Too Small for the Job

I was not a fan of 'W' as President. However, when tested by something few other world leaders or Presidents had to deal with during their tenure, he rose to the occasion and acted presidentially. He offered sober direction, provided leadership to *all* Americans, and swallowed his partisan leanings in favor of the common good as we rebuilt and came together after 9/11. He did, eventually, show his stripes when he fabricated a war with the middle east when none was warranted, but during the 9/11 crisis, he provided leadership and guidance.
45 has also been called to serve with an equally serious and testing event. His response so far has been to deflect, lie, and blame others. He specifically takes no responsibility for anything that has happened on his watch. The buck does NOT stop with him, but with some underling below him or somehow with a President that hasn't been in office in over 3 years and who specifically set up an organization to deal with just this sort of crisis, which 45 dismantled/fired.
Rather than calming words of succor for all Americans, his sense of leadership is to save the rich and the corporations and let the average American die. He has dragged his feet and looked for the chances to enrich himself. His petty grudges with individual state leadership have led him to act in vicious, dangerous ways that further harms the average American. It is hard not to come to the conclusion that he *wants* this pandemic to spread and kill as many people as possible, especially as it is strongly in those states he can't carry come November.
Even when other world leaders have been dealing with the same issue and shown what needs to be done to resolve it in the best and fastest ways possible, 45 has refused to follow that example. It is like he can't act presidentially even when shown a blueprint for success. He doesn't understand empathy, doesn't get the nuances of job, and can only understand fear, anger, and happiness. Which is probably why he likes authoritarian dictators so much; they use the emotions he understands in ways he understands them to lead. To him, they are good leaders because he can understand them. He doesn't get more subtle uses of power, moral leadership, doing what is right even when it is harder or he has less to gain from it.
All leaders are tasked with something big during their tenure. Most rise to the occasion. Some keep an even keel. And a few fail. Poor, overwhelmed Trump has proven incapable of leadership on his best days. Now that a true crisis has called on him to act, he has proven too small for the job.

There's Always One

America is the asshole. There's always one. We have, for too long, taken it for granted that we are somehow better, more capable, and a guiding light to the world. However, over the course of the last 30 years or so, we have lost that. We have let internal squabbles, strife, and partisanship take over. Now that a true world crisis is here, America is not only NOT leading, but we are also one of the best examples of what NOT to do!

America once led from the moral high ground. We always did what was morally right. Republicans introduced and got passed legislation to clean the air and water, both sides worked on social reinforcements, we all agreed that if we thought of the general people first, the rest would fall into place.

That started to change during Reagan's tenure. We started to shift the tax burden from the rich, who could afford it without it affecting their purchasing power, to the middle and lower classes, who felt the pinch. We started to roll back laws that protected people from businesses and from the government. We started to give everything to an elite few who, in turn, gave enough as was required to keep that tap flowing and to turn off all other taps.

Republicans stopped being interested in governing about 30 years ago. They became obsessed with power and money. Instead of governing and providing direction and a fiscally conservative long-term plan for the country and its people, they became singularly focused on gerrymandering, court-stacking, and taking as much money away from government assistance programs as possible. They especially targetted unions (which, while they have both good and bad points to them, were one of the primary reasons for the middle-class's constantly rising income level) and education (because if the masses were dumber, they wouldn't recognize nor fight the "elite's" more sinister power grabs).

This all culminated in the current Idiot in Chief, President Trump. What's funny is that he isn't even really the problem. He's a symptom of it. It is the succession of Newt Gingrinch to John Boehner to Mitch McConnell that is the problem. It is not having term limits which is the problem.

I have said before that the President is like the steering wheel of a car, Congress is the engine, and the Supreme Court is the brakes. The President sets the tone and direction for the country, Congress enacts laws to push the country in that direction, and the Supreme Court stops the laws that are not constitutional or that are flawed. Because the Republicans have been packing lower courts and gerrymandering for so long, they now have an over 90% incumbency rate in Congress, so the same people are always there, always furthering the party's goals while the President packs the courts with as many life-time appointments as he can. In addition, since Trump is so stupid, he is surrounded by people who can convince him to do nearly anything... so he has been openly racist, sexist, and money-hungry since entering office.

