Transformers: Age of the Primes Wreck 'n Doom Collection Carnivac vs. Fisitron is Something that Exists

 

Exclusive releases are part and parcel of the Transformers experience, and usually I'm not fussed. Exclusives have this habit of either being things that don't interest me,  dont justify the mark up, or end up on discount somewhere. With Legacy United, we even saw former exclusives get used as late wave filler. I gather that exclusives are particularly annoying if you collect seekers too, but I digress. Of course, eventually Hasbro does put out an exception, like today's subject. Carnivac and Fisitron come from a very similar place, creatively speaking. That is a comicbook writer, the kind that becomes a TFNation regular, taking a character with basically no fictional appearances and creating a fan favourite. The Primes, Megatrons, even the Brawns of the franchise have de-facto tenure and are unlikely to allow much creative freedom to a writer. The successes of Transformers comics, and their deep love by the fan base, are often due to some utter rando being selected for the spotlight. Carnivac and Fisitron, while separated by decades and continuities are absolutely two such Transformers. And good choices for exclusives, as they have dedicated-but-small fanbases.

Of the two, Fisitron is undoubtedly the best known, to the point of getting his own tributes in later fiction. Fisitron, not Fistytron as my brain insists on parsing it as, is actually Ironfist, the name change dictated by the MCU. I'm just gonna call him Ironfist from now on. Ironfist was the audience avatar for the highly regarded The Last Stand of the Wreckers, arguably the best comic miniseries ever associated with Transformers, and a top ten Transformers media candidate overall. It's difficult to express just how big a thing that was, do read it. Ironfist's fate was to be a massive fan of the Wreckers Autobot team, think an actually heroic Suicide Squad style group, or more precisely the ABC Warriors, and then suffer the reality of that. He has a bad time of things to say the least, but really you have to read it.

This new Ironfist is a bit if a mélange, if only for it's foundation. It's a remould of the Legacy Detritus toy, itself a retool of the pretty good Siege Hound making it something of a Cannonball situation. Mould degradation is becoming a concern at this point, this being the 7th use of it, but mine seems fine. The altmode has been modified to make it an enclosed cab, while the accessories have been replaced with a decorative approximation of his old Lightformer Cannon gimmick which splits into three bits. As this is an exclusive/limited release there is a bounty of paint applications, too much on the gun, tending towards IDW colours with the head being a highlight. The jeep altmode inherited is a good match for the original toy, although the robot proportions are more conventionally heroic than the somewhat dumpier build of his most famous appearance. So while he's not quite as Last Stand as I would prefer, he's a superior remake of an already great mould. 

Carnivac by comparison is much older, both in print and in plastic. I'll admit that I had to go check the specifics of what he's done, and while he's actually done more than Ironfist, he's not on the same tier of popularity. He was a recurring character in the UK comics I read as a kid, actually joining an Autobot splinter faction for a time with a few former-Wreckers, although there's continuity issues with that material. Much later on, he turned up in the sequel to Last Stand of the Wreckers, in another splinter faction that I won't describe, and very recently in those new Energon Universe comics. Carnivac's main trait is to be a wolf, both literally and metaphorically. He's a Decepticon with a wolf altmode, and a wolf's mindset. A bad guy to fight, but not automatically a foe, and given that Transformers is often Good versus Evil, that's interesting.

A more pressing question may however be "Why is he that colour?". Well, he was a Pretender Beast, you see. The original toy had an outer shell in the style of a big organic wolf, while the inner robot was was some louder in colour and a bit simple. Pretender toys were like that, and modern remakes have frequently tried to split the difference between the shells and the robots therein. This release however favours the inner robot, but taking design cues from the Marvel comics.

 

It does this by remoulding the Titans Return era Wolfwire, changing the titanmaster, whom is called Survivor, after that splinter faction I mentioned, and replacing the accessories. As it's an older deluxe, it's not quite as nice as Ironfist, but it's still a solid design, and the mould has been used far less frequently. It also removes the questionable materials that the previous releases were infamous for, an unambiguous improvement. The wolf mode is however largely unchanged, using paint to suggest the visor rather than actually sculpting one. He's not as good as Ironfist overall, and not as extensive as a remould, but is undoubtedly the best use of this mould, and it works well for the character. Nice paint job on the titanmaster too.

All in all, the set is a great example of an exclusive. It uses good moulds well, making effective changes where appropriate, and doesn't skimp on paint. It also helps that it is based on comics and latter-day G1, rather than the more over-exposed parts of the brand. It's not a perfect set, but other than totally new toys, I don't see how Hasbro could done much better. Assuming that no horrible QC issue or design flaw manifests, consider this set as having my full endorsement.

Transformers: Combiner Wars Scrounge is Something That Exists

OK, bare with me with this one. This is gonna be one of those articles where I talk about the wider context of a toy more than the toy itself. I fell down a rabbit hole on this one.

Scrounge's wiki picture

Scrounge is a lesser-known character from the Marvel comics, one of a number of "non-toy" characters created by Bob Budiansky. Bundiansky’s work isn't as well-respected as Simon Furman was, whom took over and wrote the popular bits later on, but the man hasn't tanked his reputation like Furman did. Scrounge was an Autobot whom remained on Cybertron, an eager to please spy whom hung around with the dark and brooding take on Blaster. He ran-afoul of the similarly non-toy Lord Straxus, and was sacrificed on the altar of drama. Aside from being noteworthy for being an early & lasting death in Transformers media, Scrounge was notable for his altmode. He turned into a wheel. Not a unicycle or owt like that, a simple, self-mobile, wheel. Oh, and he has a special arm designed for surveillance. Nobody at the time, and indeed after, thought this guy was gonna have a toy. Obviously, that changed, but it took a long while.

