The Boys (comics)

The Boys is a comic series based in a world where super-powers are real, but almost no one who has them is a hero. They put on a good public face, but behind the scenes nearly every one is terrible. And a small group of operatives, who are pretty terrible themselves, track down the secrets and hand out punishments.

All that sounds like it's a fun concept, and it would be, if the writers of The Boys weren't so fond of going over the top with every kind of the worst excess and immorality. Most of it is sexual, though there's plenty of violence as well. Some of it actually matters to the plot and world-building, and that part I don't mind. But I'd say that's maybe a third of what's actually presented, with the rest being just unnecessary crude sensationalism and humor.

It's possible to do this kind of "if super-powers were real people would be terrible with them" thing in a different way. I know because it already was done, back in 2003 with Supreme Power. That series had its share of sex and violence, but it wasn't thrown in your face on every page, and most of it had a purpose in the story.

I read the first collection volume of The Boys for a few reasons. I have friends who have liked it, I was looking for a new graphic novel to read anyway, and also I'd heard there was going to be a TV series made. But if the TV series holds true to the style of the comics, I doubt I'll want to watch it.

The world-building, the characters, the story plots...all that stuff is interesting and fairly well executed in The Boys. If the writers could have just restrained their impulse to cram crude language and humor into every possible nook and cranny of their creation, I'd have really liked it. But as it is, I can't say the good parts are worth the sludge you have to read through on the way.

Thor: Ragnarok

It occurs to me that Marvel Studios has set a really high bar with their MCU movies. Thor: Ragnarok is a solid effort, well above average and miles better than anything that I'd have expected a decade or so ago. And yet I found myself disappointed.

(Warning: Spoilers below, on the off chance that anyone else is as late to the party as me.)

This is the third Thor movie, and the seventeenth in the MCU. All the usual things that I've come to expect from MCU movies are here: impressive effects, interesting characters, plenty of interpersonal drama, and a plot that holds together if you don't think too hard about it. There's plenty of appearances by other Thor-adjacent characters, most notably Loki and Odin from earlier films, and new introductions of their long-lost sister Hela and a new Valkyrie ally. The Hulk plays a big role as well, which is nice since he's been missing since Avengers: Age of Ultron. And there's a bit of Doctor Strange, following up from the teaser bit at the end of his movie.

So why the disappointment? First, my expectations were sky-high. Several people in my circle of friends raved about this movie, calling it the best to date in the MCU and possibly the best superhero movie of all time. Critics loved it, ratings were high, hardly a bad thing to be said about it anywhere. Thus, I was expecting incredible things. When I got only above-average, it felt disappointing, even though I know that's not really fair.

Second, the primary reason that I think Thor: Ragnarok falls short of excellent and thus below my expectations: the overdone, constant slapstick humor. The first few times it's funny: someone falls flat on their face, accidentally knocks themselves over, insults their opponent to his face, etc. But after you see it again and again, you start to expect something embarrassing, and then it's just tiresome. By the time Bruce Banner does a belly flop out of a spaceship near the end, it was so obvious what was coming that I was cringing. Clearly I'm in the minority on this, given how much everyone else seems to love the movie, but the humor aspects just felt excessive to me...and it's not funny when it's overdone.

There were a few other minor things that didn't click with me. Jeff Goldblum's Grandmaster character annoyed me, largely because I felt that Goldblum's style clashed with the role of manipulative, heartless tyrant. The loss of Mjolnir (that's the hammer) felt almost trivial in how easily it happened. The mighty Thor begging Stan Lee not to cut his hair was pathetic. And there wasn't nearly enough of Fenris (the giant wolf).

Having said all that, Thor: Ragnarok is a fine movie. I'm glad that I've seen it, and likely will watch it again someday when I happen across it on a streaming service or something. Don't avoid it, just temper your expectations a bit going in.

Wonder Woman (2017)

Bringing a female superhero to the big screen in a leading role hasn't been done often, but DC did a solid job of it with Wonder Woman.

Unsurprisingly, Wonder Woman is an origin story. The character appeared briefly in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and the entire movie is basically a flashback sequence from that modern-day version of Diana. The entire movie takes place in the past, specifically the World War I era. If that sounds familiar, it's because Marvel did more or less the same thing with Captain America. It's hard to really fault the writers for copying, though, since all these superhero movies have their roots in decades of comic book stories, many of which are very similar. Hard to really say who is copying what, with all that history.

I felt like the movie did a good job of setting up Diana's past, explaining the role of the Olympian gods and her home of Themyscira. Seemed to me that there was enough explanation to make sense to a non-comic-nerd, though I admit that it's hard to tell since I am one. There have been lots of versions of Wonder Woman over the years, and this one seems as good to me as any.

Gal Gadot did a fantastic job as Diana, and I thought the writers and director captured the character very well. Diana's naivete is very clear as she makes her first foray into man's world, but she never seems weak or lost because of it. There's very little sexual content, which isn't easy when your main character is a gorgeous woman running around in skimpy battle costume. There's a fine line to walk with this character, and I think they did an outstanding job.

I wish I could say the same about the action scenes. There's constant use of slow-motion sequences in the middle of the action, and just about every one of them annoyed me. The scenes themselves were fine, well designed and executed. I particularly liked the no-man's-land advance, with Diana playing the "tank" for the soldiers. I just wish the director hadn't been so in love with slowing the action down over and over again. It's fine to do that once or twice, to call attention to some particularly impressive feat or important small detail, but it was badly over-used here.

The plot and minor characters are serviceable, if not particularly impressive. The "twist" with Ares' identity and the god-slayer weapon was so heavily telegraphed that I hesitate to even use the term. Outside of Steve Trevor, other characters are present only as opportunity to show off some aspect of Diana. But none of that is surprising, as it's hard to do much in an origin story film outside of the main character without making things too complex to easily follow.

Wonder Woman is a big step forward for the DC cinematic universe. I know we'll be seeing more of Diana, and I look forward to it. I hope to see more of this quality of writing, directing, and production in the future DCU movies as well.

Marvel Heroes 2.0

The Marvel Heroes folks sent me an email a while back announcing the launch of their "Biggest Update Ever." It had been several months since I played the game, so this seemed like a good time to see what had changed.

