Comics – Page 19 – Douglas Ernst Blog

Dan Slott, absent a superior argument, now sics Twitter followers on critics

September 30, 2013October 28, 2014by Douglas Ernst125 Comments

Superior Spider-Man writer Dan Slott has a reputation for not taking criticism well. His online behavior is well known, but now that he has issued marching orders to his followers like Mole Man to his troops, I will calmly and coolly dismantle his online rant for posterity.

An online critic is trying to weasel out of the time he implied that I (a Jew) was adding an antiSemitic element to my book.

Actually, no, I’m not. I’ve always been right here. The problem is that Dan Slott has never commented on my blog, sent me a direct message or asked for my email address to discuss his grievance. Instead, he’s followed me around the Internet demanding that I talk to him to about a blog post I wrote in May titled: Is Dan Slott’s ‘Superior Spider-Man’ really a Superior anti-Semite?

In Dan Slott’s mind, analyzing a character who wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghengis Khan in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world is the same thing as accusing or implying Dan Slott of being anti-Semetic (as if I knew or even cared about his heritage before he brought it up). Reasonable people can separate the two, but Dan Slott can’t. What Dan Slott doesn’t get — in some sense because moral relativism has warped his mind — is that it doesn’t matter what his intentions are if the end result is that a monster worse than Hitler is in Peter Parker’s body.

His first attempt today: Why was I still talking about it? It was “months ago.”

Seriously, why am I so upset that he took one word balloon out of context and built up an entire FALSE blog entry about it? In his mind It shouldn’t matter to me that he ran that REPREHENSIBLE piece and then punctuated his point with a picture of Jewish remains being removed from a concentration camp oven.

Dan Slott was the one who made Doc Ock say he wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Khan — at the exact moment he was on the brink of causing an extinction-level event. Not me. That context is important. There are certain critical moments in history where a man says something that reveals his true character. Doctor Octopus did just that as six billion lives were on the cusp of experiencing the apocalypse, and I wrote about it. I’m sorry if Dan Slott doesn’t like it, or if deep down he knows I’m right.

C’mon. I should drop it. Even though the article is STILL up at his site and he has NEVER apologized for it.

Dan Slott’s demand for an apology is based on the false premise that I thought or wanted people to think he was an anti-Semite.

His latest attempt today: The title of his blog raised a QUESTION. It ended in a question mark. It didn’t say I was promoting antiSemitism in a comic book. It only ASKED if I was. Therefore… It’s okay. I mean, don’t we live in a society where anyone is free to broach ANY question?

I don’t think he understands what the word “implying” means.

Poor Dan, the title was posed as a question — and then I answered the question: “Otto didn’t want to kill millions of Jews — he “merely” wanted to kill six billion people, which would just so happen to include all the Jews. Silly me. The guy who “just” came within inches of an extinction level event because he hated all of humanity is now housed in Peter Parker’s body.”

Yes, it’s pretty clear to everyone but Dan Slott what I did. He just doesn’t like it, so instead he’ll follow me around the internet demanding that I apologize to him. He’ll make it personal by invoking his Jewish faith over and over, and when a moderator doesn’t like what he’s done Mr. Slott will sic his 39K Twitter followers on me.

That blog entry, with the one word balloon taken out of context, the bizarre semantic gymnastics he makes to posit his “question,” and the graphic photo of the remnants of people I share ancestry with being shoveled out of an oven in Dachau– was put together by this unscrupulous person for NO other reason than TO imply I had antiSemitic leanings.

Again, I never did that. “Semantic gymnastics” is Dan Slott’s euphemism for “writing that doesn’t lend itself to Dan Slott’s personal attacks.”

The point of the piece was to show that Dan Slott’s “anti-hero” is in fact a monster worse than Hitler, Pol Pot and Khan. Want proof he doesn’t get it? Dan Slott used a Newsarama interview to compare a character who almost wiped out the entire earth to … Hawkeye.

“At his core, he’s someone we don’t really think of as heroic. But is he any more annoying than [former villain] Hawkeye used to be?” (Dan Slott).

That is how steeped in moral relativism Dan Slott is.

He used Godwin’s Law, the laziest and most offensive “debate” tactic, to compare someone you don’t like to Hitler & the Nazis. Why? Because he’s upset over Spider-Man comic books. IT’S SHAMEFUL. And to try to semantically weasel out of it is DOUBLY SHAMEFUL.

What is more offensive: Dan Slott’s indiscriminate use of incendiary names or my reminder of the implications of his indiscriminate use of incendiary names?

Dan Slott drops the Hitler card in his comic book as a throwaway line, and then gets upset when someone doesn’t take it as a throwaway line. Dan Slott takes his Jewish ancestry seriously, and yet he just casually has Otto say he wants to transcend three of the most reviled men in history? Interesting…

If you follow my feed and wish to show support, please block @douglasernst. And please do not give his blog ANY hits.