 

The 2016 Combiner Wars Computron toy, that's the lad in the upper-right

 

Advance thirty odd years. The time was 2016, and Combiner Wars was coming to a close. As the name implies, this line was about combining robot teams, and we were eating good. Possibly too good, as every mould was aggressively reused, and there was another problem. Hasbro and TakaraTomy were treating the toys rather differently. Hasbro was remixing and expanding teams rather than doing straight G1, while TakaraTomy was going full Sunbow G1 and modifying toys towards that aim. It wasn't exactly difficult for them to do this; Japanese Transformers releases are basically subsidised by Hasbro and the Western market, so unless we're talking about Masterpieces, risks and costs are lesser for them. While these were aimed at the Japanese collector market, which has its own character versus the West, Geewunners of course loved the TT versions, the discourse on this no doubt inspiring some silly things in the years ahead, but the Japanese versions broke the play pattern in the name of accuracy. Most combiner teams had received an additional Legends scale sixth member, which TakaraTomy ignored and shuffled off to act as filler elsewhere. The full ups and downs of East versus West are too lengthy a topic to go into here, but it arguably peaked with the Technobots. These were a latter G1 combiner team, of relatively modest fictional presence, whose main claim to fame was being created by Grimlock during a brief case of Super-Intellect. He got better. However, things played out a bit differently in Japan, whom made Transformers cartoons for longer, and the Technobots were somewhat more of a thing. Thus Hasbro and TakaraTomy took radically different approaches to them. Hasbro was more toy-based than anything, while TT used different moulds with new toolings on top of that. Which is better? I honestly don't know, I own neither, and haven't really handled either. I lean towards the Japanese version simply on the amount of effort put in, it doesn't use the flawed Brawl mould either, but there's a discussion you can have there, clearly. And a big part of that discussion is, well, our review subject.

 

This, after some 500 odd words, leads us to Scrounge. He was promoted, and presumably resurrected, to the sixth member of the Technobots. And he brought a seventh, Cybaxx. This is because Hasbro got a bit creative for the Technobots, swapping out the hand/foot guns for new combiner kibble, and threw in the 2014 vintage Cosmos toy as a sixth member, which also brought a seventh. Suffice to say, the resulting Scrounge toy was the highlight of the set, which I eventually acquired for a realtively cheap but non-trivial sum. On with the write-up then? Err, no. We have to talk about Cybaxx first. Who the cinnamon toast fuck is Cybaxx then? Well, imagine my utter surprise to find out that he's another Budiansky creation according to the wiki, actually Boltax by another name. One more easily trademarked apparently. Boltax was similarly another yellow dead dude, whom invites a really lengthy tangent about the Underbase storyline, a method to kill off a bunch of characters to make room for new toys. No, not the 1986 film, but close. Boltax was the caretaker of a functionally magical repository of Transformers knowledge, the Underbase, and was brutally killed by Megatron. Boltax had however become part of the Underbase beforehand, so it was less that he died so much as his puppet was destroyed. Later fiction from Fun Publications would resurrect him as Cybaxx. As to why Cybaxx is here? Well, the Cosmos mould came with a Micromaster called Payload, actually Blast Master, another legal thing, and I presume somebody remembered that Boltax was presented as a winged chap in yellow, and things flowed from there. Now, like the majority of the Thrilling 30 Legends partner dudes, Cybaxx is a quite simplistic but largely inoffensive chap. These are basically an upgraded accessory for the larger figure, so Cybaxx has a meh shuttle mode, a fairly decent gun mode, and a robot mode with two points of articulation and no fist holes. He's definitely got more going on than say Needlenose's guns, although the base mould is somewhat mid-tier in comparison to his tiny kin. Furthermore, this guy has precisely two paint applications and thus is extremely yellow. He's not bad, but he's not why you are here.

A comic panel of Boltax's Puppet, sourced from the wiki.

Scrounge meanwhile, to finally get to the main event, is also very yellow. He's got more paint on him, with three different colours no less, but we are still in ice lolly territory here, and the deco layout is fairly close to the original. As mentioned, Scrounge is based off the Thrilling 30 Cosmos mould, which is both a good fit for the Technobots as sixth member and a flat-out good toy in the first place. As far as Scrounge is concerned, becoming a UFO is a win. It's a fine upgrade, maintaining his fundamentally wheelly nature while gaining the power of flight. The lad got lucky, he so easily could have been one of those spring-loaded data disks from Fall of Cybertron. It's a nice sculpt, lots of good surface detail, guns up front, some engines and a tailfin out back. This is a modernised take on Cosmos' alt mode, not perfectly circular, but not the cutesy proportions of the recent Legacy toy. Aside from whooshing it around, there's a couple things you can do. Cybaxx can bolt on the front, and you can then bolt them on Computron as a shoulder shield. Not bad for a toy that predates the modern trend for 5mm ports, although not hugely exciting. Or safe, now that I come to think of it. Where the UFO suffers though is directly on the underside where the robot bits are, and where the new head sits. It's smaller than the original and rattles. 

 

 

The robot mode is where we see more pronounced differences from Cosmos, Scrounge having but one plastic colour, different shoulder decos, and a new head. The phrase "faithful to a fault" does come to mind here. Yes, the 80's comic did block colour him in yellow, but having a secondary colour would have helped. The head, meanwhile, is based off the more recent IDW version, and understandably isn't like a 1d4 in shape. On the plus side, the above is purely in the realm of subjective complaints. As far as robots made from discs go, this is basically ideal, and a good match for any comparably sized modern toy in terms of articulation and play value. He's got some well-placed balljoints, a swivel neck, a waist, and a few transformation joints you can make use of. There's oddities, sure, he's got a difficult altmode, but he's nicely posable, a heroic look, and has a gun friend. Oh, and the engines form a rocket-pack, gotta love that.