It turns out that what changed is darn near everything about how you build out each character. The action-RPG gameplay is more or less the same, and you still have pretty much the same story content and challenge modes. The level of difficulty has been reset in that content, though, so that higher difficulty modes are more of a challenge than they used to be.

Under the old system, a large part of character planning involved trying to get as many levels as possible in your key powers. The new system eliminates power levels entirely, and adds the concept of talents that can change how powers work depending on which talents you select. If that sounds familiar, that's probably because it's pretty much the same change we saw from Diablo II to Diablo III. In general I like it, especially since it means you see all of a character's powers (except the ultimate) by level 30.

The change to eliminate power levels had a big impact on items as well, since adding power levels was a big part of gearing character in the old system. Almost every item got a revamp, and for the most part you can do pretty well just by getting the unique items specific to your character plus a few artifacts. When I logged in some of my old characters, I was mostly able to jump right in without worrying too much about changing out their old gear, even though the stats on that gear had changed. I'm sure there's new ways to min-max stats, but the old stuff is mostly still usable.

Another major change is the simplification of the end-game character improvement system. The old OMEGA point system was extremely complex, so a key feature of the new Infinity system is simplicity. There are only 6 groups of 5 options for Infinity point placement, much fewer than the number of OMEGA nodes. I found it to be fairly easy to understand, and it certainly seems to have plenty of room to grow in the future if the developers decide to go that route.

I was less enthusiastic about the ramping up of difficulty. The "green" lowest level is still pretty much the same, but "red" and "cosmic" levels seem significantly harder than I remember. I suspect that the designers realized that power creep was becoming a problem - high-end characters with the best gear were just too powerful - so decided on an across-the-board difficulty increase during this major update. I'd rather that they'd paid more attention to the power creep to begin with. Still, at least this addresses the situation to some extent, and hopefully they've learned a lesson and won't make the same mistake going forward.

After spending a few days going back to some of my old characters, I felt fairly comfortable with the changes. It's a credit to the design and development teams that they were able to make these big changes in such a way that it was pretty easy for players to make the transition.

Doctor Strange (2016)

I caught the latest Marvel superhero movie today, Doctor Strange, at the local AMC theater.

I was pretty surprised to be charged exactly $5.19 for my ticket. I'd heard that some theaters were doing flexible pricing these days, but this was the first time I'd seen it in action. The 11:30 AM Wednesday show (not in 3D) was apparently pretty low on the demand scale. As someone who almost never goes to a theater during peak hours, I approve heartily. I also approve of the recliner-style seating that this particular theater was equipped with, took full advantage of that.

Doctor Strange is an origin story, like most of the other MCU productions featuring a character for the first time. Like most comic book nerds, I knew the basic story already: egotistical surgeon gets into an accident, loses his ability to perform surgery, goes searching for help and finds a mystical world where he becomes a hero. The movie does a fine job going through that origin, even if it feels a bit rushed as Strange goes from inept neonate to battle-sorcerer.

The movie is almost entirely about developing Strange's character, and there's not a whole lot of room for others. The renegade-sorcerer villain is a single-minded, one-dimensional character intent on his path of destruction. The supporting cast of other doctors and magicians mostly just seem to emphasize one aspect of Strange's transition: his old love and professional lives, the mentors leading him into magical domains, the previous master falling to make room for him. I don't think this is a bad thing, since the whole idea is to tell Strange's origin, but it's worth mentioning.

There are a whole lot of special effects in this movie, and they sure seemed well-executed to me. All the MCU films have plenty of CGI muscle behind them, and this one is near the top of the list in sheer amount of visual effects. In several places the entire screen is full of shifting landscapes - even if you haven't seen the movie yet, you've probably seen it in all the commercials - while various characters bounce around, fighting each other and dodging the scenery. A bit overdone, perhaps, but it's certainly impressive.

As with most MCU films, this one has some small tie-ins to the larger universe. Avengers Tower shows up in the New York cityscape, there's mention of an Infinity Stone, and if you stay past the first bit of the closing credits a certain Avenger makes Strange's acquaintance. I'm looking forward to seeing Strange mixed in with the rest of the MCU.

Given the prevalence of sweeping special effects, I'm glad I saw Doctor Strange in the theater. I'm sure it'll look fine on a small screen too, but those kind of visuals have a bigger impact on the big screen. Especially for $5.19.

Batman: The Killing Joke (2016)

Google was kind enough to give me another movie rental discount coupon recently. Used it on Batman: The Killing Joke, the animated film that came out earlier this year.

I believe I've mentioned before that I'm a big fan of Batman, and so I tend to like just about anything based on the character. This movie was no exception, though there are certainly some parts I'd have done differently.

Most of this animated movie is based on the graphic novel of the same name, which was published way back in 1988. I've read it several times, so I was familiar with the story and characters going into the movie. Which was confusing at first, because the beginning of the movie doesn't seem much like the graphic novel at all.

The first half-hour or so of the movie isn't in the graphic novel. It's mostly about Batgirl aka Barbara Gordon, daughter of Commissioner Jim Gordon. Unlike the source material, this version is in love with Batman. At first it's unrequited, but eventually they consummate the relationship. After that, she loses perspective. She eventually gives up being Batgirl after realizing that she's unable to be objective when Batman is in danger.

After that, the movie follows the graphic novel very closely. The Joker enters the story, having recently escaped from Arkham Asylum. We see some flashbacks to the events that caused a normal man to become the Joker...at least, one possible version, as he says himself that he prefers the past to be multiple choice. The rest of the story is about the terrible things he does while free, and how it impacts the Gordons and Batman. If you've read the graphic novel then you already know what happens, and if not, I won't spoil it.

The parts of this movie that were from the graphic novel were great. The visuals are well-drawn. Kevin Conroy is the best Batman voice actor hands-down, and same for Mark Hamill with the Joker. The story follows closely with the source material, and if you ignore that first half-hour, it hangs together nicely. And I know I'm not in the majority here, but I actually like the ending...it feels somewhat abrupt, but I think it fits together with Batman's stated desire from earlier in the story to understand the Joker on a non-violent level.

