel from a quality standpoint, but it's a superhero movie. You're not likely to see much Oscar attention for those now that Black Panther's done. Unless they do a Black Panther/Captain Marvel crossover, of course.

I'd watch that.

It's all very simple, really: Thanos, one of the most powerful villains in the Marvel universe (think Darkseid, you DC fans), has come up with a cool new way to cut down on universal overpopulation: Kill overpopulation. Literally.

Like any good villain, Thanos (remarkably played as a kinda/sorta normal guy by Josh Brolin) doesn't think he's a villain at all. In fact, over the course of Avengers: Infinity War we learn his reasoning, and he's actually pretty sincere, for a murderous egomaniac.

Lined up against him, and equally sincere: Every single character EVER to appear in a Marvel superhero movie.

Okay, maybe not every one. I'd have loved to see Martin Freeman's CIA agent character from Black Panther, if only long enough for him to encounter Benedict Cumberbatch's Doctor Strange in passing. (They have history, you see.) There are a few notable absences, three I could think of off the top of my head, two I could think of off the bottom, and one who gets a first ever movie mention. Otherwise ... well, otherwise just about everyone is there--according to one count, 76 good and bad guys transplanted from the comics and previous movies.

Let's see: one, two, three ... oh, never mind.

Holy cow, Batman. (Batman doesn't appear, but believe it or not, there is one DC related mention.)

So, does this movie have a plot, or do they just walk by one after another and wave to the camera? In other words, how in the world can they pull this off?

The answer to that, as it turns out, is that they can pull it off very well. Very well, indeed.

Thanos is on the hunt to collect the six Infinity Stones, artifacts from the beginning of the universe. When put together into the Infinity Gauntlet, they would give him unimaginable power, to do such things as, say, wipe out out overpopulation, not to mention population. Viewers of previous Marvel movies already know where some of the stones are, and as the movie opens we find Thanos collecting one. But during that opening battle one of the opposing heroes gets sent to Earth, where he warns Earth's mightiest heroes that they might have to, you know, Avenge those Thanos has already killed.

Cool bling, dude.

Directors Anthony and Joe Russo and writers Chrstopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (there are sixteen credited writers, including character creators) come into their own here, and the first thing they do is shake things up by dividing the various teams involved. Some of the Avengers stay on Earth, others go into space; the ones in space find themselves teamed with various members of the Guardians of the Galaxy. For many of our heroes, it all culminates in an epic conflict in the African nation of Wakanda, where we encounter our favorites from Black Panther.

It could so easily have been an overwhelming mess. Instead, it's incredible. So many characters get their own arc, yet the movie isn't confusing or overwhelming, even in some giant battle sequences. There's the humor we've come to expect from Marvel, but also a sense of the incredible stakes. There are call-outs to previous movies, and new team-ups that will make fans joyful. My two favorite new pairs were ... fun. (Spoilers!) It's a long movie, but it has to be--and it's worth every minute.

Go look up the video. You kinda have to be there.

My score:

Entertainment value: 5 out of 4 M&M's, the good brown ones. That's right: Avengers: Infinity War is better than perfect. In fact, I only had one issue, which stemmed from the fact that I didn't know something about Marvel's future plans, and that's all I can say about it.

Oscar potential: 4 out of 4 M&M's. Oh, that doesn't mean they'll actually see a nomination. But to put that many characters together, pulling in details from so many other movies, and have it not only make sense but be great--incredible.

The death of Adam West immediately resurrected the old argument: Who's your favorite Batman?

It's ironic that Roger Moore passed away so close to the same time: His death, of course, caused a chorus of favorite James Bond arguments. They both held similar positions in their perspective portrayals: They were the lighter, more colorful ones who weren't afraid to poke a little fun at their genres.

That being the case--especially with West--the argument becomes apples and oranges. What, I can't have both? A big navel orange, followed by a nice Red Delicious? Comparing Adam West to, say, Christian Bale is like comparing ... hm. Oh, I know: Like comparing "Battlestar Galactica" to "Battlestar Galactica". Love or hate the reboot, it just wasn't the same show as the original.

I've probably just started arguments that would rival fights among British football fans, but there you go. 

"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb." -- Batman

Look at the above quote, and picture Michael Keaton's Batman saying that. Look at the photo, and imagine Christian Bale's Batman cavorting with a purple Batgirl or a bright red and yellow Robin. Ain't gonna happen. For that matter, imagine Ben Affleck making fun of his Batman on an episode of Family Guy. (Clooney would probably do it.)

My point is, you can like them both, or all, even Val Kilmer if you want. If you're a sports fan, the analogy is that you can like both the Cubs and the Bears: They're both in the same city, but they're two different animals.

So embrace and remember the fun that was Adam West. We should all be so lucky as to bring that much joy to such a wide audience.