 

Doing the write-up for this guy was a bit of a trip, as a fell down a wiki rabbit hole and reminisced about old fandom arguments. Basically, the toy is a good one. I had Cosmos in the first place so I kinda already knew that, but handling Scrounge was like having the first impression all over again. So, he and Cybaxx are worth tracking down, although doing so is gonna be a right pain in the arse. That's why I leapt on the toy when I saw it. Combiner Wars sets tend to be serious money on the secondary market, and people aren’t like likely to part with the adorable wheel chap. What else can I say? Well, the colour choices at play here make me wonder how the multi-pack was budgeted. What came first here? The toy, the character, or the need to justify a mono-coloured repaint? I don't know. I'll leave that to the better informed. But certainly, Combiner Wars Scrounge and Cybaxx are something that exists. Let's end on some glamour shots.

A Brief Review Of Doctor Strange

Sorry, I know its been a while.

Well, its a Marvel film, do we need to say any more?

Dum-dee-dum-twiddle-my-thumb.

You can go now.

Oh, we do, sorry.

Right, Doctor Strange is the latest in the generally very consistent Marvel canon, and one of its smaller scale entries, as its an origin story for a single character. Like last year's Ant-Man, its almost a throwback to the “Phase 1” films, and has a fairly light connection to existing plot threads, excluding a mid-credits sequence and a rather notable name drop. This was probably for the best as this film attempts to place hand-wavy magic into a world of soft sci-fi, a tough sell at the best of times. This film however pulls it off, creating utterly beautiful action sequences that feel like lucid dreams. I do want to see this film again in 3D, I feel it would add to the effect, rather than than be a cheap gimmick, which is high praise from me. Its also a generally slick production with a strong cast, and a general feeling of competency. Benedict Cumberbatch is another great casting choice, fitting into the role as well as Robert Downey Jr. did with Tony Stark, and the beard is a massive boost to the man. The remainder of the cast do well with what they have, the narrative progressing in a solid manner for the genre, and there is no obvious weak point in the entire enterprise. 

This however is not quite the same as saying Doctor Strange is a great film in its own right. Something about it didn't click with me. There is where the comparison to Phase 1 comes back. Those were always entertaining films, but I didn't love any of them until the Avengers assembled. Doctor Strange has so much going with respects to its core concept that its almost surprising it works as well as it does. But we are still in a position where the rules of the world still need to be explained, and this undermines the concept of danger. The formula of the Marvel films, or perhaps just the genre at large, also shows through. Doctor Strange doesn't look like any other Marvel film, including Thor, but it has a similar feel in places, and the same sense of humour. You'd be daft to say this film was identical to say Guardians of the Galaxy or Captain America, but you can pick out common themes. If you'd been inclined to sketch out a plot for this film beforehand based on the trailer, you'd probably have got the specifics wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if you got the broad strokes. The ending was a surprise, however. Doctor Strange, while quite trippy could have been a lot stranger, perhaps to its benefit. Then again, to misquote someone, you have to have your feet on the ground, before you can build castles in the sky.

And, you'll forgive me if I don't open the can of worms that was casting Tilda Swanson as the Ancient One. She does a good job, but that's a topic for another day.

All this is however is me attempting to draw a line between the merely good, and the exceptional. Doctor Strange is good, and there's nothing wrong with that. While I don't wish to make comparisons with the distinguished competition, this film certainly handled magic a lot better than Suicide Squad did, and remains infinitely more watchable than some films about superheroes released this year.

The Verdict

Doctor Strange is exactly what it looks like, no more, no less, and that's just fine.

Opinion Piece: My Opinions Of The Batman. Again.

Right, I said I'd do some effing opinion pieces, didn't I? Well, I struggled a bit, given my new business demanding a lot of my time, and disqualifying some 90% of my ideas on grounds of potential bias. But sometimes, you get that spark of inspiration, and the need to do something else with your brain. So, here's a ramble about why I think Batman really needs to take a back-seat in Warner Bros attempt to make a cinematic universe, and will hopefully finally express my mixed feelings on the character.

Image Copyright Warner Brothers etc.

The thing about Batman at this point is that he's undemanding in terms of SFX, and you've got a bounty of material to draw on. He's easy. While Bats does fight alien ghosts of a Tuesday, he's basically on the level of James Bond. He's a gadget guy, prefers not to be shot, doesn't use guns because of his origins, and most of his foes are of that nature. He's a rich dude whom trains his mind and body like a champion. Depicting him in live action is only as difficult as you want it to be, whereas characters with actual Super Powers, especially the weird looking ones, only really became possible with CG(1). Narratively, he's also easy to get behind, being the archetypical grim and gritty superhero. Even before Frank Miller and Alan Moore took a swing at him, Batman was a guy whose parents were murdered in front of him as a child, and overcame unimaginable loss to start a quest to end crime, but decides not to take human life for fearing of becoming what he hates. He's just enough of an everyman to be easily empathised with, flexible with tone, and the psychological aspects are endlessly fascinating. Furthermore, the character has arguably the best selection of colourful villains, many being evil counterparts or reflections of Batman's personality. Its the best possible material to adapt. It resulted in arguably the greatest cartoon series of the 90's. The most memorable TV series of the 60's. Some spectacular video games. And two genre defining films by Chrisopher Nolan. If you've ever been anywhere near the Superhero genre, you know this, I do not have to explain further. This foundation is so strong that people say Ben Affleck is the best bit of Batman V Superman, despite the myriad flaws and troubling characterisation associated with that film.

Like the guns and vehicular homicide, but more on that shortly.

Batman however has some problems, ones which mark the DC universe and the expectations of viewers. The simple truth is that not all characters are Batman. Especially the grimdark version Frank Miller codified, and a large subset of comics fans tend to hold in high regard. Not every superhero works the same way, or operates in the same context, but yet WB and many others treat the character as the gold standard of the genre when it comes to live action adaptations. This is kinda daft. you get a homogenisation of the genre, where a bunch of wannabees end up imitating the wrong things. See the comic book industry in the 90's, or what happened to anime after Neon Genesis Evangelion came out.

