Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
New Mediums:Vagabond
Often times I find myself engrossed in new art and cultural mediums. Sometimes in the broad sense, I've been studying Eastern religions lately, more often then not it's on a more micro level, simply a new artist, but in the same broader mediums I frequent. Sometimes I become obsessed with a new medium, and stick with it until it's complete, or becomes less attractive. Sometimes I don't find it subjectively pleasing and move on. Sometimes I get the chance to experience something, but then don't have access to further my interests. This could be for a multitude of reasons. Why am I explaining all of this? Well, I've been thinking about a regular subject I could write about for this blog. This subject seems flexible, and interesting enough to do just that. My only parameters will be: It has to be new to me, and it has to be art in some liberal sense. Other than that I won't limit myself. Why those two things? Because, I feel that new things will keep me from feeling a sort of staleness, and art is something I've been reflecting on a lot lately. Rather than bore anyone with philosophical jargon, I'll try to express my views on art in practice. Here I go...
So Saturday I'm in New York City, on a Philosophy field trip. I follow my friend Frank as we (21 of us) break off to find places to eat lunch. Frank is following Dan and Dan's girlfriend (sorry feminists of the world I forgot her name). They mention they are looking for someplace Asian to eat. After about 20 minutes of no luck we randomly come upon Kinokuniya, Manga distributor. Apparently it has a Japanese food quasi-cafe upstairs that is both excellent and cheap (for NYC). After eating an amazing panini and trying some not bad sushi with some sort of plum, I ask Frank if there is a Manga if I should consider. Frank being the connoisseur of anime that he is asks me about my interests, and eventually falls upon what he calls "the manga of his favorite manga artist," Vagabond. So I picked up the first chapter and read the first half wile waiting to get into the Museum of Modern Art.
The first thing I have to say about Vagabond is that this is amazing. It employs so many elements of art that I enjoy so much. The obvious comparisons are Cowboy Bebop, and Samurai Champloo, but also Edward Gorey comes to mind as similar in the drawing style. The use of cross hatching and other line paterns to create texture and to seamlessly integrate while differentiating a background from a foreground. The characters are serious for the most part. They are also violent, sometimes to a extreme. Humor plays a minor roll, but it is good when it is there, and not wacky/over done as some animes/mangas tend to be. I'll admit I've never really gotten into manga before, so I don't know what's typical. I like the use of colored art on only some of the pages. It ads emphasis reminiscent of Sin City (I've only ever seen the movie, as for the graphic novels: as Judd would say, "I hear it's good.")
The plot so far has been OK, I'm expecting it to get a lot deeper. Basically some samurai wake up after a battle surprised to be alive. They kill some guys and run into some thief girls who steal from dead soldiers, then they kill some more guys that are bothering them. I'm only half way into chapter 1, so I'm yet to be too critical about the plot. The action though has been more than to my tastes. The way the manga is set up, there is real drama. It's exciting. If you like exciting, with tons of violence and great drawing, I suggest you try it out.
I'll finish off my post with a rating. (Keep in mind that this is only an initial reaction. I may think this is amazing or sucks sometime in the future, and you may never know.) Vagabond as New Medium: 8/10
Monday, September 15, 2008
CapTalk: Portland, An Exercise In Frugality
As everyone already knows, the Portland Trailblazers have possibly the most promising, young roster in the NBA. They have a young emerging core of Brandon Roy (going into his 3rd year), LaMarcus Aldridge (3rd year), and Greg Oden (rookie, due to his season-ending injury last year), and have been able to surround them with a surplus of young talent, including rookies Jerryd Bayless, Rudy Fernandez, and Sergio Rodriguez, along with Steve Blake (6th year), Travis Outlaw (6th year), and Martell Webster (4th year). Combine these guys with Ike Diogu, Channing Frye, and Joel Przybilla, and you have the most solid 12-man rotation in all of basketball. However, the most surprising element of this young talent is that the Blazers will have a two year window (2009-10 and 2010-11) where they will have around $54 million in total salary.
As I cited in my last post, the luxury tax level will be a little above $71 million next year. Extrapolating by comparing the increase from last year to this, I can estimate that the salary cap will be somewhere around $72-$73 million come 2009-10. and a little more than $1 million larger in 2010-11. However, as of right now, barring any extensions/new contracts, the Blazers will have about $53 million in total salary in 2009-10 and only $34 million in 2010-2011. This means that they will have about $20 million free to spend next summer, and about $40 million to spend in the all-important summer of 2010, when Lebron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh, among others, all become free agents.
This of course comes with some caveats: the Blazers will extend some old contracts between now and 2009. The team would be stupid to let Steve Blake, their only true proven point guard, walk when he's working for only $4.5 mil this year. Assuming he comes back at less than $6 mil, I would jump if I were the Blazers. Secondly, it would be more than stupid for the Blazers to extend merely qualifying offers to Martell Webster, Channing Frye, and Ike Diogu. When someone becomes a restricted free agent, they get assigned a cap hold by the league, which basically decides how much they count against the salary cap even if they remain unsigned and unwaived. This is especially limiting because the cap hold is generally two to three times that player's current salary.
