A Green Lantern

Earlier I saw some concept images for the upcoming (2011) Green Lantern movie and it got me thinking...

"Wouldn't this make a better science fiction movie than it would a super-hero movie?"

I know that people will argue that super-hero movies are science fiction movies. But that isn't true. Just the same way that there are horror movies that aren't science fiction. It can take place in space, it can defy physics, it can raise the dead or build a laser- but none of these things make it science fiction.

The problem is of course that Sci-Fi is both a genre and a topic. Because of this the distinction between what is science fiction and what is about an aspect of science fiction is sometimes difficult to tell. Stephen King has a book (Danse Macabre) all about how some movies, like Alien, might take place in space and have astro-miners and aliens but are inherently horror films. The astro-miners are the protagonists but the antagonist, the alien, is a monster. This is much the same way that Frankenstein (1931) is a horror or monster movie and not science fiction, even though it is full of text tubes and has a mad scientist. James Bond movies are full of lasers and space technology but it is pretty clear that these things are plot devices, MacGussins, furthering the plot but adding very little in terms of theme.

But that's what makes a movie science fiction. Theme rather than content is what makes it a genre. However, its common for the dichotomy in science fiction to be taken advantage of. Not jut works borrowing the look or style of science fiction but by the direct degeneration of genre based on its successes. As a prominent literary genre science fiction shares some themes with other genres, as they all do. But too often is a successful piece in this genre re-categorized as Literature, implying something about the nature of science fiction as a genre and the other books under that distinction. (But this, in itself, raises the issue of genres. There is a very strong argument against organizing art by genre. Non-stronger perhaps than walking through a book store and recognizing the complete incompetence of the aisles. Nevermind high and low art. Because Brave New World can be removed from 'Science Fiction' and put in it 'Literature' it should not be a surprise that Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man can be taken out of 'Literature' and put amongst the growing number of black romance novels that are beginning to define the 'African American Lit.' section. But it is a surprise.)

Science fiction is a very difficult to interpret type of story telling because it is a topic and a genre. But it shouldn't be this hard. the themes in science fiction, the true tropes of the genre, are abundant, giving, and clear. The morality, implications, intentions, behind these ideas and how they are used is what breathes life into true science fiction. Traveling through time or flying through space can mean more than just point A to point B. But often it doesn't, and that is why so much posing as science fiction sucks. And it really sucks.

If we are going to hold on to antiquated organizational means such as we have now than new distinctions need to be made. Maybe there is a difference between science fiction and sci-fi and maybe it is high and low. But even if there isn't, is it so much to ask that people at least start to think about it and make some better decisions.

There is a line in the sand. It the past few years I have only seen a handful of truly great and truly science fiction movies made. Moon, Sunshine, District 9. If movies like these want to compete than they need to avoid the Superhero Summers. I have pretty low hope for science fiction at the movies this year. I'd really hoped that the superhero trend would end and that movies like Avatar would start a new trend and like the 80s we could finally get some good science fiction back. But maybe next year or the year after that.

I don't really care about Green Lantern, at all. But, here is an opportunity, a real chance, to do something with the superhero movie as a type. Of all the comic book characters that have been offered the chance at film none of the big names has the clear option to be a science fiction movie more than Green Lantern. As far as a superhero story goes Green Lantern is soft science fiction bordering at times on fantasy. What more could they ask for? How much easier could it be to make this mainstream film science fiction and do it right- making it enjoyable but also provocative. Make a superhero movie sure, if you must, but make it explorative.


photo credit: io9

Scissor Man?

Really? Scissor Man? Come on... how lazy are you, Mr. Anonymous Ebayer? It's not like this person didn't know how to find out who this character was. He's one of the X-Men! How hard is it to wikipedia X-Men and match him up to someone? Hell, he could've asked a few random people on the street and someone would've known.

Watchmen Update

The internet has been astir with rumors about the ending of the upcoming Watchmen movie, and while I usually don't post about movie rumors all that much, this one has me worried. For any of you who don't know Watchmen is a graphic novel by Alan Moore (V for Vendetta, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), a rather interesting character to say the least. Many consider it the greatest comic book ever written. While I am no where near an expert on comics, Watchmen is one of the few I have read. Alan Moore has been a critic, to say the least, of the several movies made from his comics, and while I think he goes overboard sometimes, after reading V for Vendetta, I'm starting to think that maybe he does have a point. After reading the graphic novel, I still enjoy the movie, but it is nowhere near as good as the comic. So, I suppose that is why I am so worried about this movie, but also extremely excited at the same time. The following link and analysis contains spoilers, so if you haven't read the comic and don't want to know plot details, don't read below or click this link.

-Highlight for Spoilers-

From the rumors I've heard, some sort of nuclear assault is going to replace the weird squid alien that came at the end of the comic. Ozymandias is supposed to be using this plot device to draw the world together because of an outside threat. I just don't understand the change... The squid monster worked fine, and we here at BSD always support a good tentacle rape joke. Did they want to make the movie more realistic? It's a friggin' comic book adaptation. I just have a hard time believing that they can manage the same message with a nuclear war as Moore did with the alien "invasion". Ozymandias used the alien to unite the world against a common foe, an extra-terrestrial invader World of the Worlds style. I just don't know how this can accomplish the same thing. Hopefully I'm proven wrong.