If you follow @douglasernst and are offended by this entry, please let me know so I can block you. I don’t want anything to do with anyone who feels fine supporting a person who would do this, leave it up on his site for months– and worse– try to walk it off as nothing wrong.

The internet can be a wonderful tool for meeting people around the world and sharing thoughts and experiences with them. It can also be a way to spread hate and distortions.

Hate? Dan Slott has called me “a bad person” multiple times now. I generally reserve that term for people who abuse their children, rape women and murder people. You know … guys like Hitler. Dan Slott? His moral relativism allows him to put me in the “bad person” category with the rest of them because I wrote a blog post he disagrees with.

Using Dan Slott’s logic, I should go ballistic on all of my friends over the years who have made Catholic jokes. My faith is incredibly important to me, but yet I don’t go around calling people “bad” because they occasionally jabbed at a part of me that I hold dear. I deal with it like an adult. He should try it sometime.

One of my most prized possessions are antique clay pipes from Masada that my uncle, a rabbi, gave me for my Bar Mitzvah. I may not be a diligent or observant Jew as an adult, but I look at those pipes and it reminds me that for the grace of my ancestors overcoming great hardships and prejudices, neither I nor my family would be here today.

That’s touching, but it does nothing to change the fact that one of the most iconic superheroes ever is now a character who wanted to exterminate humanity.

The thought of someone trying to tarnish my reputation by DISTORTING one line of dialogue I’d written– and using it to portray me as someone who would promote antiSemitism SICKENS me. The fact that same person won’t own up to it– and worse– would try to rationalize it away– just fills me with sorrow that someone who could do that even exists. And when it’s all done to score internet-points over a comic book? That just makes it even more pathetic.

Sad? Dan Slott doesn’t realize that a comic book can be much more than a comic book. When I was a kid my brother let me read ‘Maus’ by Art Spiegelman. I suggest giving it a read right now if you’ve never heard of it. Mr. Spiegelman — unlike Dan Slott — would never have Doctor Octopus just casually mention Hitler in one line of dialogue. If Doctor Octopus was moments away from exterminating all of humanity and he uttered Hitler’s name, it would mean something. Every word would be there for a reason.

Dan Slott doesn’t feel sickness and sorrow because I’m wrong; he feels those things because the truth can cut deep. Every word is precious to a good writer, and “one line of dialogue” is never just “one line of dialogue.” It is not my fault that Mr. Slott chose to use Hitler’s name in such a careless and haphazard manner if his ancestry is that important to him.

I’m taking an internet break for a while and talking to real people– people I can look in the eye. Sorry for the long vent. Had to get that off my chest.

Cathartic, isn’t it Mr. Slott? It’s kind of like someone venting after a writer kills off one of the most culturally significant comic book characters of all time and replaces him with a megalomaniac.

Here's a screenshot of Dan's tweet to his 39K followers with his re-tweet of my blog entry (which has since been deleted). But here's the rub: the internet is forever. — Here’s a screenshot of Dan’s tweet to his 39K followers with his re-tweet of my blog entry, which has since been deleted. Here’s the rub: the internet is forever.

And finally:

Dan Slott, the guy who chases people around the internet demanding they apologize for ... an implication ... writes notes to himself that he should never apologize to anyone. Classic. — Dan Slott chases people around the internet, demanding they apologize to him for perceived slights, and never stops to think that maybe (just maybe) the notes he writes to himself are subconscious attempts to clue him in on some serious projection issues.

Now Dan’s fans are taking a cue from him, where they can attack me over at Comic Vine because they don’t want to come here. You’d think if a guy was going to go to all the trouble to Photoshop my name into a panel, then he’d at least spell my name correctly. ‘Doulas’? Seriously?

The poor guy couldn't even spell 'Douglas' in his little personal attack panel that he posted at Comic Vine. Sad. — The poor guy couldn’t even spell ‘Douglas’ in his little personal attack panel that he posted at Comic Vine. Sad.

Big Bang Theory delivers punishing blow to Superior Spider-Man; Dan Slott feigns delight

September 28, 2013September 30, 2013by Douglas Ernst49 Comments

Do the writers of The Big Bang Theory read this blog? If not, it appears as though we’re on the exact same wavelength when it comes to Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Man.

Here is what I said on February 1st after Dan Slott stalked “The Main Event” and got intellectually body slammed:

“It was only a few weeks ago that Dan Slott thought long-time Spider-Man fans would be okay reading a rip-off of 2003′s “Freaky Friday” starring Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan — only with Spider-Man and Doctor Octopus. (Or was that 1988′s “Vice Versa” starring Judge Reinhold and Fred Savage?)“

Dan Slott’s general response to me over the course of Superior Spider-Man has been to call me an idiot multiple times while abusing the caps-lock button, to call me a “bad person,” and to try and link me with some guy I don’t even know who writes fan fiction Spider-Man porn.