It's all biting back now, however. The world is in crisis and America is woefully underprepared for it. Trump canceled America's best hope at having a swift response when he allowed the pandemic response team, set up by Obama, to be fired and the office to be removed. He has systematically taken money from the CDC, FEMA, and other groups that could have stepped up and helped. He is consistently not paying any attention to what his experts tell him and consistently making the problem worse.

His only real contribution so far is to prop up the stock market... which is doing next to nothing to solve the problem. He is talking with business leaders and buying stock in their companies, a clear violation of emoluments, and then giving the wrong people tax breaks because he (or someone close to him) believes that, contrary to hundreds of years of evidence to the contrary, tax breaks will incentivize businesses to be better, to do what is needed, and to pass the savings on to the people. It hasn't happened yet.

Luckily, some in America ARE stepping up. Some smart people are no longer paying attention to President Idiot and are taking the reins and giving people real advice. Some of the more moderate oligarchs are putting money into places that will actually help. Businesses see that having the country collapse is bad for business, and are stepping in to do the exact opposite of what Trump says for the good of the country.

My hope is that people will see the current sham of a party that the Trump and the Republicans have become for what they are and will vote these idiots out of office in November. We need Republicans who, like in the past, wanted to help and govern the people from a place of fiscal conservatism but see that the people are the most important part. We need to see wholesale turnover in Congress on the Republican side so that the two sides of our bicameral system will start talking to each other again, start working together to get some progressive ideas and some conservative ideas passed. We need Congress to start looking out for ALL of the people again, instead of the wealthiest 1,000.

I just wish that a worldwide pandemic wasn't what was needed to wake people up. Now that it is here, let's hope that they learn from the issues and press for better leadership tomorrow.

DC Comics Continuity

Dear DC Comics,

I'm a lifelong fan. I have been reading your comics since I learned how to read. I have comics of yours going back to the mid-1970s. You have the characters I am most interested in reading. You have the titles I'm most interested in collecting.

But you're losing me as a reader.

You see, when you created the New 52, I was onboard. I thought you were ACTUALLY going to make changes to your titles, your characters, and to your history. I thought you were going to modernize everything and bring everything into the 21st century. Maybe change the race of some characters. Maybe streamline some history. Maybe start from scratch and keep what has always worked and throw out everything else.

But you screwed that up.

You see, you had a Green Lantern movie about to release and a popular Batman franchise already out. So the editors and writers of those two series were excluded from the revamp that was New 52. And those titles had an effect on other titles, like Robin, Nightwing, Catwoman, and others. Soon, the mishmash of some characters being changed and others not being changed caused internal story issues. For example, the entire "did Batman have a Robin or didn't he" conundrum you created.

You did do a good job in some areas. You made some decent changes to Superman, at first. I loved the initial changes to Wonder Woman. But the title that most closely fulfilled the promise of New 52 was Earth 2. You made wholesale changes to the characters, including changing races, sexes, and sexual preference on a number of characters. But, and here's the key, you didn't change the character of the heroes in question. E2 Green Lantern was still a father figure, a powerhouse, and an icon for others to look up to. Oh, and he was now gay. Jay Garrick's backstory and costume were radically altered. Hawkgirl and Dr. Fate's ethnicities and backgrounds were changed. Etc. But the characters continued to be the heroes we knew and loved, even if some of the specifics were altered.

The editorial positions behind the New 52 wasn't strong, and you let some writers ignore the concept of new and different while others embraced, which led to confusion. Soon, you knew you needed to clean house yet again, and you created the Convergence storyline, which was intended to get things back on track.

But you failed again.

The coherence of that storyline was poor, at best. Yet again, not every title and writer was fully onboard with the idea, and some were allowed to make very minor changes while others were allowed to make more sweeping changes. The readership, however, was left with a mess when it was all finished.

In my most recent week of comics, I picked up four comics that have Superman and/or Wonder Woman on the title. Each of the covers has a different variation of the costume for each character, indicating that each takes place at a different moment in time. But, as a reader, there is no set continuity with which I can read these titles and understand where they fit into things. They all seem to be taking place now, yet in one title Superman is wearing his old jeans and S-shield shirt, has lowered power levels, and is no longer dating WW. In another, he is wearing his New 52 costume, is dating WW, and has full power levels. In another, he is wearing a variant on the jean/shirt and is dating WW. On three of the covers, WW is wearing: her original New 52 silver/blue/red swimsuit costume, her silver/blue/red "armor" skirt costume, and her newest gold/red/black body stocking suit. But, again, I have no context or continuity to fall back on to tell me when each of these takes place. They all appear to be concurrent and now. Does WW simply change costumes depending on with whom she is fighting?

Batman is now a bigger headache. In the Batman comics, you had the Joker and Batman "die." Because Gotham City needs a Batman, you had Commissioner Gordon (really?!) take over the role wearing a mechanical suit to grant him extra-normal abilities and to protect him. Meanwhile, in other comics that are released concurrently with those stories, you have Bruce Wayne as Batman taking part in a variety of events in Justice League of America and Justice League. Again, they all seem to be taking place concurrently.

Your goal, after Convergence, was supposedly to make the entirety of the DC Comics universe available to your writers and not be so focused on continuity. But, by doing so, and by not clarifying when and why a character is missing, present, wearing one costume over another, or setting everything within some sort of time frame, you are simply making it difficult for a reader to understand what is going on. How is a new reader supposed to jump onboard and enjoy Batman when sometimes he's reading about Jim Gordon as Batman, sometimes he's reading about Bruce Wayne as Batman, and sometimes he's reading about both, with one being Batman and the other not? As a reader, aren't you more inclined to pick a couple up, get really confused about which character is which, and then stop reading all together?

DC Comics, I want you to succeed. You have the characters I want to read and collect the most. I want to look forward to comic book day each week, and I want to get those comics and immediately clear time to read them, because the stories and characters are that engaging. Instead, I am canceling titles, waiting weeks before reading, getting confused over the stories and direction the comics are going, and canceling a few more titles. If you can't keep me, then I know you aren't successful with other readers.

You need to clean house. Any writer or artist who won't follow editorial must be let go, no matter how popular he or she is. Next, you need to set up continuity. The readers don't care if there is a Superman in jeans and a shirt and low power levels and one with a full suit and high power levels, we just want to know where those two stories fit together. So, create some continuity. Say that X, Y, and Z are this continuity. Say that A, B, and C are this other continuity.

For example, let's say that you have a continuity that is "Past." (I would also be open to the Multiverse concept of an Earth X, 2, Pi, whatever... some delineator that says this is different continuity from the other stories we tell.) Justice League of America, Action Comics, Detective Comics, and others all take place in this continuity. Here, Batman is still Bruce Wayne, Superman is not using a full-on costume, Wonder Woman is wearing her silver and blue costume, etc. All these stories take place relative to each other and prior to any stories in other continuities. In this time frame, Superman and Wonder Woman are not dating; people are still figuring things out (i.e., lower tech, lower power levels, not as much teamwork, etc.); Batman does not start with a Robin, but maybe decides to add one somewhere along the way; many of the teen heroes are simply not here yet; you have fewer, but more well-thought out villains; there is no Green Lantern Corps or multiple colors, there is just Hal Jordan and a green ring; etc.

Then you have the "Present" continuity. This includes the comics Justice League, Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Teen Titans, etc. In this continuity, Jim Gordon has taken over as Batman, Superman has his full suit, Wonder Woman is using the new body-stocking suit, etc. Superman and Wonder Woman are, or were, dating. The teen heroes are present and are making a difference. The Justice League is no longer an American institution, but is world-wide. More villains are present or have been working for years. Teamwork is better. Bases are better. Things like the Suicide Squad have been created in response to the hero surge. The Lantern Corps and the plethora of other colors beyond green are starting to make an impact and be seen.

Then, maybe, you create a "Future" continuity. In this run of comics, you include things like Justice League 3000, Legion of Super Heroes, Lantern Corps of all colors, Batman Beyond exists. This is where heroes are fully formed, exceptional beings and we see the effects of years, decades even, of heroic pursuits. The children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren of the original heroes are doing their thing.

Lastly, you create an "Elseworlds" continuity, where writers and artists go to tell a story in whatever era of DC Comics they want. You want to write a pre-New 52 Superman story? You go here. You want to write a story where Hippolyta is Wonder Woman? Great place for it.

The point being, that I, as a reader, easily understand the continuity I am reading, understand that if I pick up this comic, Bruce Wayne is Batman, but in this comic, Jim Gordon (or Dick Grayson) is Batman. In this set of comics, I know I may not see some of my favorite characters, like sidekicks and teen heroes. But I can read those in this other set over here.

To wrap this up, I just want you to be successful, DC Comics. I want you to make reading your comics easy for both long-time and new readers. I want any reader to have a quick and easy time figuring out which characters they want to read and which titles to buy. Right now, it is a mess of confusion, even for a long-time reader like me.


Thank you,

A DC comics fan

Addendum:

Recent news suggests that DC Comics is rebooting its titles yet again in June. It will restart most/all titles with new number 1s and will more closely reflect the characters and situations in its movie and TV universes. I'm not sure this is a good thing in and of itself (why not wait to see if the movies are successful before doing this?), but I imagine that doing this will clean up much of the continuity issues I have discussed, above.

See here for more:
http://www.blastr.com/2016-1-22/dc-comics-set-recalibrate-their-comic-books-again-more-movie-and-tv-centered-line

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2016/01/22/dc-comics-to-relaunch-everything-with-1s-again-this-summer-with-a-filmtv-bent/

Land of the Lost... Indeed

I have railed a number of times on this blog about the penchant for Hollywood to remake things and completely ignore the original concept which made whatever it was worth thinking about remaking in the first place.

When I first saw that Land of the Lost was being remade, I thought it might make for a decent franchise. And then the rumors and hires started-- it became a Will Ferrell family comedy. And then I started seeing the first promos and previews and my fears were realized; this movie was so far away from the original concept of Land of the Lost as it could be and still call itself that.

Just in case my memory for the original was faulty, Sci-Fi had a marathon of ALL of the episodes. I caught a number of them; yep, as I remembered, the original was a "dramatic" children's story about a family unit being lost in a land where dinosaurs threatened them, Sleastaks wanted to kill them and take over, and strange obelisks could manipulate time, space, and the weather. Although there was humor in it, it was played straight for the most part and there was always tension.

The preliminary results are in and the Will Ferrell movie made about 19.5 million in its opening weekend. About 10-20 million off what the studio anticipated and well below what Will Ferrell's movies usually do.

And I suspect I know why: had they named this something else and not had Sleastaks in it, I bet it would have done okay. Or, if they had named it Land of the Lost and kept it true to the essence of the original (a family in peril, trying to survive) it would have done okay. But history keeps proving that if Hollywood makes comedies out of what were 70s dramas and action TV shows, the BO for each gets progressively worse.

I know that Hollywood thinks the average movie-goer is stupid. And sometimes I agree. However, you can't keep fooling them in the same way and expect to succeed long term. The first Charlies Angel movie did well because it was a new take on the light comedy/drama of the original. The second didn't do as well because it relied too much on kitsch and lost the fine balance. Dukes of Hazzard and Starskey and Hutch didn't even pretend to be like the original TV shows. And each did progressively worse.

The other thing that Hollywood forgets is that the audience likes sequels, prequels, and remakes... to a point. This summer may be horrible due to the large number of remakes that, frankly, few people care about. And I'll I'm seeing and reading is about the movies and shows being options for future remakes and reimaginings. Hollywood is forgetting that you need some originality to spice things up and keep the audience coming back.

I am absolutely tickled pink that LotL seems to have failed miserably and, if it succeeds at the 50%+ drop I expect next week, may not break $60 million. This sends a clear sign to Hollywood (again, along with Terminator: Salvation) that sequels, remakes, and other rehashes need to be carefully thought out and considered before investing in. Stay true to the original concept. If you alienate the core audience, you will suffer and die a painful BO death.

Thank god for Up! Here's original, quality storytelling that is making money hand-over-fist. Maybe someone in Hollywood will realize that originality is a good thing?