Its for this reason why Arrow isn't called Green Arrow. Why Man of Steel was essentially Superman Begins, via Zack Synder. Why Bats V Supes took its inspiration from the Dark Knight Returns. And why we have a TV series that's basically about Batman before he was famous, even though there's no obvious narrative there, and it presents all the problems of a prequel. This is also why, I think, the Marvel films get stick for their lighter tone and lack of memorable villains. Yes, the latter complaint is reasonable(2), but the first bit isn't. Marvel has shown another way of doing things, where antagonists are obstacles to be defeated, not more important than the lead characters. There is an ingrained mindset that these things should be serious, one that is slowly breaking down, but not fast enough to avoid hobbling the new DC film series out of the gate. Warner Bros in recent years has only really managed to produce Batman films, or films that fit into a similar Venn Diagram. They haven't been able to do Superheroes that don't fit that template, and even then, the Batman movies are patchy. They've basically got it into their heads that the dark and gritty is the only way to go, something a lot of fans encouraged, its difficult for them to change tracks now(3). It will be interesting to see how Suicide Squad works out, with the rumours of comedic re-shoots and increasingly technicolour advertising. But, then again, Bats is in that too.

I thought there was a “no jokes" policy.

Then there's the whole “unfortunate implications” business. Going by recent films alone, it would be easy to view Batman as a mentally unbalanced billionaire whom uses his money to beat up the under-privileged, as opposed to spending on Police and Social Programs. A violent power fantasy bordering on Fascistic, excused by a childhood tragedy. The character's origins as detective whom eschews guns on principle, gets lost in translation. This is what happens when you repeatedly invoke “darkness” and “realism” on a character whom dresses like a rodent to fight a murder clown. You can only push it so far before the whole edifice comes crashing down. Yes, this is a train of thought that utterly defeats the point of the guy, and can be contradicted by citing specific comics and scenes, but its an argument that can be made(4). The Dark Knight, for example, is probably still in my top 5 Superhero films, but you do find a certain Right Wing circa Dubya Bush feel to events. This is a film where the hero flies into another country, does an “Extraordinary Rendition”, beats up a guy in a Police interrogation, and hacks every phone in Gotham in an attempt to find a single person, although he does step back from that. This looks more dirty than heroic, if you are of that mind. You can say I'm reading too much into it, and maybe. But then again, the Ben Affleck version is even worse, a multiple murderer whom brands criminals, humanity and reason apparently absent. He's just a lump of brutality, deciding to eliminate Superman for reasons that can only be described as hypocritical. And don't forget, the 1989 Batman was pretty killy too.

Pretty deliberate attempt at murder there.

What I'm trying to say here is we don't need another Batman film. At least not without a pretty comprehensive reworking. The realism angle has been drained dry, and the direction Synder took was unpleasant. And while I will always enjoy The Animated Series, the best thing for the character and for DC, is just put him in the background for a while.

Footnotes

1. Yes, Superman did a good job in 1978ish, but that was at the upper limit of practicality and money at the time. Note how long it was between that film and Spider-Man.
2. That said, DC cinematic villains stopped being good circa 2012. Note I said 2 Nolan films.
3. Although, Batman: The Brave & The Bold does exist.
4. Like how Indiana Jones was unnecessary in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

A Review Of Deadpool(2016), On Blu-ray, Some Spoilers

Near my home

Deadpool is a movie Fox didn't want to make. It was gonna have a high rating, "R" in the American system, when Holywood logic said such things were unpopular. Furthermore, the character was intimately associated with the disaster that was X-Men Origins: Wolverine, although the titualar Deadpool had been changed almost beyond recognition. The actor whom played him, Ryan Reynolds, was a comics fan, and clearly wasn't happy about it, as he spent the following years pushing for a more faithful adaptation. Things had to have taken a personal angle for him, as he starred in the similarly terrible Green Lantern. He must have felt some need to atone, reclaim his nerd pride. Eventually, test footage was leaked, with Reynolds making vague implications he did it, and the resulting cheers got it green lit. Then its budget got cut just before filming. Then it made some massive gross ticket sales. It actually. took more than Man of Steel, a Superman film. The original and most recognisable Superhero. The year isn't over yet, but at the time of writing it hovers around #3 of the American cinema rankings, with similar performance worldwide. And this is fully deserved.

Because Deadpool is, in a very specific way, the best X-Men film.


Now, I made this assertion to some friends, and it was a bit controversial. There are good X-Men films, although the ratio of good to bad is not a favourable one. The films certainly deserve credit for addressing prejudice and oppression, and this film is closer to top tier episode of Family Guy(1) than social commentary. Deadpool however succeeds in completely and utterly capturing the spirit and tone of the source material, juvenile as it is. The other X-Men films, especially the Brian Singer ones, tend to feel a step removed and samey, standard Hollywood. Be it superficial stuff like costumes, or bigger stuff like the Sentinels, the X-Men films have never quite embraced the quirks of the comics. This film does does. In fact its probably the most effective Marvel adaptation which Kevin Feige didn't have a hand in. Deadpool is, as near as it makes no difference, the comic book version. He's a hideous mercenary specialising in endless chatter and inventive obscenities. He's a fighter, whose resistance to injury allows for slapstick violence that would make the late great Rik Mayall proud. And he knows you are watching, that this film breaks the X-Men format, and the actor playing him has a few troubled productions on his IMDB page. They famously CG his mask to give it facial expressions. This personality shines like a beacon, and played into the masterful marketing for this film, a majority of which is happily on the disk. But does that make it an actually good film? Let's watch the uncensored trailer again.