Unfortunately, that the first half-hour doesn't fit in with the rest of the movie at all. Showing that Barbara used to be Batgirl, that's necessary and could have been done in about five minutes. Instead, the movie adds a subplot with a random criminal trying to seduce Batgirl, with no Joker involved at all...who is supposed to be the primary villain.

Then there's the bizarre sexual relationship between Batman and Batgirl. Batman shows no signs of being attached to her as anything beyond a work partner, so why would he sleep with her in the first place? A normal man, sure, but this is supposed to be the always-self-controlled superhero who won't let anything interfere with his mission. If sex was necessary for some reason, why not add Robin, who is Batgirl's love interest in the comics and would make much more sense? The writers were clearly trying to come up with a reason for her to quit being Batgirl, but it falls completely flat and doesn't mesh with the graphic novel story.

By the end of Batman: The Killing Joke, I was happy to have watched it, since the last hour is a well executed adaptation of the graphic novel. I just wish they hadn't bothered with that first bit.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Every once in a while, Google sends me an email offering a discount on digital movie rentals. I used the most recent one on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

I didn't go to see Batman v Superman in the theater when it came out earlier this year, largely because the reaction from my friends that did ranged from "meh" to "avoid at all costs." So I went into this with a pretty low set of expectations. There were two major complaints: the iconic characters weren't portrayed as expected, and the way the movie unfolded just didn't make a lot of sense.

Batman is pretty easily my favorite comic book character of all time. Not even close, really. I've enjoyed all the various versions over the years, from the campy Adam West TV show to comics through the 80s and 90s to the Christopher Nolan films. Which is a bit of a long way to say that I don't really care about staying true to any particular "iconic" version. Same goes for Superman and just about any other character. The fact that this movie showed a Batman didn't seem to mind killing a few bad guys, or a Superman that is more conflicted than bright-and-shiny undaunted hero, doesn't bother me much.

I do, however, care about a movie's plot, characters, action, and setting flowing together to make an entertaining whole. On this front, I'd say Batman v Superman was pretty awful. The entire plot hangs on one thing: Lex Luthor is nuts, while at the same time being incredibly smart and manipulative. Batman and Superman both come off as chumps, maneuvered by Lex into fighting one another. I thought it would have been a much better movie without them getting into any kind of fight at all. Meanwhile, Lex is busy creating some uncontrollable monster, clearly just as bad for him as for anyone else - insanity at work. Unfortunately, basing the entire plot on the workings of an insane mind does nothing for narrative flow - things just sort of seem to happen for no reason other than to put a big fight in the spotlight.

If I had to pick a single word to describe Batman v Superman, it would be "clumsy." You can see what the writers and director are trying to do, but it just falls flat. Lex's manipulations only make sense if the heroes are stupid, distracted, or both. The romance between Clark and Lois is assumed from the very beginning, and then a bunch more scenes build it up later...as if we don't already know they're lovebirds after the very first rescue. Other Justice League characters pop in for a scene or two, adding exactly nothing to this movie (other than Wonder Woman) - an incredibly clumsy way to tie into a larger movie universe. Even the big fight scenes feel as if they were choreographed by the special effects people for the most spectacular shot, regardless of how silly that makes the actual characters look. And the character design is nothing special even outside of poor action choreography - Doomsday in particular looks terrible.

Despite all that, there were still some good things to come out of Batman v Superman. I enjoyed Ben Affleck's portrayal of Batman, and Jeremy Irons did a pretty decent Alfred. Gal Gadot did a good job as Wonder Woman, actually fitting better into the story than anyone outside of Batman - certainly better than the cameos by other Justice League members. Gives me hope for future movies, as long as some lessons are learned instead of just repeating the mistakes.

If I'd seen this movie 10 years ago, it's possible I'd have liked it a lot more. But now, I've got the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe to compare it against, and that's not flattering for Batman v Superman. With luck, future DC movies will be better.

Fantastic Four (2015)

Another movie off the watchlist via HBO NOW - the 2015 version of Fantastic Four.

No one seemed to like this movie much when it came out, which is one reason I hadn't bothered watching it until now. So I started with low expectations, which I think actually helped. I knew not to expect a faithful comic-series adaptation, or an amazing adventure with stunning special effects.

This version of the Fantastic Four is basically a group of young explorers, working on a way to cross into another dimension. They're working with Franklin Storm (father of the brother-sister Storms in the four) and another young scientist in Victor von Doom. Add in a smarmy corporate executive type and you have pretty much the whole cast.

None of the characters felt like they had much depth. What character development there was seemed to be trying to shoehorn them into the Fantastic Four mold - Reed's friendship with Ben, Sue and Reed growing close, Victor jealous of Reed. It all felt very predictable, even though these characters are different from the traditional comic cast. Seems like there were two different aims here - a different take on the Fantastic Four characters, and keeping familiarity for fans - and the result is that neither is done well.

Notably lacking is any significant attempt at humor, and it's sorely missed. I think the aim was to make a serious, suspenseful movie, but that's hard to do with superheroes. Everyone already knows more or less what will happen...world is in trouble, world is saved. The audience stays more engaged with a chance to laugh every once in a while.

Superhero movies rely pretty heavily on special effects and action scenes, and Fantastic Four is at best mediocre in both. It takes half the movie for there to be much in the way of either. The effects are pretty much what I expected, which isn't good...that means nothing was impressive enough to stand out. As for action, it's almost all concentrated into the final battle, which was completely predictable. Bad guy is strong, heroes are in trouble, heroes suddenly realize they can work together, big win. Yawn.

I think this could have been a decent movie if it wasn't about the Fantastic Four. Take the same general plot and tone, but make it about a smaller unfamiliar set of characters/powers, and you'd have a science fiction heroic adventure. You wouldn't need to split screen time trying to develop four different heroes, and their relationships could be a surprise to the viewer. Add in some improved action sequences, and it could be a much better film. Unfortunately, that's not how it worked out.

Deadpool

No one who might be offended by <insert just about anything> should see this movie. It certainly deserves its R rating.