Assuming in 2009, Portland picks up team options on Roy, Oden, Aldridge, and Sergio Rodriguez, they will still have to decide what to do with Frye, Webster, and Diogu. Say they let Frye and Diogu walk, and resign Webster at 1.5 times his old salary. Thus the cap holds on all three of them which would have been between $26 and $39 million gets reduced to $7.5 million for Webster. Next, let's assume that Portland decides to hold onto one of either Travis Outlaw or Rudy Fernandez (they play similar positions with similar styles involving being excellent slashers and fair jump shooters, while playing little defense). Fernandez would be much cheaper, considering he makes less than $2 mil a year, while Outlaw makes $4 mil a year and will be looking for a lucrative extension.
Thus, we're left with Outlaw, Frye, and Diogu off the books. There's some speculation on Blazer's Edge about the Blazers trading these three for Tayshaun Prince, who would be perfect in their system. If Outlaw, Frye, and Diogu all continue to improve, I can't see how Detroit doesn't make this trade. Detroit is on the verge of dying of old age (most of their core is over 30) and they'll be reloading by the end of 2009. Naturally this trade is a no-brainer for Portland, because their only hole is at SF, where they need someone who defends the perimeter and can make 3's, both of which Prince can do and a whole lot more. This still leaves the Blazers some $20 mil below the luxury tax level in 2009. Let's assume that Brandon Roy signs a contract extension for $15 mil a year (same as Chris Paul), and Lamarcus Aldridge also resigns for $15 mil (a little less than Elton Brand, more than Andrew Bogut), that still leaves the Blazers with about $10 mil to throw at a new free agent, say, Shawn Marion in case the aforementioned Prince trade doesn't work out. Or Lamar Odom. Or Mike Bibby. Or even Allen frickin Iverson. Not saying any of them would take $10 mil a year, but there are lots of possibilities. Imagine if Roy or Aldridge take one for the team and sign a below-value contract. Then there'd be lots of money to go around.
Overall, the key to the Blazers current flexibility are the fact that their players are signed on the cheap as of now, and won't be able to ask for a raise for a couple years. However, hopefully by the time they get around to signing extensions, they'll have earned them.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Comix Zone: Batman: The Dark Knight Returns
Since Matt reviewed The Dark Knight, it's only fitting that the first Comix Zone review be of Frank Miller's classic, the book that gave him fame in the comics industry.The book that is considered, along with Watchmen, to be responsible for the more mature comics that followed in the 90's. The book that is considered by most to be the best Batman comic off all time. The story that took Batman out of the cheesy precedent set by the 1960's television series. Hell, there is even an episode of Batman: The Animated Series based on this. I'm talking about the 1986 book, Batman: The Dark Knight Returns.
The book takes place in the near future. Most of the superheroes and supervillains are either retired, dead, or in the case of supervillains, incarcerated. Bruce Wayne, now an old man, has retired from being Batman. Commissioner Gordon, an even older man, is still chief of the Gotham City Police and is aware that Wayne was Batman. Jason Todd, the second Robin is dead. And Alfred is still a butler.....and realllllllly old.
In Batman's long absence, a new generation of young villains has arisen, a gang called the mutants. Calling the mutants a gang is actually putting it lightly; a small army is a better description. The mutants terrorize Gotham City with a level of violence not seen before, and only matched by the most dangerous of the old generation's villains.
As he lives day by day watching crime increase, the urges of becoming Batman continually try to resurface, with Wayne pushing them back because of a promise he made to Jason Todd about never being Batman again. (The circumstances of the promise and why it was made is never stated, although it's probably related to Todd's death.)
However, after being attacked by two mutants in the alley where his parents die, and after the reemergence of Two-Face, Wayne can no longer hold back the impulses. He wears the cape and cowl once again to battle Two-Face and the Mutants. Along the way Batman is saved in a fight against the leader of the mutants by a 13 year old girl named Carrie Kelly, who becomes the new Robin.
Along with Two-Face and the Mutants, Batman and Robin battle other threats. After Gordon is forced to resign, a new commissioner named Ellen Yindel vows to capture Batman. Batman's greatest foe, The Joker returns, and he and Batman face off one more time, this time the final battle between the two. But Batman's last fight in the story will prove to be his greatest, as the government orders an agent to stop Batman. An agent who happens to be the other half of the World's Finest....
I'd have to agree that TDK is the best Batman comic ever made. So many things go into this. First, Miller's artwork fits Batman like no other. His dark, gritty style is the essence of Batman. And the way Gotham City is drawn, makes it different yet familiar. (Not super different though; this isn't Batman Beyond.) The same goes with some of the characters. Miller's Joker looks different, almost effeminate. But it's still The Joker. And when The Joker does his laugh, you know for damn sure it's the same old Joker.