Here be swears, BTW.

If any of that made you laugh, you will like the film. Its very good at what it does, and no, those aren't all the good jokes. The film is consistently funny, often taking a scattergun approach, and quite happy shift comedic tones in an instant. As a character, Deadpool as the potential to be as irritating to us as he is to the supporting cast, but much has been done to balance him out. For a start, as this basically is an origin story, we spend a lot of time with the pre-pool-less-violent-but-still-chatty Wade Wilson and his lovely love interest Vannessa, played by Firefly actress Morena Baccarin(2). The chemistry between the two is fantastic, as she isn't the serious girlfriend, she's almost as daft as he is. Both have a lot of pain in their lives, and basically the same sense of humour. And she does not take her eventual role as damsel lying down, so a thumbs up there. The other characters vary between functional and good. I do like Colossus as the straight-man Vanessa isn't, and as a thematic contrast to Deadpool. TJ Miller's performance as Weasel should be completely superfluous, he's a comic relief character in a film where the lead character tells more jokes in one scene than Jack Synder's entire career, but makes an impression with a few very memorable lines. Negasonic Teenage Warhead has a very cool name, and a pleasing antipathy to Deadpool. The villains of the piece, “Ajax” and Angel Dust, aren't quite as memorable, if competent in their roles, and this leads to possibly the film's main problem.

In my place of work....

When you get right down to it, Deadpool the film isn't too dissimilar to the X-Men and 2000's superhero flicks it periodically mocks. Action scenes are relatively few, take place in some fairly generic locales, and are perhaps pedestrian when compared to some of the stuff we've had this year. Its an origin story mixed with a revenge story, and is fairly conventional when viewed that way. Its doesn't really reach for anything difficult, its more about being funny instead. Yes, the film plays cancer and the resultant human experimentation scenes pretty serious, but its not really what the film is about. You don't necessarily notice this as an issue because A) it is very funny, B) that really should be enough, and C) the film jumps around its timeline. It makes the film seem slightly cleverer than it actually is, and I would say suffers slightly in repeat viewings through this. That, and the jokes getting old, of course.

The Verdict

You need to have the right sense of humour to enjoy Deadpool, but its seems there's no shortage of it lately. Fans of the character can rejoice in that they got it right. Fans of superhero films will have a good time. People whom think that superheroes need a little bit of ego deflation will probably enjoy it, although its not a satire of the genre. People whom feel superheroes should be serious need not apply, however. Not a perfect film, and maybe we won't remember it in 18 months. The best superhero comedy remains Kick-Ass, and its not quite a match for Guardians of the Galaxy, but Deadpool is just what we all needed.

Foot notes

1. A.K.A an actually funny one. Possibly involving the Chicken.
2. There is similarity in the two roles, but I'd say she was enjoying this role a bit more.

A Belated Review Of X-Men: Apocalypse, With Many Spoilers

I'm by no means the first to point this out, but the 16 year old X-Men saga is a bit weird. I mean, some of its good, some of its terrible. Its technically Marvel, but its not proper Marvel. Some of its really important to the genre, but also a lot has been made obsolete by the MCU and Christopher Nolan. There's some good drama and big issues, but the drama can often misfire, its often reliant on Magneto being the villain in some way, and the adaptations aren't always that close. Multiple mutants get crammed in, often only because of their powers, with their personalities and back stories ignored. Comic accuracy is not something they really do, but they've been getting better lately. And there's this kind of period drama, nostalgia for its own early instalments, type thing going on. Before it was near future sci-fi, now its more alternate history via continuity ruining time travel and soft reboots. Its probably best described as mediocre, and contract driven. Fox has to keep making these periodically, lest the rights default to their original owner, a competitor, and the X-Men are popular enough to keep the films profitable. Merit isn't a factor in the process any more. That said, Days Of Future Past worked better than it should have, and Deadpool is a highlight of 2016(1). Where does Apocalypse sit? Well, its a film in the mediocre category. There's a few strengths, some really head-scratching problems, but a lot of it just ends up being so dull my reaction is of apathy. At least until I started writing this.

To demonstrate my point, let me describe Magneto's big scene in this film. He's married and has had a daughter in the otherwise inexplicable decade since the last film. He's in hiding, but happy. We know what happens next. The creative types behind this film aren't gonna let him be happy. Even with the timeline being thoroughly messed up, Magneto, AKA Erik Lehnsherr, has to be the mutant terrorist. So, these characters are going to be sacrificed in the name of drama. So, Magneto accidentally reveals himself at the steel mill where he works, saving a man's life via magnetism. Why Magneto chose to work at a place where he could so easily use his powers by accident is unclear, maybe he wanted weapons to hand, but it was the noble thing to do. The Police come for him, and show enough genre awareness to leave the metal things at home, and he agrees to go quietly. Unfortunately, his daughter manifests her own mutant powers, and in the confusion, daughter and wife die. Fassbender acts his arse off, completely selling the anguish of a man whom has seen those he cares about murdered in front of him once again. He then slaughters the policemen with the only metal nearby, the locket containing a picture of his parents. It almost works, the scene, but then two realisations hit. The first is that you scarcely remember anything about Magneto's family, not even their names in my case. The second thing is that, somehow, a metal-free arrow fired by accident from a short bow killed two people. Instantly, with hardly a sound or blood.


Not to trivialise the death of a mother and child, but that's a Hawkeye/Arrow level of skill there.