OK, now that we've got that out of the way, Deadpool is incredibly good. Ryan Reynolds nails the lead role as Wade Wilson, making believable the foul-mouthed, constantly wise-cracking anti-hero. I've yet to see Morena Baccarin turn in anything but an excellent performance, and her Vanessa is no exception. And Ed Skrein does a fine job as the unfeeling villain of the piece.

Deadpool is all about the comedy, which makes sense given the character's comic-book background. Everything is joke, from the one-liners thrown around in battle to Wade trading insults at the bar. At times the humor is directed to the audience, "breaking the fourth wall", which I thought were some of the best bits. Even the romance between Vanessa and Wade was largely based on them tossing jokes back and forth. It works well in all cases, which is a tribute to both the writing and acting.

The plot is probably the weakest point of Deadpool. "Revenge against the guy who ruined your life, and oh look he's holding your girlfriend hostage" is about as unoriginal as it gets. I didn't really care, though, because the movie is about the characters, action, and humor. A complicated plot would actually have gotten in the way.

There's a whole lot of over-the-top violent action scenes in this movie. Not quite at the level of red-food-coloring-everywhere that you might see in a Tarantino film, but close. Deadpool's constant wisecracking makes these scenes comedic as much as they are violent action, though. I thought it was technically well executed. There are a few uses of slow-motion and such, but the special effects aren't over-used.

This film belongs to the X-Men film universe (as opposed to the MCU), and it does include a couple of other X-Men characters: Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead (no, really, that's the name...it's not a Deadpool joke). But Deadpool is an origin story movie for Deadpool, and doesn't really cross over with the other X-Men films. Except to make a few jokes at their expense, of course. Also, Stan Lee as a strip club DJ was an inspired way to make use of the cameo he makes in every Marvel film.

Deadpool isn't a movie you can recommend to everyone. The viewer can't be too uptight about language, violence, or sex. But that viewer also doesn't have to know anything about superheroes or comic books to enjoy it, which I think is a major reason for the film's great box office success. I really enjoyed it, and hope they can pull off the same kind of performance for the sequel.

Formerly Known as the Justice League

For no particular reason, I recently found myself looking for something funny to read. I have plenty of options lying around, from Dave Barry books to Sir Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels to collections of Dilbert cartoons. (And that's just in print and on a bookshelf - plenty more at the library and on the Internet.) This time, what caught my eye was my Formerly Known as the Justice League comics.

More than 20 years ago, Keith Giffen and J. M. DeMatteis wrote a series of comedic, tongue-in-cheek storylines in the Justice League International book. Much of the team was made up of characters who weren't well-known at the time, such as Blue Beetle, Fire, Booster Gold, and Elongated Man. It became irreverently known as the "bwa ha ha" era, and it was hilarious to read. Eventually the series moved on to a more serious tone.

In 2003, Giffen and DeMatteis returned to some of the same characters and style with the six-issue mini-series Formerly Known as the Justice League. It's drawn by artists Kevin Maguire (who also worked on JLI) and Joe Rubinstein. The plot revolves around Maxwell Lord creating a new superhero team called the Super Buddies, bringing together many of the old JLI members. And a few old enemies, though at times it's hard to tell the difference.

Formerly Known as the Justice League is most entertaining if you're a comic book fan, since it uses every opportunity to poke fun at the superhero genre. For instance: the whole idea of the Super Buddies, a bunch of lesser-known heroes available for hire. But it's plenty entertaining even if superhero comics aren't your normal thing, because there's a whole lot of puns, characters trading insults, and just general weirdness that makes it a fun read.

The same creative team also did a follow-up storyline in the JLA Classified series a few years later, called I Can't Believe it's not the Justice League. That one isn't quite as good in my opinion, largely because it didn't quite fit with the rest of the DC universe at the time. Identity Crisis had recently killed off Sue Dibny, and Blue Beetle dies in the Countdown to Infinite Crisis right around the same publication date. I Can't Believe it's not the Justice League takes place in an earlier time as far as continuity goes, but it was still odd to see the same characters being used for comedy and tragedy in the same general publication timeframe.

I keep Formerly Known as the Justice League around on my bookshelf because it's a great example of the lighter side of superhero comics. Highly recommended to anyone who likes the superhero genre, and I think even non-fans would find it amusing.

DC's Legends of Tomorrow

I mentioned DC's Legends of Tomorrow television series in a post several months ago, as a yet-to-be-released series. The first season is over now, having just wrapped up this week.

The idea behind the show was to pull together a group of characters already seen in Flash and Arrow, and send them on a grand adventure across time and space. The catalyst is Rip Hunter, who is traveling across time to save his family by preventing the rise to power of the villainous Vandal Savage. He gathers up eight superheroes (or villains) to get the job done.

It's always tricky to use time travel as the basis for a storyline, and Legends of Tomorrow is no exception. There's a lot of hand-waving used along the lines of "time wants to happen a certain way" so that the characters can't do obvious things like stop Savage from being born, or correct their own mistakes. Anyone watching a show based on comic-book heroes is going to put up with a lot of flimsy explanations, but these kind of time-bending stories stretch anyone's suspension of disbelief.

Vandal Savage makes a pretty unconvincing villain, in my opinion. He's an immortal, like the character of the same name in the comics, but the TV version is also linked to ancient Egypt and Hawkman/Hawkgirl. Certainly he's smart and ruthless, but the kind of power gathered by the heroic company should have been extreme overkill. Savage ends up a step ahead in episode after episode, of course - wouldn't be much of a series otherwise - but it feels more like the team self-destructs than Savage winning. This issue becomes less pronounced as the plot moves along, which is a good thing, but that doesn't help the early episodes.

The sheer number of characters in the team is a problem, too. Considering how many personalities there are to work through, the writers actually do a fairly good job providing some depth to each one. There's only so much time to deal with the varied interpersonal relationships, though, and having so many means each one feels shorted. A team half the size would have been much more believable and provided more time to expand on each character.

Having said all that, the shortcomings haven't stopped me from watching the show through the entire first season. It's part of the same universe as Flash and Arrow, and it's fun to spot the various ways the shows cross over. I like many of the characters individually, even if the team aspect isn't as well done as I'd like. And there are definitely some fun moments along the way.

