Posted by
Fellonius Munch
- Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Comic books: most of us can recognize that they're not always for kids! Being a grownup and visiting a comic book store, taking your pick, and putting your feet up to read a good title is a sort of creature comfort to many of us. You can be a connoisseur of comic books, a true geek, and you can be open about your love of them, despite the fact that there's still one poopie head around that thinks it's a childish affair. Being a comic book reader can be just the same as being a reader of literature, or a viewer of good television drama. All art imitates life and it sometimes cuts close to the bone. Sometimes it's going to make you hurt!
 |
| "Oh, dem feelz…" |
That is the basis for Fanboys Anonymous's "Right in the Feels"—a journey through some of the industry's most gutting, saddening, touching, and shocking moments that brought tears to the eyes of many. What kind of moments in the history of our favorite titles tend to really affect us?
Establishing a story that readers sense will leave us hurting, suddenly snapping a character up into the jaws of death, sacrificing one life to save another, sometimes just exposing us to a painful secret in the life of a character we thought was all fun and laughter, action and adventure; there's no end to what can affect us, because emotional pain comes in so many forms and from so many different events in our lives.
"Right in the Feels" begins with five moments courtesy of Marvel!
(Click the links to the pictures, as they've been deemed too upsetting for advertising purposes)
1. THE DEATH OF SPIDER-MAN
Of all of the saddest moments in Spider-Man's colorful existence, you could take a name out of a hat as to which one was the most saddening. I chose the Death of Spider-Man story arc from Brian Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man not for the moment itself, but for the whole setup. Without spoiling everything for would-be readers, the Ultimate Universe has been something of a misnomer over the years. That is, unless you consider many actions of this universe's heroes as an ultimate collection of screw-ups!
Spider-Man's demise came around not at the hands of one man, but as a culmination of sacrifices to save Captain America, Aunt May, Mary Jane, and Gwen Stacey with a little help from Johnny Storm and Iceman, who were unfortunately a little out of their league against Norman Osborn and the Sinister Six. It then turned out to be Aunt May and MJ who saved Peter, only for him to be dealt a mortal wound in the explosion that also killed Osborn. An unintended bullet through the gut from a sniper rifle and being beaten to near-death by the Sinister Six; Peter would not stop trying to save those he loved, and in his final words he wouldn't have had it any other way—
Panels:
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -
5
2. LOKI AND BOB REYNOLDS IN MARVEL'S SIEGE
An untypical choice for a single instance of emotional reading, again, Norman Osborn is pretty much to blame for everything; but this is the Norman Osborn of the 616 (mainstream) universe: the crooked ex-Green Goblin who rose to power after dealing the final blow to the Skrull in Secret Invasion.
That era in Marvel's history, from 2008 and onward, was actually quite an emotional rollercoaster for many readers who saw a grisly end to some of their favorite characters. To see Osborn not only rise to power, but then divide and conquer the Avengers through politics, subversion, sabotage, and assassination—he was one of the most evil villains ever to come so far and to have the world believe he was a hero. After Civil War, so many heroes were permanently driven underground, including Cap, Spider-Man, Daredevil, and Nick Fury.
Siege saw Osborn use the seemingly unlimited Sentry (Bob Reynolds) and the conniving Loki to instigate a war with Asgard while Thor was considered dead, and in that time, even everybody operating under Osborn began to question their alliance. Then Sentry did this to Ares…
During the siege of Asgard, it was revealed that Reynolds was in fact possessed by the Void. Osborn knew this all along, but when he lost control of Sentry, only then did it seem that the heroes might not win the war until Loki revealed a change of heart and sacrificed himself in the name of his adoptive father, Odin…(panel 1 - panel 2)
After everything the readers had already been through, seeing Thor's surprise return immediately turned the battle in their favor. A literal army of heroes arrived to do battle with Osborn, including Iron Man, Captain America, Winter Soldier, Nick Fury, Spider-Man, and Maria Hill. We'd suddenly lost all hope again when Sentry had transformed into the Void. For Loki to suddenly have such a change of heart and then sacrifice himself is a redemptive tearjerker in itself. Then as the Avengers team up to destroy the Void, we see a broken Bob Reynolds look around at the destruction and ask if he'd done all this…
Bob Reynolds, the Sentry, the most powerful superhero in the last decade of Marvel comics! After all he had done for the greater good, with powers that could have lit a fire under Superman's arse, you're led to believe he wants to die so desperately before his final ounce of humanity is stolen. Thor gives him his last wish. There was also an epilogue to Siege—Sentry: Fallen Sun—that saw the surviving heroes attend Bob Reynolds' funeral. As a testament to the impact of his death, how many Marvel characters have had funeral story arcs? Aaargh, right in dem feels!