And this is it right, pretty much the whole damn movie. I should care for the characters, or I should be angry they messed it up, but I don't. Its got some heavy weight stuff, or something potentially awesome, but then something happens to negate the effect, and its really noticeable in the second half. To continue on with Magneto, there's a scene where Apocalypse tries to recruit him. The pitch? To take him to Auschwitz, the Nazi death camp of reality, and the place where Magneto's parents died. Horrific stuff, which needs handling with care. Here Apocalypse seeks to convince the grieving mutant of the need to wipe the world clean, encouraging Magneto to rip the foundations out, while boosting his abilities. Throughout all this, all of it, the Horsemen loiter in their costumes like lost LARPers, and Psylocke in particular probably showing far too much skin for the occasion(2). The contrast between the characters, in their silly clothes, and what the scene is about is too sharp. Apocalypse himself has been ice for millennia, he's got a good excuse for any social faux pas, but his horsemen should know better. Were black cloaks not available? Did they not mention it to him? Did nobody think of this? Its a little tone deaf, isn't it?

Tone deaf isn't a bad way to describe the flaws here, especially when logic in general starts to fail. There's a scene where Professor X touches Apocalypse's mind and gets "hacked", Apocalypse using the link to launch every nuclear missile from its silo. Its an honestly tense moment, this dude is called Apocalypse, and he seems to have lived up to his name a whole act early. But then you realise not only is he firing them into space, completely against his objective, and they choose this point to do the Stan Lee cameo. Apocalypse instead uses Magneto to rip the metal from all the world, an act less radioactive, but no less destructive given that most of it came out of buildings. Erik easily killed millions, possibly hundreds of millions. Does anyone discuss this? No. His punishment? Nothing. He comes to his senses, fights Apocalypse, and gets credited as the hero of the hour. Insert your own comparison to Civil War and/or Batman V Superman here. I see what they are aiming for, but in ignoring these consequences, any deeper meaning of the film is diminished.

Also, given the plot of the last film, shouldn't the Sentinel Program be approved after all this? I mean, the world's nuclear arsenal got fired into space. Just a thought.


The film also suffers from the "Wolverine Detour", a chunk of the film that adds nothing to the plot bar fan service and a plot hole. Basically, the protagonists get captured by Colonel/Major Stryker, whom has been experimenting on Wolverine. They let Logan out, he kills a bunch of people, runs into the woods, and then the plot continues. This could have been excised completely from the film, and you would have lost nothing. In fact, it actually makes the post-credit scene less interesting as it spoils the surprise. Yes, you could argue Spider-Man was unnecessary in Civil War, but at least he didn't bring a continuity error. You see, Stryker didn't take Wolverine at the end of the last film, Mystique disguised as Stryker did. So what happened there? Wasn't it implied she had plans for him? Is this not a mistake? Mystique in this film seems to be written to reflect Jennifer Lawrence's role as Katniss from the Hunger Games and an Oscar winner. She's intended to be inspirational and heroic, but not the manipulator and assassin she should be. Her part in things could have been easily filled by any other character, and she's hardly ever blue, seemingly forgetting her mutant pride. Of course, having her be involved with the highly unethical Weapon X program would have greatly undermined her position as a Che Guevara, so I assume some form of studio politics and/or basic incompetence at play. Clearly, they hoped this would go unnoticed, or hand-waved it as being a decade later, but we know why the scene is here. Its to add to ticket sales by added Logan to the mix, not because the story needs it.

The young X-Men? Erm, OK, I guess. They do pass muster as teenage versions of those characters depicted in the first two Singer films. If you consider those depictions to good ones, this is a plus, but the film is a bit bloated, and not all characters really get due screentime or have a memorable moment. We also have to ask if their inclusion has more to do with nostalgia and a vague attempt to maintain continuity, rather than them having something notably important to do? Cyclops comes off well, but Jean Grey is back to set up the Dark Phoenix Saga again. I seriously hope that this is not the case, and that this is just another example of misused plot elements form the comics, because the films are samey enough without them trying to remake their worst instalment. Either go to space, or go back to the drawing board. Apocalypse himself? Nothing to him, but you'll excuse me if I bring this to a close.....


The Verdict
I should be listing some positives here, I know, but I' don't remember many. At best, its acceptable. At worst its kind of dumb, and borderline offensive if you like the actual X-Men comics. But mostly, its just there. Its not even bad enough for too hate. Seriously folks, its barely worth seeing once, let alone twice. Go watch the 90's cartoon again, I'm sure it on Netflix or similar.

Images copyright of Fox, used under fair use provisions.

Foot notes

1. A review of that follows shortly.
2. Aside from being hired muscle, all Psylocke really does is walk around in comic accurate fetish outfit. A missed opportunity.

Captain America: Civil War, A Somewhat Spoilery Review

Reviewing cinematic failure is easy. Flaws are usually obvious, or numerous, or even interesting, which make for good material. Some films can be so bad that writing about them is a safe way to vent. Yes, you are supposed to maintain some attempt at objectivity, which is why I make a point of finding strengths and weaknesses, but catharsis is catharsis. A legitimately excellent film is more difficult to talk about. On the fanboy level, you don't want to say too much for fear of ruining the experience. Its like explaining the joke, or dissecting the frog, you can't put it back together when you've finished. Similarly, you doubt if your own response is a reasoned one. Were you swept up in the moment? Do the nitpicks matter? Do you have an unacknowledged bias? Or will your opinion presumed to have one? I've already been extremely hard on the distinguished competition, after all. Going by fan reactions, and the occasional gulf between critics and those fans, you'd think most films are either excellent or dire, with nothing in between. This problem becomes worse when the film is a sequel, especially one which is part of these new, "universes".