The first season of Legends of Tomorrow has been pretty rough, but I'm hoping there's been some lessons learned. A second season is already in the works, and what I saw at the end of this season's finale certainly looks promising. A smaller team with a better villain could make for a solid show.

Marvel Heroes' Civil War Event

Marvel Heroes has promotions and events of various kinds running almost constantly. So it's no surprise that they did not miss the chance to put something together specially for the release of Captain America: Civil War.

There was no time wasted by the marketing department: I got an email even before the event actually started. Presumably the idea was to catch the eye of fans who were going to the midnight showing of the movie, since it came in at 11:15 PM. Here's the event details, as listed on the game's website.

This promotion should appeal especially to new players, since it includes a free unlock of either Captain America or Iron Man. It's still useful for existing players who already have both, too, since you get a hero token to improve their Ultimate power. I picked Iron Man. There's also new costumes for many of the characters in the movie, for purchase in the store.

The event itself has two parts. This week, a short new zone where you can chase down the villain Crossbones (similar to the movie's opening action scene) has been introduced. Crossbones also shows up in the various patrol zones. Next week, there will be events to gain influence with either the Iron Man or Captain America side of the civil war. Through the whole thing, characters that appeared in the movie will get bonus experience.

I went through the new zone a couple of times, first with a level 60 character and then a level 40. At level 60, it was very easy, so I'm glad there's also a cosmic version of the zone to provide a bit more challenge. At level 40 there was a bit more difficulty, but still not too bad. All but the least experienced players should have no trouble, and it won't take even brand-new players very long to get to the point where they can make it through.

Clearly the idea with this promotion is to attract new players, with all the movie-related giveaways and content. A free hero unlock is always good for new players, and the bonus experience is nice to give them a quick start. I think the developers did a good job with the new zone as well, making the movie-related content easy to access for new players attracted by the movie tie-in.

I haven't been playing Marvel Heroes on a regular basis for a while, but I still log in occasionally and I'm glad to see the game continuing to grow. Hopefully some of the excitement from the movie will transfer over to some new players in the game.

Captain America: Civil War

Marvel Studios films have been some of the best action movies released in the last decade. Captain America: Civil War fits right in.

I really dislike crowded theaters, so I didn't go to see this movie on opening weekend. By waiting until the first Monday showing, I got into a theater that was only about 1/3 full. Most of that population was a high school class, I assume seeing the movie as a reward of some kind. The teacher had to shush them a few times, but nothing too distracting. And the theater had a few rows of D-BOX seats, a few rows ahead of where I was sitting. I could feel the vibrations all the way back where I was. Can't imagine why you'd want to pay extra to sit in the actual seats, but I suppose there's always someone looking for extras in the movie experience.

Two and a half hours used to be a really long running time for a movie, but it seems pretty average these days. Captain America: Civil War doesn't feel artificially extended like some films, though. The story flows smoothly the entire way through. Nothing seemed totally out of place, disconnected, or felt like a last-minute addition. And it fits in nicely with the rest of Marvel Cinematic Universe films, with plenty of references to previous events.

That story involves a manipulative villain setting the heroes at one another's throats, as you'd expect from a movie with "civil war" in the title. The plot mechanics involving the mystery villain were well executed, neither revealed too quickly nor made too obscure. All that was really secondary to the personal conflicts between the various heroes, though. Primarily this takes the form of Iron Man versus Captain America, with other heroes lining up behind one or the other. It's not always easy to portray friends falling out, and I'm glad to say that all the actors involved pulled it off nicely here. Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow was particularly well done in my opinion, as she tries to walk the line between her friendship with Cap and agreement in principle with Iron Man.

Before things get intensely personal, conflict between the two sides is about oversight for the Avengers. The Iron Man position is that superpowers need to be kept in check, no matter how well-meaning the people using them. An international agreement through the United Nations is presented for the heroes to sign, binding them to obey UN direction on when and where they can get involved in world events. Captain America's side fears that such restrictions will put them in a position of being unable to intervene when they feel it's necessary, or worse used as enforcement for corrupt regimes. It's not always smart to put too much thought into the philosophical underpinnings of superhero movies, but in this case I think it holds up pretty well. The tension between using force where required and keeping that force in check is an issue in the real world, not just some larger-than-life super-conflict. I thought Captain America: Civil War did a good job of calling attention to that tension, and showed how each side has positive and negative points. The question isn't ever truly resolved, which is a good thing since you can't fully resolve it in the real world either.

Though I try not to know too much about any movie before seeing it for the first time, I'd already seen some important scenes from this one. All it takes is one trailer or commercial, so I knew ahead of time that we'd see Spiderman and a big showdown between Iron Man and Captain America/Winter Soldier. I understand that the marketing folks want to drum up as much interest as possible, but I wish they'd found a way to avoid showing important late-movie stuff in the pre-release promotional material. The aforementioned showdown is the last big scene, and based just on what you see in the film, you'd think the in-fighting was over and everyone was friendly again (despite still having some disagreements). It kind of spoils the surprise when you know they're going to end up fighting again because it was in all the commercials.

Speaking of commercials, I noticed a good amount of product placement. That's nothing unexpected in today's film world, of course, but it can still be a bit jarring at times. Mostly I just noticed things in passing, such as the (very) old-school Mac in Peter Parker's room, or the VW Bug that Cap drives at one point. But the Vivo logo on smartphones was a bit much, particularly at the top of Tony Stark's super-futuristic holo-tablet. On the other hand, seeing MSNBC on the news reports with Kate Snow anchoring fit in nicely and added a bit of a real-world feel.

A lot of any superhero movie is about action, and there was plenty in this one. I'm sure that I'd find some things to nit-pick after seeing it again, but on first viewing it sure seemed extremely well done. There's plenty of action set in areas all over the world, from an early incident in Nigeria to the final showdown in Siberia. The centerpiece is a big hero-on-hero fight involving every major player on both sides, and it did not disappoint. Every character had an opportunity to put their signature on the fight, from Ant-Man shrinking down to mess with Iron Man's suit to Spiderman talking incessantly through the action.