3. TONY STARK'S CONFESSION
Speaking of epilogues for dead heroes, The Confession occured after the assassination of Captain America following Marvel's Civil War. At Cap's side in the morgue, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers' best friend and then worst enemy, breaks down in a heart wrenching heap of guilt and regret.
Civil War began with a somewhat notorious event; the nuking of a school in Stamford, Connecticut, after a bunch of superpowered kids tried to get 15 minutes of fame hunting down supervillains. This led to the division of the Avengers, following Tony Stark's introduction of the Superhuman Registration Act, which in turn started the Civil War and gave Norman Osborn his chance to make some changes during his sociopathic rise to power.
From friends and allies to enemies, Stark and Rogers drew a line in the sand with citizens, heroes, and villains caught in the crossfire. It also led to the cloning of the currently deceased Thor, who killed Giant Man and made this war deadly serious. So when it ended with Cap surrendering—a broken man, although having defeated Stark—after having seen the destruction their war had caused, it was just one more gutting tragedy when he was assassinated at his own trial. Surprisingly, none were as deeply upset and affected as Iron Man.
Over the years, the deteriorating alcoholic that hid behind the genius and the swagger had leaned on Rogers, who had always been there for him no matter what. It was only in the event of their conflict that Tony had truly cleaned up and tried to be a better man. At the cost of his best friend's life, he realizes that it's all been for nothing. Hate him all you want, but you don't want to rub his face in it! And then they cheapened it all by bringing him back to life...
4. DEADPOOL'S DAD WAS A REAL KIDDER!
From the X-Men Origins: Deadpool one-shot, here is an amazing example of humor being used to touch readers when it comes to personal tragedy. In fact, I'm just going to shut up!
Panels:
1 -
2 -
3 -
4 -
5
5. FRANK CASTLE RESCUES A GIRL FROM THE SLAVE TRADE
First of all, I must warn you that this final entry is graphically and emotionally distressing, so if you're of the disposition to be disturbed by scenes of violence, abuse, and death, please exit the page for your own safety!
Garth Ennis isn't called the greatest definitive Punisher writer for no reason. Over the duration of his legendary run, through the Marvel Knights and MAX imprints, he made us laugh, he made us angry, and he made us call the Punisher the most bad-ass Marvel character of all time. He also made us afraid of the Punisher, because in the pages of The Slavers, we discover why Frank Castle suppressed his feelings so much. The antagonists of this particular story arc made him unable to do that anymore.
When getting ready to take a hit on a New York mob boss, Frank witnesses a hooker making a break for it—literally fighting for her life. Upon rescuing young Viorica, he hears her story of how the men that led the genocides in Moldova enslaved her, got her hooked on drugs, moved her into the prostitution business and killed her baby. We're actually faced with a visualization of how that news got around…
A lot of people are going to die, and we're already sitting here not knowing whether to throw the book down, crying, or to carry on. We do not physically or mentally know whether to boycott Ennis from now on, or to accept that he's introducing us to factual reality. Enter the Bulats, responsible for everything that we've already witnessed, and I don't care if you're motherfucking Gandhi: you want them dead.
The Slavers wasn't so much filled with great quantities of violence as it was filled with instances of violence that showed a true monster in the Punisher. Whereas he could have just shot a lot of people, nearly everyone that died at his hands was tortured in the most brutal way imaginable, and he still cannot make it count for the crimes he knows they're all responsible for. In the scene, he terrorizes information out of the now-deceased Christu Bulat's wife before he kills her. It doesn't sate his rage; it just makes him angrier, and we feel the same.
The entire arc is not meant to make you sick with distress, and there is some very subtle humor courtesy of a couple of underdog police officers that find themselves at his mercy. Come the end, though, after all Frank has done to get Viorica and the other girls into a better life, we're left heartbroken and unsure of whether she'll ever retain the will to carry on…
Ugh! And there we have it: five instances of gutting moments in Marvel comics. We hope you truly enjoyed yourself and that those of you who appreciate good drama in your comics will be compelled to try out some of these story arcs. To show that I'm not completely callous and that I do care about your feelings, here's a video filled with lots of warm, fluffy, cute entertainment to raise your spirits…
Sound off, fanboys! What are the most emotional scenes within the pages of a comic book you've ever read? We'd like to hear from you. Comment below and thank you ever so much for reading.