Now, take the most recent episode of The Big Bang Theory:

Howard: What were they thinking putting Doctor Octopus’ mind in Peter Parker’s body?

Raj: I’ve been quite enjoying that. It combines all the superhero fun of Spider-Man with all the body-switching shenanigans of ‘Freaky Friday.’

Dan Slott’s reaction? Feigned joy.

Let me spell it out for Mr. Slott and everyone else who keeps saying “Raj likes the Superior Spider-Man”: The reality is that the writers just made a joke that cut deep — at Dan Slott’s expense.

When a character on a television says he loves Superior Spider-Man because it reminds him of the “shenanigans of ‘Freaky Friday,” it is the equivalent of a Little Mac power punch to Mike Tyson on the old school NES. Correction: a Little Mac power punch to Glass Joe.

Howard asks “What were they thinking?” and the response — accentuated by the laugh track — was that Marvel killed off Peter Parker for what is essentially a rehashed version of Freaky Friday. Congratulations. Freaky Friday grossed $110 million dollars, so using the ‘Slott Rule’ for success, we only have to wait a few more decades before people realize the genius of Lindsay Lohan’s portrayal of Anna Coleman.

As I’ve said before, I believe there is room in the Marvel Universe for Doctor Octopus to play the “Superior Freaky Friday Spider-Man.” I am not opposed to having a megalomaniac running around New York with spider-powers. I just think that executing Peter Parker (twice) so that Dan Slott could make Jamie Lee Octavius everyone’s favorite wall crawler was an error of monumental proportions.

Ask yourself this question, Spider-Man fans: Knowing what you know about how Dan Slott conducts himself on message boards, how would he respond if someone said that they hated Superior Spider-Man because it was little more than ‘Freaky Friday’ with Marvel characters? Now ask yourself why he took to Twitter to feign admiration for a joke told at his expense. Perhaps because it’s a little more dangerous to mock and ridicule the writers of The Big Bang Theory than it is to personally attack the average fan? Hmmm.

Thank you, writers of The Big Bang Theory, for delivering a KNOCK OUT blow to this abomination.

Update: Someone over at ComicVine shared my blog post. Dan Slott has decided that personal attacks and weird discussions on Trayvon Martain and Ben Shapiro would be appropriate instead of actually discussing Superior Spider-Man.

“Douglas Ernst was clearly in the wrong– and horribly offensive– in the WORST way a human being could possibly be. He has NEVER apologized for that BASELESS, DISGUSTING, and REPREHENSIBLE attack. He has stuck to his guns that he was in the right for doing this TERRIBLE and ATROCIOUS thing. Douglas Ernst is a bad person. Plain and simple. Why you people give him the time of day here I’ll never know,” (Dan Slott).

It’s good to know “All-Caps” Dan Slott dislikes me so much that he … reads my commentary on legal cases like the Trayvon Martin case.

Speaking of legal issues, Dan Slott is now making weirdly veiled legal threats in my direction. Dan Slott stifles debate? Who would ever get that idea?

“If someone, like you, who is in the habit of spreading gross falsehoods about me online, I am interested to see if any of them rise to the level of being liable and actionable,” (Dan Slott).

Side note: Here’s Slott’s tweet after (one would assume, given the timing) reading this post. All press is good press, right? Even if writers are mocking your product, who cares if the attention will bring in more sales. Sad.

Dan Slott’s ‘Superior Spider-Man’: Genocidal ‘Peter Parker’ is really just like Hawkeye

May 15, 2013April 24, 2014by Douglas Ernst39 Comments

Update: The title of this has been changed after a civil conversation with reader xmenexpert. To see the conversation, click here.

Dan Slott is incredibly proud of the Superior Spider-Man, both as a hero and in regards to sales. And why not? It’s his creation. And to top it all off, he has plenty of fans who tell him at comic conventions how much they love the book. But that still doesn’t change the fact that one could arguably call Doc Ock the Superior anti-Semite.

Quite a charge, is it not? Is Doctor Octopus an anti-Semite, or was his actual end game “just” to kill six billion people (all the Jews included)? Let us revisit the “Ends of the Earth” storyline, shall we?

“But the human race is resilient and the first thousand or so who climb out of the wreckage … they’ll rebuild. Life will go on, and they’ll remember me. For that new society I shall live on in infamy — a mass murderer worse than Pol Pot, Hitler, and Genghis Khan combined!” (Doctor Octopus).

Here’s a little history lesson from the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., to demonstrate just how evil of a man Otto would have to be to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghenghis Khan combined.

German SS and police murdered nearly 2,700,000 Jews in the killing centers either by asphyxiation with poison gas or by shooting. In its entirety, the “Final Solution” called for the murder of all European Jews by gassing, shooting, and other means. Approximately six million Jewish men, women, and children were killed during the Holocaust — two-thirds of the Jews living in Europe before World War II.