But, who knows... I won't hold judgment on the movie until I see it, but I'm worried. But, I'm also pretty damn excited. At the very least, I am looking forward to seeing the characters on the big screen, the action, the special effects, and Rorschach's costume. I hope that'll be worth the price of admission and that I'll be pleasantly surprised by the rest.

Fish Lovers

Superheroes were everything when I was little…

But… Aquaman… well Aquaman was just… how can I put this lightly? Worthless.

And so was his archnemesis Black Manta. Seriously, do you even know who he is? Does anyone even care who Aquaman is? And so we have one a superhero and one a super villain. But, are either of them truly super? Are they heroes? Villains?

I never read comic books as a child, but I knew a ton about superheroes for some reason or another. It was probably all those TV shows and maybe just word of mouth with my other friends, but we sure knew about them. We knew them like the back of our hands, like we knew the trench run of the Death Star, like we knew baseball and apple pie and Suburbia.

Except, Aquaman was never really in that equation. Sure, we knew of him, but he was never in the forefront of our minds or our imaginations. Superman was there, Batman, Wolverine, Spider-man, The Incredible Hulk, even Nightcrawler, Gambit and Godzilla. No, Aquaman was a non-entity, someone not even worth mentioning… he was just sort of weird and quaint and with powers that were pretty damn crappy. Even when we were playing in the pool he didn’t come up… the one place where he might have been a bit of use. And that’s the saddest part of it all. He’s not really bad… just…

Mediocre, I guess.

And isn’t that bad enough in the world of superheroes? These people… these beings are supposed to be gods among men, the fastest, the strongest, the smartest, the greatest… yet, they gave us a fish-man, who doesn’t even look like a damn fish. He could at least look cool… like some sort of Kraken… or turn clear like water? I don’t know, something.

And so we were Supermen and Batmen in the backyard, on the playground and in the pool, while Aquaman wasted away to be ridiculed, because really… as one man once said, to get an idea of how useless Aquaman really is just take a motor boat everywhere you need to go for an entire week.

Aquaman has become a joke, and Black Manta has along with him. Despite how dark the nature of their relationship really is. My only knowledge of their history is gleaned through half a Wikipedia article and about a dozen Super Friends episodes, but I believe that’s enough.

Black Manta was an autistic black kid from Baltimore who liked building sandcastles. One day some fuckers kidnapped him by pulling him onto a boat or something and raped the happiness out of him. He blamed Aquaman because Aquaman is the King of the Sea or something and shouldn’t let shit like that happen… or something along those lines. It’s kind of like how people ask if God exists why does he allow bad things to happen. I suppose it’s because sometimes God’s busy doinking mermaids and playing Marco Polo with dolphins (or maybe it’s the other way around), or at least that’s what I imagine he does in his spare time.

Settle down there, Aquaman

I can’t say I blame the kid for going crazy, he was autistic and what happened to him is just awful, so I’m just going to give him the benefit of the doubt. At least he gave Aquaman some credit, that’s more than the rest of us give the schmuck.

So Black Manta grows up, buys a submarine and assembles a crew of two idiots in blue suits to go kill Aquaman. I’m not sure if he’s actually a villain, or just some psycho who wants revenge, but I guess it doesn’t really matter all that much. He gets foiled a bunch of times, even though Aquaman is a pansy… but then again, Black Manta is retarded.

How can someone who looks so badass be so lame?

Eventually, though Black Manta captures Aquaboy and kills him while Aquaman watches helplessly. Seriously, that’s bad ass as hell. You have to respect the guy for having the balls to do that, especially considering he’s the only person on the planet weaker than Aquaman.

And so that about raps things up, rape, revenge, idiocy, sex with fish. The Aquaman-Black Manta saga has it all. It’s really a shame no one ever gives them any credit. I’m sure they’d just like to be left alone to their cat and mouse game…

“I'd like to be under the sea
In an octopus' garden in the shade.
He'd let us in, knows where we've been,
In his octopus' garden in the shade.

I'd ask my friends to come and see
An octopus' garden with me.
I'd like to be under the sea
In an octopus' garden in the shade.

We would be warm below the storm
In our little hideaway beneath the waves.
Resting our head on the sea bed
In an octopus' garden near a cave.

We would sing and dance around
Because we know we can't be found.
I'd like to be under the sea
In an octopus' garden in the shade.

We would shout and swim about
The coral that lies beneath the waves.
Oh what joy for every girl and boy
Knowing they're happy and they're safe.

We would be so happy you and me
No one there to tell us what to do.
I'd like to be under the sea
In an octopus' garden with you.” –The Beatles

Happy Black History Month

...from all your pals here at BSD.

CML, Black Manta Historian