Posted by
Fellonius Munch
Fanboys Anonymous regrets to inform its readers that New York actor Roger Hill died last Thursday, February 20, 2014, at age 65.
Hill, who co-starred in director Walter Hill's late-'70s street gang thriller The Warriors, portrayed the revolutionary leader of the Gramercy Riffs: the man whose assassination leads to a city-wide manhunt to catch the wrongly accused Cony Island gang.
The actor, who had few credits in film, still worked as an actor for some twenty years, mostly in theater. He had been a participant of the Frank Silvera Writers' Workshop and had worked Off-Broadway and in touring productions of famous plays such as Hamlet. If you watch his scene in The Warriors below, you'll see where his captivating performance and bellowing voice come from.
The Warriors was a very unique little late-night action movie that has acquired massive cult classic status over the decades. Much of its strength—although full of action and being as gritty as it was campy—came from the caliber of its young actors. Amongst the actors from the film recognized for their achievements and contributions to film and theater today are David Patrick Kelly (Luther), James Remar (Ajax), and Deborah Van Valkenburg (Mercy). Marcelino Sanchez, a.k.a. Rembrandt, had also been very popular in television throughout the '80s (The Bloodhound Gang) but sadly died in 1986 of AIDS-related illness. Other Warriors appearances included Sonny Landham (Billy from Predator) as one of the subway cops and the late martial artist/actor Steve James (Delta Force, American Ninja) as a Baseball Fury. I think we could all agree, though, that much of the movie's magnetism came from Hill as Cyrus because he really set the tone.
 |
| A real heavy set! |
Later in life, Hill stepped aside from his acting career and took up a position as a librarian while he wrote poetry. He leaves behind an only son, filmmaker and TV show editor Chris W. Hill.
Thanks for reading and if you have anything to add on the life and career of the immortalized Cyrus and the man that portrayed him, please feel free to comment below!
Posted by
Orion Petitclerc
Welcome to my second review of the Guardians of the Galaxy comic book series, written by Brian Michael Bendis as a part of the Marvel NOW! initiative. In my last article, I reviewed the first collected volume, titled "Cosmic Avengers," to prepare you guys and gals for the Guardians of the Galaxy film coming this summer. I gave volume 1 a whopping 4.5 and 5 stars out of 5 for the writing and art, respectively, and touted its success in drawing a new reader (namely, me) into relatively unknown territory. This time around, I'll be reviewing the next volume in the series, titled "Angela," which collects issues #4–10.
Before I get to reviewing this volume, though, some background information is required for this outstanding volume. In volume 1, we saw the Guardians welcome Tony Stark, a.k.a. Iron Man, to their ranks—which include Peter Quill (a.k.a. Star-Lord and the half-human team leader), Gamora, Drax the Destroyer, Rocket Raccoon, and Groot, who also compose the team roster in the film sans Iron Man. Star-Lord laid out the team's mission statement pretty clearly in issue #0.1—that they would defend Earth from any extraterrestrial trouble his father, King J'son of Spartax, may cause. Star-Lord then learned from his father that he and a council of galactic empires had decreed Earth off-limits to any extraterrestrial interaction. A fortunate turn of events, no?
No, actually; for at the same time, a scandalous Badoon invasion force attacked Earth, leaving the Guardians as the gung-ho first-respondents in the absence of the Earth-based Avengers and superhero collectives. They managed to fend off the attackers but were immediately arrested by the Spartax empire for violating the intergalactic decree. The whole ordeal obviously stunk of a set-up, and the Guardians escaped custody and broadcast a message to the people of Spartax exposing King J'son's injustice against Earth's protectors.
Now, derailing from Guardians of the Galaxy for a moment to the wider scope of the Marvel comic book universe, last year saw the big Marvel cross-title event, "Age of Ultron," from which the 2015 Avengers film sequel borrows only its name. The event in itself was a huge, confused mess with poor execution (in my own opinion), but it managed to leave lasting effects on the Marvel Universe in its wake due to the characters' abuse of time traveling. Among these effects was the introduction of a very significant property into Marvel's vast library of characters: Angela, an angel and hunter from Heaven.