Got that? Doc Ock had a “Final Solution,” but it involved being a “superior” version of Hitler; he would implement a plan that would in effect kill all of the Jews instead of just those residing in Europe. And now he’s Spider-Man. In Peter Parker’s body. In fact, he’s Dan Slott’s Spider-Übermensch.

Kind of sick, isn’t it? And the only retort Dan Slott and his fans could possibly have is that Otto didn’t want to kill millions of Jews — he “merely” wanted to kill six billion people, which would just so happen to include all the Jews.

Silly me. The guy who “just” came within inches of an extinction level event because he hated all of humanity is now housed in Peter Parker’s body. And fans “love” the story. It’s what brought them back to the book. Congrats Mr. Slott, those are the kinds of winners I want giving me high fives and pats on the back at comic conventions…

With that said, it is also important to once again revisit how on earth Marvel fans could get a run-of-the mill genocidal maniac swinging around New York City in Peter’s body. Mr. Slott’s recent Newsarama interview gives the answer.

Nrama: With Superior Spider-Man, you’re writing Doc Ock as a lead character for really the first time, and a more long-term Doc Ock story than has really been seen before. We’re seeing the character put in very different situations, interacting with totally different characters. What kind of task has that been — approaching his mindset and his attitude in the position of a lead character?

Slott: He’s trying his best to be a hero, but he’s doing it in a very Doc Ock way. And Doc Ock’s an egotistical, annoying sh*t. It makes him an interesting character. At his core, he’s someone we don’t really think of heroic. But is he any more annoying than [former villain] Hawkeye used to be?

Hmm. Good question. Is Hawkeye “more annoying” than Otto, or has Mr. Slott’s moral relativism inadvertently produced Marvel’s first genocidal maniac superhero? Let me revisit the Holocaust Memorial Museum one more time:

The Nazis frequently used euphemistic language to disguise the true nature of their crimes. They used the term “Final Solution” to refer to their plan to annihilate the Jewish people. It is not known when the leaders of Nazi Germany definitively decided to implement the “Final Solution.” The genocide, or mass destruction, of the Jews was the culmination of a decade of increasingly severe discriminatory measures. …

After the June 1941 German invasion of the Soviet Union, SS and police units (acting as mobile killing units) began massive killing operations aimed at entire Jewish communities. By autumn 1941, the SS and police introduced mobile gas vans. These paneled trucks had exhaust pipes reconfigured to pump poisonous carbon monoxide gas into sealed spaces, killing those locked within. They were designed to complement ongoing shooting operations.

Question for Dan Slott: What issue did Hawkeye triumphantly declare that he would be remembered as a worse murderer than the guy who deployed gas vans to exterminate Jews? Just asking. Was that an annual, or a Comic Con exclusive?

Does a character go from wanting to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot, and Genghis Khan in terms of perpetuating pure evil upon the entire world to a “hero” just because a really good guy beamed his life story and “with great power comes great responsibility” into his head? Probably not. And since we’re talking about the Superior Spider-Man — the guy who blew a defenseless criminal’s face off — Magic 8 Ball says “Why would you ask me such a dumb question?”

Superior Spider-Man is an abomination. It’s an insult to Stan Lee, long-time Peter Parker fans and anyone with a shred of respect for the character. Sales may be fine for Superior Spider-Man, but history will not treat the book kindly. One day a group of editors with a working moral compass will be at the helm of the Spider-Man books and they will look back at this era and ask, “What were they thinking?”

The end of the book can not come soon enough, and the ‘Ends of the Earth’ arc tells us why.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Holocaust image that was previously here has been removed after reflecting on the request of a reader named Rogue. You can view her comment here. If Dan Slott had acted like an adult from the very beginning and demonstrated half the intelligence and grace as Rogue, it is very likely the picture would have been removed in May.

Update: Here is an email I received from a reader disagreeing with the decision to remove the photo:

“I think Rogue is way off on the sensationalism and especially the testosterone rationale. It is important to show what Slott so casually put in his dialogue and inside Spider-Man’s head. I agree they are real people with no voice, I agree it was horrible, I agree it’s grisly — but it was Slott who betrayed their legacy — and that needs to be shown. Obviously his own grandfather’s story didn’t keep Slott from writing a tasteless story with an iconic hero, so maybe that image drove it home. I respect Rouge’s opinion, but I wouldn’t have changed it. It was Slott who inserted this awful chapter of history into the comic,” (douglasernstblog.com reader).

Removing the image was an incredibly tough choice for me. The reader accurately sums up my feelings on the issue, but in this instance I think removing the image sends a more important message: How you conduct yourself with those with whom you have fierce disagreements will often determine the amount of progress you make towards finding an amicable solution.