We saw a movie in 3-D today, by accident.

I can take or leave 3-D, and since it costs more I usually leave it. But we’d misread the schedule, and rather than wait around another half hour we chose to watch Ant-Man in three dimensions. It was in a theater which just replaced its seats with power recliners, which makes it a far cry from the movie-going experiences of my youth. I can take or leave the recliners, too. It’s nice to not worry about a tall guy sitting in front of you, though.

Happily, in this case the movie uses 3-D without relying on it. Sometimes moviemakers overthink the format, throwing everything from arrows to crashing vehicles at the viewer in the hopes of setting a new audience jump record. I wonder if the same thing happened with the first talkies, or the color films? Probably early movies in those formats threw their newfangled tricks at viewers, just as the early 3-D movies did.

But the day will come when 3-D will be just another part of every movie experience, regardless of how much some hate it now. Having things jump off the screen at you will be no more remarkable than hearing Johnny Depp’s newest accent, or seeing the primary colors of a superhero’s costume. I’ll probably choose 2-D for some time to come … just as people chose the less garish black and white movies decades ago. But I can go either way.

As for the movie itself? Ant-Man was great fun, and I highly recommend it in the dimension of your choice.

            Am I so much of a geek that I care when actors from some of my favorite shows come together in one movie?

            Yes. Still, this movie doesn’t need the help.

The consensus was that Guardians of the Galaxy, based on a comic book that most people who don’t read comics have never heard of, would be blockbuster or complete bust. Chris Pratt, the guy from “Parks and Recreation”, as a leading man action hero? Marvel going into space? A raccoon with a gun? Disaster looms.

            But this is Marvel. And yes, Marvel is bound to have another huge dud sooner or later … but not this time.

            Despite being known for its humor, the movie actually starts out with a tear jerking scene in which a little boy named Peter Quill sees his mother die of cancer—then, immediately after, he’s abducted by a UFO. Fast forward 26 years, and we find the adult Quill dancing—literally—into what looks like an Indiana Jones set on an alien planet.

            There Quill finds a strange orb that you just know everybody’s going to want. He’s ambushed by a bad guy who also wants the orb, and from then on it’s a slam-bang series of fights and flights as just about everyone in the galaxy battles for the power that resides inside the artifact.

            One of the most fun fights is also where most of the fellow guardians gather for the first time, all intent on taking the orb. Zoe Saldana’s performance as Gamora is killer—literally. But even she loses the screen when Rocket and Groot—an engineered Raccoon and a walking, talking (a little) tree—show up.

            Rocket Raccoon should have been ridiculous. Instead, the sarcastic rodent, voiced by Bradley Cooper, makes everyone else step up their game just to keep up. Later we meet the last member, Drax, played by a pro wrestler—apparently wrestling really is fake, ‘cause the guy can act.

            All the GotG members are damaged anti-heroes, who reluctantly decide to protect the orb from various bad guys. (Their motivation? For one thing, they do live in the galaxy, after all.) You have to pay attention as characters come and go, motivations are revealed, and wises are cracked. Luckily, paying attention is fun.

            Guardians is certainly the best I’ve seen this year, and I’ve seen some pretty darned good movies. Why? It’s a good story, and funny, and naturally the special effects are amazing. I’m fairly convinced at this point that they really did find an intelligent, if mean, raccoon and a slightly less intelligent moving tree to play Rocket and Groot.

But in the end it’s the cast that makes the movie. Chris Pratt is a revelation as Quill, fighting and cracking wise with equal skill. Saldana is amazing, and we get great performances from actors such as John C. Riley and Glenn Close, among others. I take it Close thought she was slumming for this roll, but she gives it her skill and it shows.

On a note relating to my earlier comments, it was great fun seeing Michael Rooker, playing an intergalactic version of his redneck bad boy character from “The Walking Dead”, and Karen Gillan, playing someone just as tough but way more evil than her “Doctor Who” role.

Oh, two more things: First, Peter Quill’s oddly timed abduction as a child does make sense. Second, there is indeed an extra scene at the end of the credits, which I suspect will leave many younger movie goers scratching their heads.

            Entertainment Value: 5 out of 4 M&M’s. My review, my rules.

            Oscar Potential: 3 out of 4 M&M’s. Hollywood muckity-mucks hate SF, especially funny SF, although they don’t hesitate to take the money. Just the same, it would be a shame if Guardians of the Galaxy doesn’t get nominated for something, even if it’s a technical Oscar.

            Side Note:  If Guardians is sold out, check out Lucy or Planes: Fire and Rescue. One is thrilling and mind blowing, the other truly fun family fare. On a personal note, whoever scripted the Planes movie took the time to research firefighting, which I appreciate.

They look a little different in the movie ...