Its at least partially a generational thing, back in the 80's, 90's, even at the millennium, ye olde video tape days, honestly good sequels were rare. Franchises did exist, don't let anyone tell ya different, but sequels were usually the domain of the lazy cash grab or the niche. This attitude still remains common in film critics, whom often take the view all works should be self-contained, rather coast on a previous success. Its not a baseless complaint though, diminishing returns is a thing, and its rather annoying to see a bad film presume a follow up. A persistent doubt is whether you can fairly judge a piece of a whole? And whether this flaw is a plot-hole or a sequel hook? As you liked the first film, aren't you sold on the sequel by default? And, when you get right down to it, multi genre long form story telling is some that hasn't really been done on screen before. Its not unique to comics, but its not exactly routine for Hollywood. When it comes to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, we have all of the above and more. The Marvel films have yet to produce an actual turkey, a few Ds certainly, but tending towards Bs for the most part. And people love them, assuming they don't have a dislike for the genre. But Marvel's consistent success adds to the review difficulty. We have an idea what to expect now, there's certainly enough for haters to hate, but, somehow, the movies keep on surprising us. And when they don't, we at least have something you can watch twice. The Law of Averages demands they must do a bad film eventually. Perhaps there was one, and we just loved them so much, we don't care. Does familiarity breed contempt? Or maybe this will run and run, like your average soap opera or Last of the Summer Wine. What will happen first, the end of the MCU, or the heat death of the actual universe?

Yes, I am stalling for time.

Look, you only need to know one thing about this film: its another success. If you need to know two things? The harshest criticism I can make is that it is indeed a sequel. Its drawing on eight years worth of material, which runs the risk of alienating new viewers, but just about everything that makes this film exceptional is made possible by that legacy. Could they have cut a few characters? Yeah. Would have been a better film? Probably nah. The airport fight that the trailers feature is a spectacle on a level we haven't seen since Avengers: Assemble, the sense that another fanboy dream has been made manifest. Whereas there the joy was that somebody had finally “got” the idea of a team of heroes with different powers, this film pitches two such teams against each other rather than disposalible foes, and its worth the price of admission by itself. All of a sudden, every single X-Men film looks like a missed opportunity. But more important than that, it sells the conflict. The film works because we know the characters, because we know that they would act like this, and we know what's at stake. Its like watching your parents divorce, or two mates in a nasty argument. Its a tragedy that plays out in front of you, as deep bonds are broken on principle. Who is right? Is the argument even about government oversight? Neither, and not for long.

Comparisons to Batman V Superman are impossible to avoid, and while its not really fair to make one, the contrast is sharp. Even with eight years of continuity weighing them down, and potential for Robert Downey Jr. to steal the show, the Russo Brothers has created a narrative that makes a hell of a lot more sense and doesn't shortchange anybody. Its still the Captain's film at the end of the day, plot threads from his previous solo outing being the starting point. As with the Winter Soldier, this film takes another sledgehammer to the status quo, but is notable for having something of a downer ending. Perhaps not for the reasons you might think, and certainly not the ponderous gloom of Bats v Supes, its a case where the actual villain of the piece wins. Marvel tends be criticised for its bad guys, because if they aren't Loki, they tend towards being 2-dimensional in some way, or not being given the due screentime. The antagonist in this probably won't defuse those complaints, but does go against the trend, and is used with same level of intelligence of the rest of the film.

I don't want to say much more at this point. With Marvel consistency being what it is, you know how you will likely react to this film. Spider-Man? Yeah, he's great. Black Panther? Nicely done. Vision and Scarlett Witch get some great scenes. I will end on this thought. Captain America: Civil War may not be the best film ever made, but its one of the best Marvel has ever done, and certainly top ten material.

Images copyright Marvel, used under fair use provisions

New Captain America: Civil War Trailer Released, Guest-starring Spider-Man

Brace yourselves.

The word of the day is "Underoos!"

Blog Update And Eight Opinions

Okay folks, I'm back. Partially. The family matter is ongoing, and I don't feel I can talk about it here, but I've been away too long. So, I'm running a Sunday service for the foreseeable future. I've no shortage of demands on my time now, and I'm going to Botcon 2016, which is gonna be something of a distraction. And a good source of material too, don't get me wrong, but JEEEEEEETTTTT LAAAAGGGG. In the meantime, here's an article touching on the varying toy, political and nerd film news that happened while I was away.

Source unknown. Please tell me, I'd love to know.

The New York Toy Fair reveals

Yay! Chromedome! Yay! Fort Max! Yay! Almost Everything! Hang on, where's Computron and Liokaiser? Oh, there's Computron, yay!

The TakaraTomy versions of Titans Return toys, such as Hardhead

This is a complex one. The Japanese versions of Transformers tend to get lots of praise for superior paintwork and very closely following the G1 cartoon, and they've taken the step of retooling the faces for that purpose. So Hardhead has a mouth, like most of his appearances. However, purists will note that the Japanese cartoon continuity diverged from the Western version sharply in 1987, and had their own exclusive series. Which of course, does not line up with any Hasbro depiction. The whole “Takara makes stuff that reminds me of the cartoon I saw as a kid, and Hasbro don't, so its better” argument doesn't really apply here. It is however interesting to see these these come with mini-vehicles intended for release for $5 price point in the West. On a more objective standpoint, if the price is proportional, this would be a legitimate improvement. Given that I found Hardhead for preorder at $36, maybe not.

The Deadpool movie

An obvious labour of love, that deserves all the praise and money its receiving. If you like the trailers, especially the uncensored ones, go see it. Its easily the best non-Marvel Studios superhero film since 2008, both in terms of entertainment value and adaptation. I just hope Hollywood won't learn the wrong lesson from its success. You know, that Deadpool isn't popular merely because he minces people and says bad words and is from the 90's. Its because it was made by people whom cared, who did a good job, backed up with a spectacular advertising campaign.

Batman V Superman to get a “R Rated” home release

Oh god, too late. This has apparently been in works for a while, so its not Warner jumping on a trend. Its still a bloody stupid idea, regarding a film which has had seemingly nothing but stupid ideas. These characters are intended for children. Here's a more detailed rebuttal. And another.

The Venom film that doesn't involve Spider-Man

Oh god, too late.