Update: Dan Slott has called me a “bad” person and “immoral” for writing this blog post. He then was so incensed that I’m able to tactfully defend my decision that he requested the moderator close out the thread. In Dan Slott’s mind, asking if a character who wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghengis Khan in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world is the same thing as accusing Dan Slott of being anti-Semetic. Reasonable people can separate the two, but Dan Slott can’t. That’s why he sticks to forums where he can control the moderators and count on his devoted fans to verbally attack. His moral relativism has warped his mind so badly that he now puts my soul on equal terms with real life dictators and despots. Telling.

Update II: Dan Slott is upset that the moderator at Comic Vine put him in his place, so now he’s trying to send his 39,000 followers here to give me grief. Welcome! Here’s the abridged version for some of you:

What Dan Slott doesn’t get (in some sense because moral relativism has warped his mind), is that this post points out the obvious — it doesn’t matter what Dan Slott’s intentions are if the end result is that a monster worse than Hitler is in Peter Parker’s body.

How fitting that only 48 hours after my "Beautiful Music Monday" on Facebook, featuring Schindler's List, Dan Slott would call me "immoral" for writing this blog post. That's okay, Dan, there are many, many others that can see why making a man who wanted to transcend the world's most notorious dictator the new Spider-Man is so wrong. — How fitting is it that after my June 10 “Beautiful Music Monday” on Facebook, featuring Schindler’s List, that Dan Slott would call me “immoral” on June 13 for writing this blog post. That’s okay, Dan. There are many, many others that can see why making a character who wanted to transcend the world’s most notorious dictator into the new Spider-Man is an abomination.

At one time Marvel had heroes who punched out Hitler on the cover. Now, with Dan Slott's Superior Spider-Man, fans have a "hero" who wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of successfully bringing forth murder and mayhem. Congratulations, Marvel. I'm glad "sales" are doing so well for you. It's just fascinating you can still look at yourself in the mirror. "With great power comes great responsibility." Just because you can write a particular story, it doesn't mean you should. I guess Dan Slott missed that lesson when he was reading Spider-Man as a kid. — At one time Marvel had heroes who punched out Hitler on the cover. Now, with Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Man, fans have a “hero” who wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of successfully bringing forth murder and mayhem. Congratulations, Marvel. I’m glad “sales” are doing so well for you. It’s just fascinating that you can still look at yourself in the mirror. “With great power comes great responsibility.” Just because you can write a particular story, it doesn’t mean you should. Maybe Dan Slott missed that lesson when he was reading Spider-Man as a kid.

It’s April 18, 2014 — almost a year after this post was written — and Dan Slott is still obsessing over it. That’s what you call hitting a nerve. Deep down, he knows that my reasons for writing this piece were spot on.

Dan Slott YouTube service reply — Dan Slott wants people to believe I’m “deceptive,” a “weasel,” and someone who is an evil master of “semantics,” but yet I’m also “stupid,” “insane” and incapable of capturing nuance. Which is it? The truth is, he knows I’m highly intelligent. He’s admitted as much on CBR, where he said something along the lines of: “You know exactly what you’re doing.” Here’s the truth: Dan Slott does not think I am stupid — he thinks other people are stupid. Follow his Twitter feed and you will soon see evidence of this, as it manifests itself in his political tweets. Essentially, people are so stupid that they need 535 elitist masters in the nation’s capital to control every aspect of their lives.

The real story behind ‘The Hawkeye Initiative’: Liberals bashing liberals

December 4, 2012April 5, 2013by Douglas Ernst56 Comments

Not familiar with The Hawkeye Initiative? You should be, especially if you’re into comics. It’s a somewhat-amusing attempt by artists to replace “strong female character poses” with Hawkeye.

We’ve seen a lot of clever responses to the spine-twisting, butt-baring poses so many female comic book characters are subjected to, but the Hawkeye Initiative is particularly fun. Their mission: to take those particularly awful poses and replace the female characters with Hawkeye.

Why Hawkeye? It seems it all began when artist Blue decided to switch the poses and positions of Hawkeye and the Black Widow on one of their comic book covers. …

Then Blue and Noelle Stevenson (also known as Gingerhaze and creator of the fabulous webcomic Nimona threw a challenge out to Tumblr: fix those “Strong Female Character” poses by replacing them with Hawkeye doing the same thing.

The problem with I09’s Lauren Davis’ take on The Hawkeye Initiative is that it misses the story behind the story. Who are all these artists and writers and editors in the comic industry? What kind of sexist jerks would try and hide their objectification of women behind false attempts to portray a “strong female character”? Given that there’s a “war on women,” any rational human being would conclude that the perps are all very white, very Republican men. Right? Wrong.

Matt Fraction — liberal. Joe Quesada — liberal. Grant Morrison — liberal. Rick Veitch — 9/11 Conspiracy theory kook liberal. Geoff Johns — liberal. Dan Slott — liberal. Sara Pichelli — liberal. Brian Michael Bendis — liberal. Alex Ross — liberal. Mark Waid — liberal. And for many, many more you can visit the Four Color Media Monitor.