Even if you haven't seen the previous MCU films, Captain America: Civil War is well worth spending the time to see. If you have, it's even better. Action fans should like it, and superhero fans should love it.

More Supergirl?

It's not clear yet whether Supergirl will be renewed for a second season. It would be a real shame if the involved parties couldn't come to an agreement.

The first season, which wrapped up a few weeks ago, could charitably be called uneven. Some of the writing is downright atrocious, particularly if you have low tolerance for awkward romance or one-dimensional villains. The plot pacing feels way out of whack, as if the writers were given a barrel of ideas and told "put all these in, whether they fit or not, leave nothing out." The show's superhero stunts and effects are good for television, but still feel a little underwhelming considering how much we see of that kind of thing in big-budget movies these days.

Balancing those shortcomings, though, are some amazing performances and a whole lot of old-fashioned fun. Melissa Benoist is incredible in the lead role, making the portrayal of a Kara/Supergirl dual life seem effortless. She and Chyler Leigh have great chemistry as the Danvers sisters, David Harewood is an excellent J'onn J'onzz, and even Calista Flockhart's Cat Grant was growing on me by the end of the season. The vast majority of the show is relentlessly upbeat, with Supergirl refusing to be anything but optimistic in the face of any situation.

Supergirl started with pretty good ratings, but dropped significantly over the course of the season. That's true of many first seasons, of course, but in this case I think the problems I mentioned above made it worse. Those sinking ratings mean that CBS is thinking hard before bringing the show back for a second season. According to The Wrap, CBS is paying around $3 million per episode to Warner Brothers Television, which is a whole lot for a show with that downward rating slope.

The best solution would be for CBS and Warner Brothers to work something out to deal with the high cost. There are rumors that perhaps moving production north would help, for instance. They need to find some better direction in the plot pacing and writing areas, also. If they can't find a solution, maybe it would be possible to move the show to the CW, which already has Arrow and The Flash. Neither of those shows is perfect, but both are miles ahead of Supergirl in the writing area, so perhaps the production teams could help one another. Even if a network move means some major changes to the cast and/or setting of the show, it would be much preferable to a non-renewal.

In any event, I hope the networks can figure something out to allow Supergirl to continue. There were some outstanding acting performances in the first season, and the consistently upbeat and cheerful attitude is great. I'd love to see that continue, wherever it happens.

It's a Bird..., by Steven Seagle and Teddy Kristiansen

DC Comics published a graphic novel back in 2004 called It's a Bird..., written by Steven Seagle and illustrated by Teddy Kristiansen. I recently had an opportunity to borrow and read through it.

With a name like It's a Bird..., published by DC, the first thing you think of is Superman. And the story does have Superman, but not as a character. Some Superman comics make an appearance, and Superman as an idea is a major theme, but the real story is the protagonist Steve and his struggles. The art isn't the "bright and colorful" format that many Superman stories use, but rather a more abstract and down-to-earth graphic style.

Steve is a comic book writer who has just been given the opportunity to write the current Superman book, a chance that everyone around him expects that he'll be excited to have. But it's just the opposite, as Steve associates Superman with childhood memories of his grandmother's death, due in part to the Superman comic he was given as a distraction while waiting in the hospital. That death was due to Huntington's Disease, as Steve learned later in life, and he's done his best to avoid anything associated with that disease, or even thinking about it. But the Superman job, combined with another instance of the genetically-linked disease in his family near the same time, forces Steve to confront his own fear of contracting it. He goes through something of a breakdown, but eventually comes out the other side of that dark time, and decides to move ahead with his life without letting fear of disease control him.

That's a very high-level summary that leaves out a lot of details, but it'll do for discussion purposes. I really enjoyed the journey that It's a Bird... takes with Steve, ranging from a comfortable position in life, through major disruptions, to a new acceptance of his situation. Come to think of it, maybe "enjoy" isn't the right word, since some parts of the story are pretty tough to read. Steve doesn't exactly make many friends with the way he acts throughout, and some people close to him (particularly his girlfriend and his editor) have to forgive some really bad behavior. Maybe "appreciate" is better, since that covers the uncomfortable but well-written parts of the story as well as the happier areas.

It's a Bird... may be more than a decade old now, but I think it's just as relevant today. Everyone can relate to dealing with a difficult truth that you don't want to accept, even if not everyone is faced with something as directly life-threatening as Huntington's Disease. Well worth the read, whether you have any interest in comic-book Superman or not.

Marvel's Agent Carter

For the last two years, ABC has run two Marvel universe shows in the same time slot. Agents of SHIELD runs in the fall and spring, and Agent Carter fills in the winter weeks. I've enjoyed the show, and would like to see it continue, though its future is in doubt.

Agent Carter takes place after the first Captain America movie, starting in 1946. The title character is the same Peggy Carter from the movie, now working in an American agency called the Strategic Scientific Reserve (SSR). There are quite a few tie-ins to the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), such as the appearances of Howard Stark and his butler Edwin Jarvis. A sample of Captain America's blood makes an appearance, and the "zero matter" used in season two has ties to the upcoming Doctor Strange movie as well as Agents of SHIELD.

Since Agent Carter takes place back in the 1940s, the setting is interesting in its own right. I'm not expert so I don't know exactly how historically accurate it all is, but nothing jumps out at me as being too far out of place. (Other than all the comic-book villains and super-weapons, of course.) The setting plays into the writing, in situations such as Carter's stay in a women's boarding house and an investigation into a Nazi-Soviet incident from the war.

A large part of the appeal of Agent Carter is the job done by Haley Atwell as Carter and James D'Arcy as Jarvis. They spend a lot of screen time together, as Carter is going about her investigations and Jarvis assists her. The strong agent towing along a rather timid butler setup works nicely, and the friendship that develops between them is portrayed extremely well.

One of the major themes in Agent Carter is the effort that Carter has to put into being treated equally to the male agents. She's constantly having to go around the system in order to pursue her case, and having to deal with co-workers who don't believe she can do the job. Of course, she also uses the tendency of opponents to underestimate a woman to her advantage. As the show moves along, other strong female characters are introduced, most notably two villains - Dottie Underwood in the first season, and Whitney Frost in season two. I think the writers have done a nice job keeping female characters in leading roles, while still working in the male-dominated 1940s setting.