On Donald Trump

Oh god, too late.

The new Ghostbusters trailer

Wow, what a lot of controversy. I'm almost afraid to talk about this, lest I accidentally I align myself with a bunch of misogynistic and/or entitled troll fanboys. The thing is this: I didn't find the trailer funny. I didn't find it engaging. It felt like exactly every other Hollywood comedy, possibly involving Adam Sandler, but could have been made by or starring anyone of the tinsel town standbys. Its too early too tell, humour is subjective, but I didn't like it. I'm also inclined to say that all the gender controversy is just giving the film free advertising, which it may not deserve.

And finally, the E.U Referendum

Look, whatever you decide, try to read up on the situation. I mean actually, read, don't just watch a rolling news channel. Don't use a single newspaper or website, and seek ones you normally wouldn't read. You're probably best off starting with the BBC; everybody has an agenda, but at least the beeb has impartiality in their charter. And then actually vote. And then shut up about the result, whatever it may be.

So sick of hearing about this.

Youtube Highlights: Big Issues Then Comics

Here we go folks, here's yet more youtube videos I've found and enjoyed in the past week. Buckle up.


To get the serious stuff out of the way first, SciShow did a video on the horrifying Zika virus.

Regular readers may have noticed an overlap between SciShow and vlogbrothers via Hank Green. Here is his brother John is talking about the gender pay gap

Ever wonder why some comics had a random picture of Spider-Man or whatnot on the cover. NerdSync tells us why.

Speaking of comics, the viral marketing campaign for the new Deadpool movie continues apace, this one from 20th Century Fox UK.

The normally serious and a little dry ComicsExplained also attempted to explain how Deadpool became Iron Man.

On the theme of violence and things I'm looking forward to, a new trailer was released for the new Doom game, seemingly based off E3 footage. As is appropriate, it is HUGELY VIOLENT, so caution is advised. Via Bethesda Softworks.

 


And finally the self-proclaimed Internet Personality Vangelus has done an education video on tightening joints on Transformers. Useful information, which I intend to use myself at some point. Full disclosure and/or claim to fame: I also met the fellow at Botcon 2013, nice guy.

 

Saving Superman

As regular readers may note, I'm not hugely keen on how they seem to be handling Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. Its got the look of a disaster. Yes, yes, the film isn't out yet. I'm being a judgemental fanboy. It could be awesome, nobody knows. There are talented people working on it. I will say two things in my defence, however. First off, I don't actually like Superman, so there's no childhood being ruined here. My position is one of detached respect. And secondly, I don't like it when someone is clearly doing it wrong. The sensible response when Man of Steel had a less than stellar reception was to go back to the drawing board, and acknowledge the criticisms. It was not to make a sequel to a quite dour film, and make it darker by putting Batman in it. Nor was drawing inspiration from the “Dark Knight Returns”, or “Death of Superman” plotlines. Nor was allowing this cover for Empire Movie magazine.

Yeah, that's not a pose that inspires hope and awe. Restraining orders? Yes. But not hope and awe. So, in the event that BVS:DOJ fails so hard they have to start again, here's a list of suggestions on how to fix the mess that the cinematic Superman has become.

Go watch some Bruce Timm cartoons

Its well-known at this point that Batman V Superman is a hurried attempt to get a DC cinematic universe up and running in the quickest possible time. Understandable, given Marvel has been so profitable at this, but the folks at Warner Bros. seem to have forgot they already did that on TV. The classic Batman: The Animated Series gave us an entire shared cartoon universe, and eventually the Justice League Unlimited series, arguably the best and most successful comic adaptations until, well, Marvel. That continuity ran for fourteen fricking YEARS! Something about it must have worked. Get yourself a DVD boxset or three, get over any snobbery you may have about cartoons, and take notes.

If you have to be realistic, dump the secret identity
The fact that Clark Kent manages to disguise his role as Superman via glasses is something that's been openly mocked since forever. With the march of technology being what it is, its a façade that would not last 30 seconds, and hasn't been remotely tenable since the home video camera. And lets be honest here, the whole secret-identity-revealed plot point has been done to death. So bypass it completely. Have Supes be based in the Fortress of Solitude, he can still interact with Lois and Jimmy as part of his day job. Make it a commentary on celebrity, his identity revealed before the film even starts. Pop that zit, and deal with the consequences.


Set it in the 30's
Its said that Supes is old fashioned, so play to that strength, and make it a period piece. The secret identity problem largely vanishes, and Superman is just the hero for the Great Depression. Lex Luthor as an evil industrialist in this time makes a crazy amount of sense, too. And speaking of period pieces....

Have him fight racists
Oh, you want Superman to be edgy and dark, do you? You want to match his optimism with dirt? Bring him down to Earth? Well, the radio show version had the titanic balls to take on the Ku Klux Klan in 1946. Seriously, it was almost a journalistic expose, and actually did some good. Be they Nazis, or Donald Trump supporters, squaring off some proper nasties will only reinforce how good Supes is.

Or stop having him fight people
Look, Superman is a physical god, and there's no sensible foe for him to face in a mere punch up. Remember the fight with Zod in Man Of Steel? Did it not get boring? So either go bigger or a lot smaller. Give him a challenge that cannot be resolved by merely punching it. Superman v an earthquake. Superman v an arm-smuggling ring. Superman v famine. Superman v the subtle manipulations of billionaire Lex Luthor. Superman v President Luthor. Not Superman v guy with identical powers again. And if you have to do the alien invasion once more, go full Independence Day.

And Finally, NO MORE KILLING
Seriously folks, can we get over the Superheroes killing people trope please? Especially with blueboy here. Superman has sufficient level of power he does not need to kill anyone, and nor does he have the inclination. That scene with Zod? Should never have happened. DC and Warner Bros: Marvels mocks you on this front. So stop doing it.