Art only goes so far though. Luckily, the writing doesn't disappoint. Miller uses his noir style writing that was last seen on his run on Daredevil, and that would be later used in Sin City. This fits Batman like a glove, and at the same time is different than anything done before it. But Miller pulls out a few other tricks too. Batman being old is current theme. Although still better fit than most young men, Batman is still old, and it shows in the art and the writing. Batman says many times in the narration that he used to have better reaction time, and there are moments when he is almost killed by actions that his younger self could more easily overcome. The extreme case is Batman's first fight with the Mutant leader, who would have killed Batman if not for the intervention of Robin.
The other thing Miller does in the writing, and what was unique for the time, is that Miller often shows clips from the Gotham news. During these times, the reader gets to see the public opinion on Batman's return. Some responses approve of Batman, others do not. Some responses are smart, some are dumb. But there is a lot of social and political commentary, at one point even about nuclear war and paranoia resulting from it. (Keep in mind, this was written in the 80's, towards the end of the cold war). Public opinion about Batman would be used in later works, most recently the movie, The Dark Knight.
If your a Batman fan, or just a fan of good comics or even a fan of good stories, give this a read. It is influential not just in comics, but in media overall. You can thank The Dark Knight Returns for things like Lost, Heroes, and.......well The Dark Knight.
5 out of 5
Motion Picture Magic: The Dark Knight
O.K. I know this is everyone and his brother's favorite movie of all time. And if you want to find a review of this movie you can google it to find a billion of them from many different angles. This being said I wanted to add my two cents anyway. I may not add anything new, but I've seen it three times now and was completely enthralled each time.
Before I jump into the movie I should add some prefaces. First, I'm a complete geek. This is probably obvious if you've read any of my other posts. Second when it comes to comic book characters Batman has always been my favorite. He was just darker, smarter, and just all around cooler. I watched the 1960's Batman when I was a toddler. When I got a little older I watched Batman: The Animated Series. Batman TAS really got me hooked on the character. The creators, Bruce Timm and Paul Dini, did everything they could to make Batman dark, edgy and cool. Eventually I saw the original movie and it's sequel, which were both decent flicks. The Schumacher directed movies of the 90's were pretty much trash, but they didn't really change my view of Batman. When Batman TAS became Justice League (followed by JLU), the creators went out of the way to make their batman character compelling to watch. His witty cynicism, and the ability to use his detective skills and mind to solve problems made him a superior hero to the others. I could go on with other Batman media, but you get the picture.
Getting back on track with the discussion of The Dark Knight. The batman character in the Dark Knight I think is a close second to the Animated Series (and it's predecessors). Gone is the witty cynicism, but it is replaced by an equally if not deeper character. The Batman of the Dark Knight is not fully sure of himself. This is hinted at in Batman Begins, but reaches fruition in this movie. One of the main plot points of the movie is Batman's quest to help Harvey Dent take over his role as the city's protector. Batman wants Dent because Dent is the district attorney, what he does is legal and doesn't require a mask. The movie makes a point of empathizing with Batman's desire to be Dent, from his ability to work in the open, to his relationship with Rachel Dawns. Christan Bale does a remarkable job expressing these emotions in the character. Interestingly though, it is Bruce Wayne who elicits these expressions. Once he puts on the cape and cowl, he's all business.
The villain of the film is the Joker. The late Heath Ledger did such an amazing job with his portrayal of the Joker. Coupled with the amazing writing of Christopher Nolan, the Joker steals the spotlight from all the other characters. The Joker of the Dark Knight is not really like any other I've seen. Sure he's still dressed like a clown, but gone are the gimmicks. Also missing is the wackiness. He's still insane, but in such a way that as an audience member you find yourself drawn in by him. The Joker represents something that is very rare to find on film. He has a completely different set of values. Most villains twist or break normal codes of good and evil. The Joker doesn't even compare. He doesn't know what he's doing is evil, he knows normal people think it is, but to him it's some great work of classical music or art. His philosophy is chaos or nihilism, he wants to show the world that it's highest values are meaningless, that deep down we are all just like him. And just before Batman inevitably saves the day, you'll wonder whether it's true.
The other notable member of the cast is Gary Oldman playing LT./Commissioner Gordon. Most portrayals of Gordon have either been as him as a victim or a hard nose cop who begrudgingly steps out of Batman's way. Here Gordon is Batman's partner in arms. Ironically while Batman is busy trying to make Harvey Dent into Gotham's White Knight, Gordon is fulfilling just that role. Oldman shows in near perfection Gordon's hard work, tenacity, and fear in a world dominated by forces not fit for your average police officer.
What makes this film great is the underlying philosophical issues that drive the plot and the characters. Batman is vigilante justice, taking the mantle of societies values, which inevitably leads to questioning it's own righteousness, and necessity. The Joker is Nihilism, questioning the very structure of society attempting to shatter it's values. Harvey Dent represents chance. In a world of chaos maybe the only justice is chance. Philosophical discussions of the nature of Justice are as old as Philosophy itself, but this movie paints a picture of these debates that is gripping. You don't even have to appreciate that they're there. The forces at work are so alluring it's almost impossible to not get caught up in it. As the Joker says at the end of the film, "so this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."
Trailer:
