The New DCU: September 21, 2011 - A Simulblog

The following is a simulblog with Chad P. of Political Jesus, Josh Toulouse of Fat Train, and Arthur of Arthur the Lesser. You ought to be forewarned: there will be spoilers.

Chad's article, "Savage Nerdery: Week 3 of DC's new 52: Simulblog Reviews" can be read here.

Josh's article, "The New DCU: Sept. 21, 2011, A Simulblog" can be read here.

Arthur's article, "The Next Post is Not About Comic Books, I Promise" can be read here.

There were twelve new titles this week: Batman #1, Birds of Prey #1, Blue Beetle #1, Captain Atom #1, Catwoman #1, DC Universe Presents #1, Green Lantern Corps #1, Legion of Super-Heroes #1, Nightwing #1, Red Hood and the Outlaws #1, Supergirl #1, and Wonder Woman #1. Since there was one last title than the previous two weeks, I consider that a break. At this point, I think you know the drill. I don't like doing individual reviews, so I pick up on some trends in this week's comics and how they construct the new DC universe. As always (Are two previous posts considered always?), leave me some comments if you want to talk about what is going on in the individual comics. And heck, leave me some comments if you want to talk about anything I cover in the post.

The first thing I'd like to discuss is a conversation that you should be familiar with. It revolves around who Batman and Superman are. And why is it so important? Because on October 19th, we're going to see the two battle in Justice League #2. While Week One gave us a good understanding of Superman, neither Week One nor Week Two gave us any significant details as to who Batman is. Batman is Batman. My friend Zac told me, however, that the definitive Bat-book is Batman and I just read #1 this week.

At first, I was unsure whether Zac's proclamation was correct. Batman and Robin wowed me a lot more last week than Batman did, but I learned two of the most important things in this Bat-book. For one, all of the Bat-books are tied together in a really interesting way. When Batman brought Damian to crime alley in an attempt to give up living in the past (and even dwelling on the present) in Batman and Robin, it is because, as Bruce Wayne, he has decided to renovate the city and give it another golden age in Batman. Furthermore, in Nightwing #1, Dick Grayson is described by an unnamed villain as "the fiercest killer in all of Gotham. And he doesn't even know it." In Batman #1, Harvey Bullock shows Batman a victim who was tortured and killed with knives that have pictures of owls on them, and the DNA under the victims fingers, which should tell who his killer was, is that of Dick Grayson. (And let's not forget that when Kara's powers kick in during the action of Supergirl #1, she overhears the same conversation in which Grayson is declared a killer in Nightwing.) For another, I realized that I should stop trying to figure out who Batman is and try to figure out who Bruce Wayne is. In Batman #1, there are a couple of important scenes that tell us exactly who Bruce Wayne is. Reporter Vicki Vale calls him "Gotham's own Man of Tomorrow," which calls to mind the title of the first issue of Action Comics: "Superman vs. The City of Tomorrow." Also, Harvey Bullock describes Wayne as someone who doesn't see Gotham the way the people see Gotham. If, by the time of Justice League #1 and 2, Superman is the blur proper, with the ability to see through costumes and see the real person, he'll see Bruce Wayne. He's a newspaper man, so he'll know exactly who Bruce Wayne is. He's an industrialist, much like Lex Luthor, and as such, he's going to be an enemy of Superman. After all, Superman battled a wrecking ball in order to save poor people from being demolished with a building. Won't there also be wrecking balls and gentrification as Wayne attempts to clean the streets of tomorrow. Superman stands for the poor, who are not receiving equal protection of law, and Bruce Wayne stands for the wealthy, and though he speaks of high ideals, his programs could possibly make things worst. And for the sake of covering over his horrible past.

What we learn of Superman takes place in the pages of Supergirl #1. The take home message seems to be that the entire Super-family is different. Amazingly different. This reboot of the entire universe is first and foremost a Super-reboot. It could be said that the Green Lantern reboot happened when Geoff Johns took over the series and brought Hal Jordan back. It could be said that the Batman reboot never really happened, that Batman never really needed to be rebooted. Or perhaps it simply happened at Crisis on Infinite Earths. But my point is that some things are staying the same and some things are changing drastically. As for Superman, Superboy and Supergirl, it seems like their powers are drastically different, and judging by how long it takes Supergirl to realize her powers versus Superman, it seems like she might actually be more powerful than Kal El in this universe. And since her first appearance is traced to DC's present day (unless she can hear the future, because she certainly heard the events of present-day Nightwing), some other things must be true. Whatever huge role she played in Crisis on Infinite Earths must have been played by someone else if the Crisis remains canon (perhaps the original Dove of Hawk and Dove?). I am excited for two things more than anything else in this new reboot: 1. the Batman/Superman battle as a battle of the people (Superman) vs. the man (Batman), and 2. the new shape the DC universe will take with such a different Super-family present.