 |
When your debut into a new universe involves riding the decapitated head
of a Kirby-era monster, you know you're destined for greatness. |
Angela originally belonged in one of the founding Image Comics titles, Spawn, and was jointly created by the series' creator, Todd McFarlane, and guest co-writer Neil Gaiman (Sandman, American Gods, Coraline). Early in 2012, a lawsuit between McFarlane and Gaiman over ownership rights for Angela and Medieval Spawn was settled mostly in Gaiman's favor. He gained the rights to both characters, and many wondered what his plans would be for them. Then in 2013, it was announced that Gaiman was returning to Marvel to cowrite the final issue of the main Age of Ultron title with Bendis and to introduce Angela to the Marvel Universe. This ultimately culminated at the end of Age of Ultron #10 with Angela being shunted into the mainstream (616) universe due to Wolverine and the Invisible Woman breaking the time/space continuum.
 |
| "She's up all night for good fun, he's up all night to get lucky!" |
 |
Obviously she doesn't remember hunting Spawn
on Earth. |
All right, to the actual review. We find the Guardians celebrating their freedom in some intergalactic cantina (once again conjuring up parallels to Star Wars and the Mos Eisley Cantina), which leads to Tony getting lucky and living his Captain Kirk dream with Gamora and a big bar fight between the rest of the Guardians and Spartax royal guards. Once they go orbital, Tony, Gamora, Groot, and Rocket Raccoon notice that Star-Lord and Drax have mysteriously abandoned them before their attention is diverted to an alert that some space entity is headed toward Earth. They take off to intercept the intruder and meet Angela head-on in battle.
Angela's presence in the Marvel Universe means trouble according to Uatu the Watcher, but after a brief and decisive battle and a short term of imprisonment, Angela is released from the Guardians when it's obvious she means Earth no harm. She flies off to Earth's surface to see it for herself, explaining to the Guardians that just as Heaven is a myth to Earth, the same is true vice versa. The Guardians leave her to her own devices for a short while before she shows up again to assist them in defending Earth against Thanos' armies during the "Infinity" cross-title event. She ultimately joins the team toward the end of the volume.
 |
| All Fearless Defenders really needed was these two, and it could've survived! |
Once again, Bendis' writing really shines in this second volume, and with Gaiman credited as a consultant for issues #4–7, Marvel drew a lot of star power to deliver another immensely enjoyable reading experience. Tony is, again, completely humbled by the oddities and advances in technology he experiences firsthand in his adventures as a Guardian. Where volume 1 did Drax an injustice in development, Bendis delivers more Drax in volume 2 and we get a glimpse of the kind of character he really is. The banter between Groot and Rocket Raccoon still echoes with those same lethal R2-D2 and C3P0 quips that resonated in the first volume, and plenty of Star Wars references abound. What really shone for me this time around was Gamora and Angela's interactions in issue #10, in which we see them become something akin to best friends after having clashed in battle the first time they met.
The art in this volume continues to deliver stunning visuals to accompany the excellent writing. Sarah Pichelli and Kevin Maguire's styles compliment Steve McNiven's from the first volume in their strong sci-fi elements and distinct characterizations, while Francesco Francavilla kills with his much more classical, ink-heavy line work reminiscent of Mike Oening's work in the previous volume.
The real success, though, is in Bendis and Gaiman's handling of Angela in the Marvel Universe. They faced a particular challenge in reinventing and reintroducing a character who had been unused for over a decade and whose appearance and development in the Spawn comics was all too brief to warrant much celebrity outside of a cult following. I did read her first appearance in the pages of Spawn #9 and admit that she fostered some attraction in me (not just because she was a hot and badass red head with a 'do only the '90s could produce), but what Bendis and Gaiman did with her made me a new fan.
 |
| Alas, poor Groot. She slew him well. |
Guardians of the Galaxy, volume 2: "Angela" gets 5 out of 5 stars for both the outstanding writing and titillating artwork. Once again, this is another must read if you're interested in the Guardians outside of their upcoming film, especially since you most likely definitely won't be seeing Iron Man or Angela on the big screen.
Still raving to see the Guardians of the Galaxy film this summer? If you read the book, how do you think Marvel did with adopting Angela? Let me know in the comments section below, and stay tuned for future Guardians of the Galaxy reviews by yours truly here, on Fanboys Anonymous!
Posted by
Fellonius Munch
- Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Calling all budding comic book artists! Are you for hire? It isn't often an opportunity like this is put out there to the fans, but Diamondsteel Comics are looking to take on new talent, and they're asking their readers first!
Specifically, Diamondsteel, the creators of Saltire (Scotland's first superhero), are looking for artists to work on short stories, futuristic stories, and stories for children; and artists that have their own unique style and a great passion for their work. Experience is an advantage but is not essential. A sample panel of your art based on a Saltire script, which would be supplied upon request, will determine whether you get the job. You can contact them by emailing info@diamondsteelcomics.com.
For those of you unfamiliar with indie comic superhero Saltire, you just may be in for a treat. He is a character unlike any others currently gracing the pages of the Big Two (Marvel and DC) and Dark Horse. Saltire, as a strong Scottish character—a superhero of ancient times—is something of a cross between Braveheart, Hercules, and Lobo aesthetically and personality-wise. Because superheroes are a hard sell with smaller indie companies, though, they have to have an x-factor about them that the likes of Marvel cannot provide. Saltire really is something else.
 |
| It's so chilly in the Highlands, even his long johns are blue! |
Diamondsteel has also just released the graphic novel Saltire: Invasion, which is set during the invasion of Britain by the Roman Empire. When the Romans are at Scotland's door, all of their greatest guardians must stand against them, which is when this immortal warrior awakens from his slumber. Beasty!
Sound off, fanboys! If any of you have read any Saltire story arcs in the past, we'd love to hear from you. If you get in touch with Diamondsteel and one of our own readers ends up as Diamondsteel's latest artist, we'd also love to hear it. Comment below and thanks for reading.
Posted by
Unknown
- Sunday, February 23, 2014
In the modern era, I feel that when it comes to science fiction, you basically have two big players—the "parents," as it were—and everything after them are their kids. It's a bit of an unfair comparison, and I certainly don't mean to downplay a lot of truly great sci-fi work out there. (My apologies, Whovians, Browncoats, and Battlestar Galactica (BSG) fans of the world, to name but a few.) Still, I think it is absolutely fair to say that those endeavors owe part of their successes, if not their existence, to the twin trails blazed by Star Trek and Star Wars.
 |
| Someone took a wrong turn at Albuquerque. |
I'd say, without question, these are the preeminent sci-fi franchises in the world today. You can argue Terminator or Alien, but as good as those stories can be, they just don't match the cultural pervasiveness and influence of the Big Two. Obviously, this is due in part to seniority—Star Trek debuted in 1966, Star Wars eleven years later, in 1977. Getting there first counts for a lot, but the manner in which their stories were told, their characters introduced, and worlds built influenced everything that would come later. Yes, they were themselves influenced by the heroic myth or by numerous talented sci-fi writers, but that's all on the page. Guided to the screen by people with vision, the stars aligned over these two properties, and decades later, they're still going strong: Star Trek released a new installment last year, Into Darkness, and everyone and their protocol droid knows that Star Wars: Episode VII is on its way, slated to drop in December 2015.
Here's what's gonna happen: I'm going to round up everything we know about Episode VII and Star Trek 3. We'll take a look at what's on the horizon for both, examine their relationship, and see if we can't make some guesses of our own as to what their futures hold.
EPISODE VII:
It's been roughly a year and a half since Disney announced the impossible: George Lucas had made a deal to sell Lucasfilm, and the rights to Star Wars (as well as Indiana Jones, for those keeping score), to the Mouse House. It came hand-in-hand with the news that, yes, there would be more Star Wars. If you're anything like me, perhaps you took the news with a dash of incredulity, a generous helping of excitement, and a pinch of foreboding. For some fans, I'm sure the grief of the prequel trilogy is still too near; yet Lucas, the brainchild of the whole shebang who many (this writer included) felt had overindulged himself on said prequels, would be relegated to "creative consultant" on these new films without much direct involvement. Instead, the herculean task of getting Star Wars back out there would fall to new Lucasfilm head Kathleen Kennedy and whoever Disney would tap to direct the damn thing. As it turns out, the task would be appointed to Star Trek director J.J. Abrams.
 |
| Mind. Blown. *bwoooooosh* (More on this later.) |
News has trickled steadily out in the ensuing year since that first announcement. Screenwriters were hired: Michael Arndt, Academy Award-winning writer of Little Miss Sunshine as well as Toy Story 3; Lawrence Kasdan, familiar to fans as one of the writers behind Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, in addition to Raiders of the Lost Ark; and Simon Kinberg, who is just on a tear right now. (Go check out my article on "The Guys Who Bring Marvel and DC to Screen" for more on his resume.) Currently, Kasdan and Abrams himself are said to be rewriting Arndt's draft with with some input from Kinberg, who may be busier penning one or more of the Star Wars spin-offs Disney has planned. Arndt is more or less done with his contribution to Star Wars, having been given a send-off by Lucasfilm.
There is no clear indication of the direction the story will take. Numerous times, Lucas has talked about the different stories he had planned within the Star Wars saga, and gone back on those statements just as frequently. He had said there would be four trilogies; he had said there were really only ever three; he had said that Return of the Jedi is the end of the series, because it closes out the Vader story. Various statements by Lucas and others in-the-know suggest that the story could focus on rebuilding the Republic dismantled by the Emperor. Lucas' biographer Dale Pollock said that he read twelve outlines for Star Wars films, encompassing the original and prequel trilogies, as well as two sequel trilogies. He stated that the outlines for episodes seven, eight, and nine—the ones we're about to get—had a lot to offer in terms of action and character, and were stories he'd love to see as films. Reportedly, these twelve outlines were part of the package deal Disney bought, so any film they produce will still have roots deep in Lucas' lore. Also, like many franchises, Star Wars has no shortage of "Expanded Universe" material from which to draw, notably the "Thrawn trilogy" novels by author Timothy Zahn. Zahn, who met with Lucas to discuss his story, noted that Lucas' "original idea" was to center the sequel trilogy on Luke's progeny, and likely Han and Leia's, as well. This echoes what others have said about the new films, and while that is material that the Expanded Universe has dealt with heavily, the filmmakers aren't drawing on any of it, opting instead for a new story.
With that in mind—a fresh batch of Skywalkers and Solos to take the reins—almost every young actor in Hollywood has tested for a role in Episode VII. Names like Saoirse Ronan, Michael B. Jordan, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, and Jesse Plemons have been thrown around with most debunked as rumors and none yet confirmed. Ronan, at least, confirmed she did not get the part she auditioned for, but no less a source than Abrams himself mentioned Plemons as having read for a part while the actor denied it. (Hmm.) This leaves us with returning characters, of which we have several. The trinity of the original film—Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, and Harrison Ford—have all been more or less confirmed as reprising their iconic roles in Episode VII. Unofficial rumor claims that Abrams is reworking Arndt's draft to feature these characters more, leaving the other two films in the trilogy to focus more on the newer characters, potentially a reason for Arndt's departure.
Given that, Chewbacca is likely to make a return, and casting calls for actors of seven-foot-plus stature lend credence to this likelihood. It's also a foregone conclusion that C-3PO and R2-D2 will make a return, given that they appeared in the prequel trilogy and are essentially immortal characters. Given, too, that some Jedi have attained a form of ethereal immortality, it's possible we'll even see actors from the prequel trilogy show up. Ewan McGregor has stated that he'd love to come back, so we may see some of him channeling ectoplasmic Alec Guinness; and since this is still Hollywood, which likes to bleed franchises for every fan-pleasing dollar, it's theoretically possible we'll see Darth Vader or Emperor Palpatine to some degree. Both James Earl Jones and Ian McDiarmid are still alive and kicking. (I understand Jones is only Vader's voice, but that's the important part.) So what if their characters are dead? Flashbacks! Force ghosts!
 |
| See? Everything's fixed now! |
Here's my read: Disney, Lucasfilm and Abrams know how beloved the original franchise is, and they know many were displeased with the prequel trilogy. Understandably worried about their $4 billion investment, Disney will play it safe by trading on the recognizable characters and spirit of the original trilogy, while setting up the lengthier plot lines and new characters that will carry the rest of the trilogy. The story will be based, at least in part, on outlines Lucas made of the entire Star Wars saga, and we'll get a new film every other year starting in 2015. Whether or not Disney moves ahead with a potential fourth trilogy will depend on the financial success of this one, so…yeah, we may have long years of Star Wars ahead of us in addition to the spin-off films they keep mentioning.
STAR TREK 3:
Unfortunately, there hasn't been much buzz about the development of the next Trek. The few things we know: Paramount is angling for a 2016 release, to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Star Trek. To reach that point, writers J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay, who recently adapted the graphic novel Boilerplate for Abrams' Bad Robot production company, join Roberto Orci's efforts to bring the next Trek to screen. Orci, along with writer Alex Kurtzman, penned the first two films of the series, but Kurtzman is out on Spider-Man duty. Damon Lindelof, who produced and also had a hand in writing those same two films, is also busy with other projects; and of course, with Abrams out of the director's chair (though he'll stay on as producer), the hunt is on for who will helm the next voyage of the Enterprise.
Initial reports were that Joe Cornish, of Attack the Block fame, was being courted, but those talks ultimately went nowhere. Brad Bird, Bryan Singer, Jon M. Chu, and Rupert Wyatt have also all been mentioned, with varying degrees of probability. The studio reportedly likes Chu, who pulled their G.I. Joe franchise out of the fire. Abrams personally endorsed Wyatt, no doubt in part to his success in helping to revitalize the Planet of the Apes series. Worth noting is that Bryan Singer approached Paramount several years back with a proposal for a new Star Trek TV series, bringing the story back to the medium in which it was born. The Trek camp has been quiet for some time now, which may mean developments are forthcoming, but things are so up in the air right now, the director's chair could go to anyone.
 |
| Settle down, J.J. You had your turn. |
We know just as little about the potential story, but we can make some educated guesses. Star Trek: Into Darkness ends with the crew beginning their five-year journey—the classic mission of the Enterprise: to seek out new life, and all of that. We'll certainly find the crew in some stage of that exploration, whether part of the way through or near the end. It's a good bet, too, that the Klingons will be involved some way. They were mentioned in 2009's Star Trek, and a scene involving them was cut, so they made their debut getting butchered by Benedict Cumberbatch in Into Darkness. Remember, too, that much of that film's plot is driven by the notion that war with the Klingons is looming. "Inevitable," even, as Admiral Marcus calls it. I'm sure there are plans to include Trek's arguably most famous foes in some way, if not outright make them the main antagonists. As for our heroes, we know the cast, including Alice Eve's Carol Marcus, will return. The filmmakers have also said they'd like to bring back Cumberbatch as Khan (oops, spoiler alert)—though probably/hopefully not for this next film.
So really, compared to the bevy of info we've been steadily fed on the development of Episode VII, we know next to nothing about the next Trek movie. Add this to the fact that Abrams jumped ship and headed to Lucasfilm to helm the next Star Wars, suddenly Kirk and co. seem left in the lurch.
Full disclosure, now: I love both Trek and Wars. Trek got its hooks into me first, but there's just no denying the scope and fun of Star Wars. It's ingrained into pop culture that we geeks will forever war over which is superior, the basic notion of which I find silly. Both use different means to work toward different ends. They tell totally different kinds of stories. Star Trek is humanist, often philosophical science fiction: a vision of humanity's future, extrapolated from the times in which we live. Star Wars is epic science fantasy with elements of magic and mysticism seen in the Jedi and the Force. It takes place a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, giving it a unique setting free from real-world rules and using recognizable analogues for the sake of storytelling. There's no Earth in Star Wars, of course; humans, sure—but from Coruscant, and the Correllian system, etc. (and Alderaan…once).
 |
| Too soon? |
The relationship between the two could fill books. This, really, is where the "debate" comes from. It's fun to compare the two precisely because they walk such different paths—yet despite this, those paths have rarely crossed. For all the talk about the merits of Trek vs. Wars, they're rarely met head-to-head in the real world. Star Wars movies came out every three years from 1977–1983. Thanks to Star Wars' success, Paramount remembered they were sitting on their own sci-fi franchise with a rabid fan base. At the time, Gene Roddenberry was gearing up for a second Star Trek TV series, cleverly called Star Trek II, the pilot for which was adapted into 1979's Star Trek: The Motion Picture (worst subtitle ever) at Paramount's request. The sequel, Wrath of Khan, came out in 1982. Star Trek subsequently had fourteen years, from 1984–1998, of no competition from Star Wars, during which time seven films were released. The only time the two franchises met in the same year was 2002, an uneven year for both franchises: Attack of the Clones and Nemesis, the latter of which was the final Trek film until the 2009 reboot.
Perhaps inevitably, each has influenced the other to some degree. Lucas freely admitted that Star Trek was in his mind as he began creating the original Star Wars, and Roddenberry had much praise for his "rival" franchise before his death. It's widely held that Abrams brought a heavy dose of Star Wars sensibility to his work on the Star Trek films. Of course, this isn't to say zero competition exists—look anywhere for box-office data and a clear winner emerges. Star Wars has made three times as much money with half as many films, and the licensing and merchandise for Star Wars is legendary. Culturally, it's tough to tell which has been more pervasive. Star Trek is widely cited as an inspiration for gadgets like cell phones and medical equipment. "Beam me up, Scotty," and "Live long and prosper" are about as ubiquitous as "May the Force be with you," but perhaps not as well-known as "No, Luke…I am your father." Here's the thing, though: that old rivalry, whatever it may have been, is basically dead.