Is it possible that some of the allegedly-sexist poses these women are put in are in fact rather innocuous — but that critics are merely projecting their own sexual biases onto the images? I think so. Scrolling through the Tumblr account, anyone who has read Spider-Man knows that as a quick and agile character, many of his contortions would be interpreted as “sexist” if a woman was drawn the same way. Women have different bodies than men, an inconvenient truth that the gender police don’t want to acknowledge.

One of the biggest tells of The Hawkeye Initiative is that it doesn’t even require submissions to be from people who are actually fans of the work they’re criticizing. What if the image in question includes the Marvel equivalent of Ke$ha? What then? I guess it doesn’t matter, since all that counts to the self-righteous know-it-all are her intentions. “My statement about female empowerment matters more than my practical knowledge of the characters, their histories and their motivations.”

It may also be a shock to The Hawkeye Initiative crowd, but women are able to possess power, intelligence and sexuality at the same time. While even I get annoyed at the artist who is obviously obsessed with the porn-star-with-disturbingly-large-breast-implants look, I also don’t mind seeing a female character whose strength and amazing figure are highlighted. (Apparently, the creators of The Hawkeye Initiative have never been to a bodybuilding competition, where men and women contort themselves in interesting ways to show off as many of their best assets in one pose to audience members and the judges.)

Regardless, the next time your friend talks to you about the “war on women,” go to your stash of comics created by liberal writers and artists. Show them a good butt-shot, and then ask them if they’d still buy the product if it was a known Republican who was devising such demeaning poses.

Update: If you’re coming here from Reddit, just a heads up: I’d comment in the thread, but my first tactful rebuttal was deleted because that’s how liberal Reddit goon moderators roll. We can’t have the conservative guy actually defending himself, can we?

Iron Man 3 trailer delivers — Shane Black gets dark

October 24, 2012March 6, 2013by Douglas Ernst7 Comments

Iron Man 2 was a decent super hero flick. It was fine … but when one compares it to the first installment or The Avengers, it’s glaringly obvious that the studio rushed a half-baked product to the market. The only thing that saved Iron Man 2 was Robert Downey Jr’s pitch-perfect understanding of the character. Marvel will be under a great deal of pressure to get the ship righted, but after seeing the first trailer for Iron Man 3, it appears as though they might have succeeded.

The problem with Tony Stark (billionaire, philanthropist, playboy), is that even though he’s that cocky genius-bastard you can’t help but love, after three movies of his wise cracks, at some point the character needs to be grounded. He needs to be humbled. He needs to face something that takes the smirk off his face and makes him reassess who he is and what’s important to him. I’ve said since day one that bringing on Shane Black, who did a wonderful job with Kiss, Kiss, Bang Bang, was a smart move. Black is more than capable of directing strong action sequences, and he’s shown that he could write witty, compelling, complex characters. Marvel did itself a favor by bringing him on board.

With that said, the only thing that could derail Iron Man 3 for me will be politics. (I can tolerate Gweneth Paltrow’s “I’m just here for a paycheck” performances, although I hope she gracefully exits after her contract is up.) Marvel has a bad habit of flirting with liberalism in its products — even subjecting Tony Stark to weird Bush-Cheney warmonger allegories. While it’s been said that the new movie was going to be inspired by Tom Clancy — who is most definitely conservative — I wouldn’t put it past them to sully the series with politically correct gobbledygook.

Case in point: Iron Patriot.

Without spoiling things for fans who don’t read the comics, the Iron Patriot’s mere presence raises questions. Who will be in the suit? Is he a good guy or is he a bad guy? Will the calamities that befall Tony Stark be solely the work of The Mandarin, or will shady actors within the U.S. government somehow be to blame?

Take, for instance, the trailer’s narrator, who says:

Ladies. Children. Sheep. Some people call me a terrorist; I consider myself a teacher. Lesson number one: Heroes — there is no such thing.

If the Iron Patriot is somehow involved with the Mandarin or if the U.S. government is somehow culpable for the espionage that destroys Tony’s life, the movie will instantly lose credibility. If the message ends up being some sort of social commentary on how “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” I probably won’t be seeing Iron Man 4 in the theaters.

Regardless, I had my doubts about The Avengers and ended up being pleasantly surprised. I’m cautiously optimistic that the creators of Iron Man 3 are drawing from the same successful formula.
Related: Iron Man is America
Related: Robert Downey Jr.’s politics: A lesson for liberal Hulks
Related: Lone Avenger: Robert Downey Jr. soars above his liberal critics

Spider-Man won’t kill N. Korean soldiers or waterboard a man to save 6 billion

May 20, 2012July 4, 2015by Douglas Ernst73 Comments

Marvel has officially killed Spider-Man. They did it before with his deal, for all intents and purposes, with the devil. And now they’ve done it again by turning him into such a pacifist clown that his lack of moral clarity actually makes him an accomplice to evil. Correction: Writer Dan Slott’s pacifist-clown take on Spider-Man has made him an accomplice to evil.