Whereas last week was family week and rage week and old DCU week, I think that this week is closer to ladies' week. Birds of Prey is an all-women's team. Catwoman, Supergirl, and Wonder Woman were a couple of the strongest titles. And even in the book Red Hood and the Outlaws, which surrounds the exploits of bad boy Jason Todd, the main character was actually Starfire's Tamaran body and the fact that she has loveless sex with anyone she encounters without ever really remembering so much as their name. While the new DCU has a whole lot of exploitation similar to this, from the clothing changing scenes in Batwoman to the flashy Harley Quinn on the cover of Suicide Squad to the half-undressed battle and escape scene in Catwoman, it also features some of the most interesting female leads and female stories I've seen in comics. I'm incredibly interested, for example, to see how Catwoman explores the confusing and erratic relationship of Batman and Catwoman. And Wonder Woman may be the single most necessary reboot since Morrison's take on Action Comics and what I expect to see in Johns' take on Aquaman next week. (Part of me thinks that we're going to be talking about Aquaman and Action Comics more than anything else throughout the next few months, but we'll see.)

Before I move on to my recommendations and what lies ahead, I want to make a note about the Legion books. Last week, I read Legion Lost #1 and this week I read Legion of Super-Heroes #1, and I really didn't like either book. Already, at the beginning of the new DCU, they are engaged in something of a crossover, and it honestly feels like we're entering both stories in the middle of a very confusing arc. Legion Lost had a manageable amount of characters, but the issue went by so quickly and I felt like we had little to no character development. In fact, I think some really important people may have died, but there is no emotional weight because I don't really know anything about them. I remember trying to keep track of the team members of Legion of Super-Heroes. I wrote down Chameleon Boy, Dragonwing, Phantom Girl, Ultra Boy, Chemical Kid (that was a particular favorite name for me), Colossal Boy, Mon-El and Brainiac 5, but I had to stop because every single page introduced at least one new character. My trouble with these books was that I was completely incapable of getting into them, but I also happen to know that they are simulblogger Arthur's favorite books. You don't see why this is troublesome? You see, Arthur has really fantastic taste, and he has great reasons. He is one of the few people in my life where if I disagree with him I feel like I might not understand something that everyone understands, like something went over my head. I understand that the word legion means a lot of effing characters, but is it possible that the Legion books require a pretty heavy investment prior to reading? Must you be familiar with the Legion in order to enjoy the books? Of course, the other side of these questions is: Are any of these books accessible to readers who don't know anything about the characters? I've found that I don't like books as much simply because I don't know the characters sometimes. Not all the time, of course. Animal Man was fantastic and I know nothing about him.

Well, I think those questions could keep us discussing for the rest of the history of the DC universe. Between now and then I think I should let you know which comics I'm going to keep reading. I think that Wonder Woman was the absolute best book that came out this week. I also suggest reading Batman, Birds of Prey, Catwoman, Green Lantern Corps, Nightwing, Red Hood and the Outlaws andSupergirl. I am a little on the fence about DC Universe Presents. There is something really deep going on in this book that currently surrounds Deadman, but sometimes it can be a little too wordy. I think I'll give it another issue or two at the very least. I think I'm definitely going to skip Legion of Super-Heroes, Blue Beetle, and Captain Atom. They didn't do much for me.

Check us out next week for All-Star Western #1, Aquaman #1 (with Geoff Johns), Batman: The Dark Knight #1, Blackhawks #1, The Flash #1, The Fury of Firestorm #1 (which sounds pretty tight), Green Lantern: New Guardians #1, I, Vampire #1, Justice League Dark #1, The Savage Hawkman #1, Superman #1 (so excited), Teen Titans #1 (even more excited), and Voodoo #1. Until then read the Josh's article, Chad's article, and Arthur's article, and leave some comments here. Perhaps about this...

Top 3 Batman Villains For The Dark Knight Rises

3. Catwoman

Last year there was an internet hoax in which Megan Fox was supposedly confirmed for the role of Catwoman in the third Dark Knight Christopher Nolan Batman film (which we now know by the name The Dark Knight Rises). I was furious. Megan Fox can't act and I've never found her attractive (with the exception of a couple brief moments in the film Jennifer's Body). Megan Fox as Catwoman was, to me, like feeling the need to throw up, feeling that poison welling up in your abdomen and your entire body preparing to forcefully remove it. Likewise, the clarification that this was a vicious rumor and that no casting choices had been made for the upcoming Bat-film felt much like that moment of happiness once a poison has been purged.

The fact, however, is that the conclusion of The Dark Knight sets the stage perfectly for a Catwoman storyline. (I would argue that a Batman/Superman story would actually fit better, but Nolan said he didn't want to introduce Superman in Batman's story. I also think that there is a significant setup for a Batgirl storyline.) Batman is a criminal. His existence is against the law. He belongs, like those he has brought to justice, in Arkham Asylum. He is forced into the dark underside of justice, and who better to accompany him than everyone's favorite cat burglar with a conscience.