The second season, which has just the finale left to go as I'm writing this, has a lighter feel than the first. There's still plenty of world-in-danger mystery and action, but also quite a few humorous moments and side jokes. The first season had that too, but it's more pronounced in the second. I enjoy both, though I think I prefer the slightly more serious tone of the first season.

The future of the show hasn't been officially determined yet, but the future is in doubt. Ratings have been down for season two, and Haley Atwell has been cast in another series. I think more Agent Carter would be fun, but regardless of what happens with the future, I've enjoyed the two seasons we have already.

Marvel Heroes: Theme Building

Like most ARPGs, character builds in Marvel Heroes come down to laying waste to as many enemies as possible, as quickly as possible. With so many different characters to play, though, I find that it gets boring trying to maximize damage output for each one. Building a few characters according to a theme is an entertaining alternative.

This post doesn't have anything to do with Storm. I just like the picture.

Pretty much every playable character has two or three choices for how to focus their build. Take Psylocke, for instance. She can be played with ranged psionics, a melee mix of physical (sword) and psionic damage, or all-psionic melee damage. If you're looking for maximum damage, the hybrid melee build is probably going to win out. My Psylocke is currently an all-ranged psionic build, though, focused on the telekinetic theme rather than the up-close-and-personal assassin aspect of the character.

Colossus is another character that I like playing with a theme build. Most people play him as a tough melee character, doing damage largely with his fists. He has a set of powers that focus on his friends, though. He can do the "Fastball Special" Wolverine throw that is a staple of X-Men comics, and Wolverine will stick around to fight for a while. Colossus can also summon his sister Illyana (aka Magik) to fight alongside him. With the right gear and build, Colossus can have both helpers out and fighting all the time, turning him into more of a three-person team than a single character. It's not the most optimal damage-dealing setup, but I think he's more fun to play that way.

The most customizable Marvel Heroes character, by far, is Rogue. She has a set of powers of her own, but nearly two thirds of her power choices are borrowed/stolen from other characters. There are dozens of possible choices; honestly, it can be a little overwhelming to decide what to focus on. Rather than focus on pure damage output, I created my Rogue builds around themes. My first build was focused on fire powers and gear. After a while I decided I wanted to try another option, so I created a build using all X-Men powers and gear. (A few X-Men enemies in there, too.)

I find that playing Marvel Heroes can get repetitive if all I do is focus on "optimal" character builds. (True of just about any ARPG.) Playing around with theme builds as an alternative helps me to see the game from a fresh perspective.

Marvel Heroes

Marvel Heroes is a massively multi-player online (MMO) action role-playing game (ARPG). Short translation: it's an MMORPG where the vast majority of what you do is combat. There is a story-line, but it's fairly shallow and not character-specific. The main attraction of the game (for me, at least) is that you can play as many different characters from the Marvel universe.

The game was first released back in 2013, and to be honest, it was pretty terrible. Lots of bugs, poorly designed characters, limited gameplay choices. I tried it briefly and gave up quickly. But to their credit, the developers have done an amazing job improving the game since then. In late 2014 the game was re-branded as Marvel Heroes 2015, and when I tried it again, it felt like a completely different experience. In January it was re-branded again as Marvel Heroes 2016 with a new round of improvements and expansion.

Unlike almost every other ARPG that I've ever played, characters in Marvel Heroes aren't based on a race or class. Instead, each of your playable characters is a personality from the Marvel universe (i.e. Iron Man, Spider Man, Captain America). There's a ton to choose from - 53 at the time of this post. You choose one when you first pick up the game, and can unlock others through various means: purchase, picking up in-game currency, occasional giveaways and rewards. You choose gear and decide which abilities to focus on for each character, so they're not always the same: your Jean Gray might be focused on her psionic abilities, while my Jean Gray uses her Phoenix powers. Both thematic for the character, but the player chooses how to customize their version.

Marvel Heroes uses a top-down isometic view, so you're always looking down at your character moving around the world. That's important, because there's always a ton of things going on as you fight your way through hordes of villains. A first-person viewpoint wouldn't have much of a chance of keeping up. Most combat is an explosion of lots of different superpower effects, to the point where it's difficult to see what all is going on. The interface provides some help, like pointing out where a boss is among all the chaos, but it can still be a challenge to keep track of everything that's going on. And that's part of the fun...the "action" part of ARPG is certainly front and center most of the time.

My experience with Marvel Heroes has gone through three major phases: discovery, expansion, and end-game. They overlap somewhat, but I think every player is likely to follow more or less the same path.

When a player first starts Marvel Heroes, everything is new, thus the Discovery phase. You've got just one character to play, and you take them through the story chapters. The story is pretty simple and feels very much like a comic book, especially since it is told largely through "motion comics" - basically slideshows using comic-book style art with voiceovers. You get to see all kinds of locations familiar to Marvel universe fans, from Hell's Kitchen to the Savage Land to Odinheim. You'll also be introduced to the concept of patrol zones (open areas with tons of enemies to beat on and periodic villain invasions) and terminals (repeatable areas with one major boss and his minions).

As you make your way through the story and have seen most of the various content areas, the experience becomes about Expansion. The most obvious form is unlocking new characters to play, which can be done quickly with purchases from the store or more slowly through collecting gameplay items. I've spent very little on character unlocks, myself, but I know people who have bought quite a few. My purchases have mostly been unlocking new storage space, and once a costume (90s X-Men Storm...my favorite character from that old cartoon). You can also improve your access to various items and abilities by leveling up the crafter and enchanter NPCs, obtaining influence with the Genosha Liberation Front, and collecting items for the various weekly event vendors. Then there are Team-Up characters, who are unlockable like playable characters. You can choose one Team-Up for each of your playable characters, granting various buffs and some combat assistance.

The expansion never really ends, but once you've gotten a few characters up to the maximum level of 60 and improved their gear/builds, you can shift focus to the End-Game. There are several raid zones meant for 10 players, and special "cosmic" versions of the patrol zones only accessible after your character completes a moderately-difficult trial zone. The game feels very different with a character at 60, as difficulty scales up and more zones are available to access.