 |
| You know the line. |
Why, you ask? (I'm gonna pretend you asked.) It's because now both franchises have passed out of the hands of their original creators. Roddenberry died in 1991 after helping to develop each of the "original series" films and the spin-off series, Star Trek: The Next Generation. The one constant figure for the remaining Trek films, all featuring the Next Generation cast, was Rick Berman, a producer on that TV series who worked with Roddenberry in the early days of developing it. He was often accompanied by Brannon Braga and, for one film each, Ronald D. Moore and Michael Piller. Once the new Star Trek film series was announced, all of these names disappeared in favor of the, if you will, next generation of filmmakers that would carry on the new story. Exactly the same thing is happening now with Star Wars. For much of Roddenberry's later years with Star Trek, he was touted as "executive consultant," which sounds really similar to the role Lucas is said to be playing with the new Star Wars films.
You know, I've gone on long enough already; I'll just cut to it. Having Abrams on both sets of the sci-fi franchises is a bad idea. This isn't a comment on his abilities; it's about a distinctive style that I'm afraid will reduce both franchises to the same basic kinds of movies. The whole reason the two could coexist in the first place is because they were different. Roddenberry pitched his initial vision for Star Trek as "Wagon Train to the stars," or "Horatio Hornblower in space." He wanted to tell adventure stories about humanity exploring the next frontier, what we encounter out there and what it can do to us. It was this very spirit that rendered Abrams mostly uninterested in the series. He called it "too philosophical" for him, which basically means there weren't enough explosions for his taste. Subsequently, that's what we got in the rebooted series, melded with some recognizable Trek of old. This isn't to say he's totally screwed up the new films; I think there's plenty to like about them. I recognize, too, that movies have different demands than an ongoing TV show, and vice versa. For example, Leonard Nimoy had eighty episodes to forge Spock before the character appeared in a movie. His character arc had time and room to grow, time that Zachary Quinto didn't have. Thus, Quinto's is a more passionate Spock: his emotions are closer to the surface and are easier to rouse because the filmmakers want to get the point across quickly in a two-hour movie with seven main characters. Plus, y'know, alternate timeline and everything.
 |
| And space magic! |
I was initially disappointed to hear that Abrams was departing from Trek for Wars, because I felt the transition to a new director could be jarring for the flow and feel of the series. Now, though, I think it's great that new blood is coming into the next Trek film. New writers and a new director: it's possibly the best thing that could have happened to both franchises. Abrams took on the Trek gig because he essentially wanted to make his Star Wars. Now he gets the chance, and Star Trek doesn't have to be a stand-in anymore; it can relax back into its own skin. Directing Star Wars: Episode VII is a chance for Abrams to make the sci-fi action movie he always wanted to make, free of actual science and filled with big set pieces and characters with a galaxy in the balance. This leaves Trek to re-route its course, if you will. With two-thirds of the original writing team gone, the onus is on the newbies stepping in to differentiate Nu-Trek from Nu-Wars. While I enjoy the injection of action and energy brought by the reboot team, and while I have been critical of the series' tendency to lean over much on the prior continuity, a look backward to the kinds of stories told in original Trek could do wonders for the new.
We're now coming to a point where Star Trek and Star Wars are going to compete more directly than ever before, and for at least one film each they're going to do it while sharing one major creative force. Even though Abrams is only producing Trek 3, and it's likely that his involvement will be minimal, his fingerprints will still be all over the next film in the pre-production work that's already been done and in the influence of the prior two films. It isn't good for either franchise, or for Abrams, to be involved with both. Whatever he produces with Episode VII will inevitably be compared to his work on Star Trek and Into Darkness, and, similarly, Star Trek 3 will be compared to Episode VII. These two franchises thrive because of their differences, and I'm afraid one or the other (let's be real, probably Star Trek) will suffer unduly for the potential similarities. The best way to ensure the quality, and existence, of both franchises is to make sure they don't become carbon copies of one another. We know what Star Wars feels like, and it's building on familiar, beloved territory. Hand in glove; we know what to expect. Conversely, the exciting thing about Trek now is that it's fresher. Nothing is set in stone. This is a chance for the new Trek filmmakers to explore strange new worlds, because the new series was made different from it's predecessor by design. It's still developing, still growing, and can still become just about anything it wants to.
So sound off, Fanboys and Fangirls—got thoughts on Episode VII or the next Trek? Love or hate how both series are developing? Annoyed that I failed to mention Stargate or Farscape until the very end? Leave it all below.