Between the rumors that Joseph Gordon-Levitt would play The Riddler and the confirmation that Tom Hardy will be in the film but that he will most certainly not be playing The Riddler, there was a rumor that Inception co-star Marion Cotillard would be joining the cast as Catwoman. Of all the rumors, that is the strongest public casting choice that I have seen so far. At the same time, however, I think Cotillard's talents might be better used elsewhere, but I'll explore this later. For me, the greatest Catwoman was Michelle Pfeiffer in Batman Returns. Pfeiffer's Catwoman, like Nicholson's Joker in Batman, is the standard of comparison, if we deem comparison necessary. Who, like Pfeiffer, can do the role of Catwoman justice? The first thought that came to my mind was Kristen Bell, but maybe that's just because I would love to see her in that costume and I know from Fanboys and Veronica Mars that she's a geek. Naomi Watts would be fantastic, but I fear that she is getting too old for audiences to buy into this casting choice. Scarlett Johansson's already tied to the Marvel films, but would that be a problem? Halle Berry had already played Storm in two X-Men films when she was chosen to play Catwoman in Catwoman. (If you want to know where I think Halle Berry's portrayal of Catwoman fits in the spectrum, you will find it at the exact opposite end from Michelle Pfeiffer.) Kate Beckinsale?

In the end I don't know who the best choice for Catwoman is, but I know Catwoman is one of the best choices for The Dark Knight Rises.

2. Ra's al Ghul

There are a couple of significant difficulties with bringing back Ra's al Ghul for The Dark Knight Rises. The first difficulty is that Ra's al Ghul was killed in a train wreck in Batman Begins. The second difficulty is that resurrection via the Lazarus Pit seems a little too mystical and extraordinary compared to the tone that has been set for the Christopher Nolan Batman films.

I think that if we assume that Ra's al Ghul is simply not a viable candidate for the villain in the next Batman flick then we are underestimating not only our own imaginations, but the imagination of Christopher Nolan. If you remember how Ra's al Ghul was depicted in Batman Begins, you will remember that he was always enshrouded in some sort of mystery. The first person we believe to be Ra's al Ghul (Ken Watanabe) turns out to be a decoy and we find out that the real Ra's al Ghul is a man we have come to know as Henri Ducard. At Bruce Wayne's birthday party, Ra's al Ghul suggests that as an idea he is immortal.

So, how does the idea of Ra's al Ghul come back to life? I think it's possible that Ra's al Ghul was suggesting that the concept of Ra's al Ghul is something that any of a number of people could partake in, that it is perhaps more of a role than a particular identity. The decoy Ra's al Ghul may have been just as much Ra's al Ghul as the Henri Ducard Ra's al Ghul. I wouldn't immediately dismiss this idea. First of all, Nolan continues to describe his Batman films as a trilogy, meaning that there's a strong likelihood that issues dealt with in the first movie will resurface in the last creating a greater continuity. The League of Shadows certainly could have been behind some of the events of Dark Knight as well. Second, there may be a precedent for this transformation of the identity of Ra's al Ghul from the personal to the corporate. In Marvel's Iron Man, the character of Mandarin, originally understood as a martial artist who came upon ten rings of power in a crashed alien space ship, is transformed from a single individual enemy into a terrorist group known as Ten Rings. If the Mandarin identity can be understood as belonging to multiple individuals, why not the Ra's al Ghul identity? The mystery and identity confusion of Batman Begins are basically begging for this to be true and it gives us a chance to see a very Nolan understanding of the classic rejuvenation and resurrection themes that accompany any understanding of Ra's al Ghul.

Who should play the next Ra's al Ghul? Why not Tom Hardy? He's already confirmed and he sure isn't playing The Riddler.

1. Talia al Ghul

The solution to all of your Batman casting problems is Talia al Ghul.

Talia al Ghul is the best way to resolve the Ra's al Ghul/League of Shadows storyline from Batman Begins. You don't have to think so hard about identity and illusion. Instead you get to enjoy an incredibly beautiful woman in the interesting and complex role of Ra's al Ghul's daughter.

Talia has the dark side of a Catwoman character without introducing too many extraneous characters to the storyline. She belongs to the storyline as a successor to Ra's al Ghul. Similar to Catwoman, Talia al Ghul fills the necessary lead female role in Bruce Wayne/Batman's life that was emptied when Rachel Dawes was killed in Dark Knight. This provides an extra pay-off for comic book fans who know that she is the mother of Bruce Wayne's son Damian Wayne in the regular DC universe.

As for casting, here's where Marion Cotillard comes in. She's sexy and exotic, which hits the nail on the head for Talia al Ghul. She's got a rapport with Nolan, which seems to have worked for Tom Hardy. Most importantly, she can really act. I say this because Katie Holmes and Maggie Gyllenhaal were the two weakest links in the casting of Batman Begins and Dark Knight. Gyllenhaal was miles ahead of Holmes, but she was also miles behind what I would consider her normal acting capability. With Cotillard we could have an enticing female bat-villain who steals the show from acting titans Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman.

In the end, I am just happy that Christian Nolan is in charge. For the most part, I trust his decisions and I feel certain that The Dark Knight Rises is going to astound me and be one of the best films of the year.

Now to figure out how I'm going to pass the time until 2012. Any suggestions?

Tim Gunn on Comic Book Costumes

I'm in love with this!