The Marvel Heroes experience is almost entirely about the different playable characters, Once you've gone through that initial discovery phase, you won't find much new in terms of story or areas to explore. The game still comes down to repeating the same areas with the same enemies, but using different characters keeps it interesting. The game reinforces this by giving each character their own personality, with different one-liners during combat and occasional comments as you pass through different areas or near other characters. (For instance, my Storm likes to compliment every Psylocke she sees, while Emma Frost has a put-down for almost everyone she runs across.) If you get multiple characters up to level 60, each adds an experience boost to all your other characters, which smooths out the slow grind of getting a new character through lower-level content.

I don't play Marvel Heroes every day (though I'll usually log in once to claim daily rewards), but it's enough fun to keep me coming back on a semi-regular basis. Especially as the developers continue to add new playable characters, additional areas to explore, and special events.

Sentinels of the Multiverse - The Video Game

Sentinels of the Multiverse is a card game about a team of superheroes battling a supervillian. It was originally released as a physical set, and later adapted into a computer version. I picked it up in a recent Steam sale, and it's also available on iOS and Android.

Each game of Sentinels of the Multiverse starts with the choice of one villain, one environment, and a team of 3-5 heroes. Each of these has their own deck of cards, customized to the abilities of that particular character. The villain and environment play automatically each turn, while the heroes are controlled by the player(s). The heroes must overcome the villain before they are knocked out, while both sides deal with the environment's effects.

The characters and art are very much in the Silver-Age comic style. It's all specific to the game, not based on any existing franchise, although many of the characters are very familiar. Wraith has a lot of Batman characteristics, Legacy is like Superman, etc.

The villains are much stronger than each individual hero, plus the environment tends to cause more problems for the heroes. Therefore, teamwork is essential. I've been playing Sentinels of the Multiverse solo, which means I control all of the heroes myself. You still have to play their turns one at a time, but there's no danger of someone going off in their own direction...unless that's what you want, of course. I don't really plan to play the game with random online folks, but a few of my friends do have it on Steam, so maybe I'll be able to organize a game with them at some point.

The gameplay itself is pretty simple. On each turn, a hero gets to play a card from their hand, use a power from a card in play, and draw a card. There's lots of synergies between the heroes, so often one hero's turn will set up another hero to make a big hit on the villain or otherwise boost their abilities. The villain and environment each get their own turns, playing a card from their deck and/or using abilities on cards they have in play. If the heroes drop the villain's hit points to zero before each of theirs fall to zero, they win.

I very much like the cooperate aspect of the game. There's not really any "winner" of the game as such - either you all win as a team by taking out the villain, or you all lose when the villain knocks out all the heroes. Playing as a single player that doesn't matter much, of course, since I control all the heroes anyway. I've played similar team-vs-the-game setups with multiple players, though, and I like the cooperative aspect.

There are two major shortcomings to Sentinels of the Multiverse, at least for me. First, the balance is pretty uneven with different initial setups. Playing with three heroes might be really tough, but adding a fourth or fifth makes it extremely easy. Some heroes have very little actual attack power, so picking a group comprised mostly of those can make the game nigh-unwinnable. I'm sure experience will help to avoid those situations, but it can be pretty discouraging for a newer player.

Second, there's very little to the game outside of playing individual battles. You fire up the game, win or lose against a villain, and that's it. Back to the main menu, with nothing changed. That's not a problem for a physical game that you'll only play once a month with friends, but for a video game it means players likely won't come back after their first few attempts. A little web searching told me that there are achievements and the ability to unlock variant versions of some heroes, but those aren't obvious in the game itself. There is also a weekly "one-shot" challenge, where you have to win some particularly difficult initial starting setup, but that's tough for newer players (plus some of them aren't playable without buying added content). Some kind of single-player campaign, with a few battles that gradually ramp up in difficulty, would make for a much better experience for the beginner.

I've been enjoying discovering the different combinations of heroes and villains in Sentinels of the Multiverse, and I'll probably keep it around the Steam library for a while. It has its flaws, but overall it's a fun way to enjoy the occasional comic-book style battle.

Heroes Reborn

Heroes Reborn is a thirteen-episode follow-up to the original Heroes series that ran from 2006 to 2010. The new series just finished its run this week. I enjoyed about the first half of the original series, before it degenerated into characters following complex and confusing plot-lines that made no sense given the abilities they supposedly had. Unfortunately, the new series follows just about exactly the same formula.

The basic premise of both series is that "evos," or evolution-advanced humans, are present in the world, with various kinds of powers from the mundane (create some pretty lights) to insanely powerful (move freely through time and space). It's an old formula, well represented in comic books, movies, anime, etc. Television dramas such as the Heroes franchise aren't nearly as common, in large part because it's hard to pull off.

The best part of Heroes Reborn is the first six episodes, where new characters are being introduced and older ones are busy setting the scene. There's a lot of mystery around Noah Bennet in particular, who has gaps in his memory and is busily trying to fill them in. A whole raft of new characters are introduced, which of course includes revealing what kinds of powers they have. This whole initial introduction and set-up-the-big-mystery phase is really well done, and I had fun following it and guessing where things were going.

Unfortunately, the answers start coming around episode seven, and things start to fall apart. Part of this is because the writers decided to make heavy use of time travel (more on that below). Another reason is that the introduction of characters is pretty much over. Digging deeper into the existing characters is a lot less fun than discovering new ones (or rediscovering old friends). To me, it felt like the last half of the series was being stretched out just to cover more time, avoiding the resolution as long as possible.

It's really, really hard to pull off time travel correctly even when it's very difficult to use. In Heroes Reborn, there's a character (or two, but not at the same time) who can do it basically at will, with the only restriction being some vague ideal around changing as little as possible. This means that every single moment of drama becomes an opportunity for the viewer to say to themselves, "hmm, that could have been avoided with just a little past change." This kind of massively overpowered ability just kills the viewer's suspension of disbelief.

If you were a fan of the original Heroes, then it's probably worth watching Heroes Reborn to see what's happened to some of the older characters. Otherwise, don't bother.