Case-in-point would be Marvel’s current storyline, ‘Ends of the Earth.” In it, Doctor Octopus has come up with a plan that could seal the ozone layer and save humanity, but the technology — that only he possesses — could also be used to bring about world-wide genocide. Isn’t the ozone layer so … 1989? Regardless, Spider-Man is convinced his enemy is going to trick the international community into agreeing with him and kill billions with the push of a button.

That is precisely what seems to happen, which makes the “amazing” Spider-Man’s actions leading up to the event so maddening (and that’s not even counting the “one man’s hero is another man’s terrorist” moral relativism that’s dished up by a supporting character).

It all starts with a race to stop a number of satellites from being made, some of which are being put together in North Korea — home of the world’s very notorious, very real gulags. A member of Spidey’s team sets explosives at the factory, taking out all the tech and presumably the North Korean soldiers guarding it. Peter Parker then channels Jimmy Carter, berating the hero: “No one dies! Understood?” Sadly, it turns out the North Koreans — those giving direct aid in an effort to cause a mass-extinction event — were led to safety!

The story then moves on to an interrogation scene, where Peter must extract information from Flint Marko (aka, Sandman) as to the location of another weapons factory.With Flint not wanting to talk, a team member begins the equivalent (arguably) of waterboarding to get the intelligence she needs. Spider-Man acknowledges that he would have caved in to appeals for the “pretty please” approach if the terrorist foot soldier had pleaded with him for just a bit longer. Once again, a braver hero must pick up the slack for Spider-Man’s ineptitude. There is never really any acknowledgement by the characters that Spider-Man is out of his league, or that his “peace at any cost” mentality will actually bring out his worst fears: word-wide death and destruction.

Spider-Man Flint3 — The new Spider-Man waffles on water boarding a guy who could help stop the death and destruction of billions of lives. Let’s just rename Peter Parker ‘Jimmy Carter’ and get it over with.

There is really no way to spin this (no pun intended) into the character’s favor. If good and evil exists — if it is real — then there should be no hesitation by the true hero to do what is right when the moment calls. Not using deadly force for a purse snatcher? Sure. I get it. Freaking out over the death of soldier-scum enablers of one of the most vile, despicable regimes in the world? No excuse. In this day and age, Spider-Man will make a deal with the devil but he won’t kill a few North Korean soldiers when the fate of the world hangs in the balance and the situation demanded it? Thanks a lot, Marvel: You’ve turned my childhood hero into a morally bankrupt loser, sailing through life without a rudder.

My spider-sense is tingling, and it’s telling me Marvel’s Dan Slott might want to talk to Shin in Geun, who escaped from North Korea’s infamous Camp 14, before he writes another issue.

Update: Looks like Dan Slott didn’t bone up on the North Korean regime. See how Spider-Man has become a war zone liability.

Editor’s Note: It’s always fun to see Dan Slott’s CBR drones read my stuff and then distort my words over in their little forums. I suspect the reason why you haven’t tried that in the comments section is because I’d call you out on it immediately.

Spider-Man Ends of the Earth — Spider-Man’s moral compass broke and billions of people may have died. But hey, at least he can pat himself on the back because he saved the lives of the North Korean Communist goons who helped bring about hell on earth.

While I'm not into Spider-Man porn, I am the "NeoCon" who wrote about Spider-Man's absurd "no one dies" mentality proved what a naive loser he has become with Slott at the helm. Maybe Dan Slott never read up on North Korean gulags. It's a shame. — While I’m not into Spider-Man porn, I am the “NeoCon” who wrote about Spider-Man’s absurd “no one dies” mentality proved what a naive loser he has become with Slott at the helm. Maybe Dan Slott never read up on North Korean gulags. It’s a shame.

Once again Dan Slott addresses me in a way that I would never see unless I was stalking his Twitter feed or a kind reader brought it to my attention. I wonder why I wasn't tagged or why Mr. Slott didn't comment here? Perhaps because he wouldn't be able to make disingenuous claims without having them shot to pieces. — Another example of Dan Slott addressing me in a way that I would never see unless a kind reader brought it to my attention. I wonder why I wasn’t tagged or why Mr. Slott didn’t comment here… Perhaps because he wouldn’t be able to make disingenuous claims without having them shot to pieces.

Chen Guangcheng: Real-world Daredevil

April 29, 2012April 29, 2012by Douglas Ernst3 Comments

It’s the story of a blind lawyer, one who fights for the rights of those less fortunate. He’s hunted by his powerful enemies. He’s been forced into hiding. His heroism puts his family in danger. He scales massive walls in the middle of the night to secure his freedom. Sounds like we’re talking about the Marvel Comics hero Daredevil, right? Wrong. Instead, we’re talking about Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng.

The dramatic nighttime escape of a blind rights lawyer from extralegal house arrest in his village dealt a major embarrassment to the Chinese government and left the United States, which may be sheltering him, with a new diplomatic quandary as it seeks to improve its fraught relationship with Beijing. …

[With] Mr. Chen now believed to be on the grounds of the American Embassy in Beijing, administration officials are likely to be far more cautious in handling his case. His advocacy for the handicapped and for families subject to forced abortions and other coercive population control methods is widely known in the West. He also became a symbol of the deficiencies of China’s legal system after he was convicted of criminal charges in 2006 in a prosecution that Chinese lawyers — and even some officials in Beijing — felt made a mockery of China’s claims to be developing better legal norms.

We all love our fictional heroes. Millions will see The Avengers on May 4th, and millions will see The Dark Knight Rises on July 20th. But there are real heroes among us, and their stories are often times more exciting than what you see on the big screen. Since Hollywood types couldn’t even manage Red Dawn remake featuring China (they apparently went with North Korea to avoid annoying China), something tells me Chen’s story won’t be given the green light anytime soon. Add in his activism in opposition to China’s forced-abortion policy (the one Joe Biden “understands”) and it’s hard to imagine Hollywood investment in such an amazing story.

Chen Guangcheng may be blind, but he’s opening the eyes of millions of people to what Communist China really stands for. Like Shin In Geun, who somehow managed to escape from a North Korean gulag, the free world needs to familiarize itself with the story. We need to see what Chen sees. Tiny sparks can often create big flames, and fires are not always a bad thing—particularly if they’re burning oppressive regimes.

Batman is not gay, but Grant Morrison is liberal

April 27, 2012May 22, 2012by Douglas Ernst18 Comments

Seemingly out of nowhere, writer Grant Morrison decided he was going to issue a decree: Batman is gay. Morrison is a powerhouse of a comic book writer, so I assume that he thinks he could start the editorial ball rolling in that direction. And that very well could happen, even if he was eventually given some sort of “alternate universe” gay-Batman story to write. As he told Playboy:

“[Bruce Wayne is] very plutonian in the sense that he’s wealthy and also in the sense that he’s sexually deviant,” Morrison told the magazine. “Gayness is built into Batman. I’m not using gay in the pejorative sense, but Batman is very, very gay. There’s just no denying it.” … Morrison adds, Batman’s “gayness” is actually part of the character’s near-universal appeal: “I think that’s why All these women fancy him and they all wear fetish clothes and jump around rooftops to get to him. He doesn’t care — he’s more interested in hanging out with the old guy and the kid.”

If Grant Morrison was named John Boehner or Kurt Cameron this story would be plastered on cable news shows for the next 48 hours. Since Grant Morrison has sturdily planted his feet in liberalism’s camp the generally-bigoted explanation he gives will go largely unnoticed.

If a conservative comic book creator coupled sexual deviance and “gayness” there would be hell to pay. When Grant Morrison does it, complete with allusions to what Bruce would do with “The Boy Wonder” … nothing. According to Grant Morrison, Batman really should be called The Caped Sandusky. Where is GLAAD when you need them? Probably monitoring conservative websites, I guess.

Let it be known that Grant Morrison is a guy who pumped himself up with so many drugs in Katmandu that he claims to have had a discussion with hyper-intelligent silver blobs from the fifth-dimension. Perhaps the fifth dimension exists, or…perhaps the trip melted parts of Grant’s brain.

With that said, the universal appeal of Batman doesn’t stem from his sexuality, but from his constant struggles with his inner demons, and his obsessive drive to root out evil. Or, as I said in regards to The Dark Knight Rises:

“Bruce Wayne, like all of us, is fallible. Like many Americans, he doesn’t want to believe that The Batman has to exist, but “he must.” He must because there are evil men.”

Bruce is wealthy, and most people would like to be wealthy. He’s fallible, and all of us are fallible. He’s conflicted, and all of us are conflicted. And he strikes fear into the hearts of of very bad men. What’s not to like?

If you’re still wondering why someone would decide that it would be okay to switch a character’s sexuality out of nowhere, look no further than the writers of Marvel’s Ultimate Spider-Man, who created a half-black, half-hispanic version of the ol’ web head:

Italian artist Sara Pichelli, who was integral in designing the new Spider-Man’s look, says, “Maybe sooner or later a black or gay — or both — hero will be considered something absolutely normal.”

As I said before, it is normal! It’s only not normal when it’s shoved in our faces. It’s only not normal when political points are shoe-horned into a story for no other reason than to make readers adopt a Progressive worldview. Instead of creating a likable gay character with mass appeal, guys like Morrison wish they could just say, “Batman is gay” and have one. It doesn’t work that way, and all it does is annoy people.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to watch The Dark Knight Rises trailer for the 100th time.