TRENDING TODAY IS...................

I'm not totally sure what's trending, ebola, marijuana, Batman vs Superman. I don't know but it all sounds interesting so take some of those topics and go ahead and start a conversation with the person next to you. Don't sully the interaction with political disagreements and religious strife, just have a conversation because  life is too short to keep your head up your ass.

X MEN, STILL GREAT AFTER 14 YEARS

I have to say that the X Men franchise simply continues to improve, enter X Men Days of Future Past. I'm not a fanboy and I really don't care to get into comic book history because, honestly, I'm sure I'll lose in terms of little obscure details. From what I saw this particular film stayed fairly true to source material, something that most films rarely ever do. I love the fact that the film itself tells a story that's well connected to previous films in the franchise.

This particular movie picks up where the last Wolverine installment left of and gives first class a lot more prominence. Sure the whole story is turned upside down and essentially the timeline established by the first X Men film is shaken to its core but it's okay because in the Marvel Universe X Men is the on title that takes heroes to a place unlike any other title.

X Men goes beyond the logical into the impossible, people with special abilities fighting for their existence and the salvation of mankind. There is still a powerful future for this franchise provided that they keep hitting the parts of the stories that really meant something as far as the books are concerned. Let's see what happens, hopefully Disney won't fingerbang this like they have so many other things.

COMICS ON TV

I recently read that Agents of SHIELD is steadily losing viewers which brings to mind something I've always thought, extremes with comic book stories are not very good in television. When Batman came out in 1966 it was a lot of camp and not too much substance. That series worked because back in those days television was not a charged medium. The Superman series starring George Reeves was geared toward kids and it had been on air in the 1950's.

Superman was highly predictable and did not have much depth since it only had a 30 minute timespan in which to tell a full story. If you fast forward to the 70's you have shows like Shazam, Wonder Woman, and the ill fated Justice League, series.

All of these shows failed to get long runs out of the gate because by the 70's there were more shows chose from and comic books were not really as marketable as before. With films such as Star Wars it seemed like comic books would be doomed. Yes Superman was released in 1978 and it was a huge box office hit but beyond that it seemed like the genre did not really have a life in the small screen.

Fast forward to the early 90's and it was more of the same with failed attempts in shows such as the Flash, and Justice League. It wasn't until Smallville that there was a real success with heroes. Now we look at SHIELD and see what's wrong.

People expect all out action and special effects sometimes and SHIELD has not gone that route. SHIELD has taken to slowly telling a story that relies on depth mixed with action. A show like Smallville began to step away from the soap opera in order to bring in more comic book aspects and while that worked, it took a little bit of wind from the shows sails. As far as SHIELD goes there's a possibility that it can nail the right balance if given a chance. People should not view it as just another comic book show. Perhaps the show is lagging because it only has one so far compelling character in terms of Agent Coulson.

I hope the show stays on the air because I think it's a great show.

FROM CLOONEY TO AFFLECK: BATMAN ADVICE

It's been reported, and I guess made official, that Ben Affleck is the new Batman and will star in the sequel to Man of Steel. I like Ben Affleck, I thought he was okay as Daredevil and I thought he did a great job playing George Reeves in Hollywoodland. I think that Affleck is not really the guy for the Batman role. Affleck just isn't that brooding, even when he did Daredevil it seemed like he was forcing his tortured portion. I am also assuming he got some advice from George Clooney and that advice was probably dispensed over drinks in a hot tub with Danny DeVito. I assume the conversation went like this:

Clooney: So they finally found someone worthy of my role.

Affleck: Yeah, wicked awesome.

Clooney: You have a challenge ahead of you, my nipple Batman was incredible.

Affleck: Irregardless I will be be the man.

Clooney: Who will be Superman?

Affleck: That Henry bastard, he's wicked good.

Clooney: Who will be Alfred?

Affleck: Either Mel Gibson or Bob Saget.

DeVito: Hey fuckers Rhea can be a great Catwoman.

Clooney: Remember the suits must always have nipples. Any word on Matt?

Affleck: He may play the part of The Demon.

Clooney: Hahahah, fantastic.

I'm sure that's not really what happened but when you think of the fact that George Clooney and Ben Affleck teamed up to bring back the porno beard, anything can happen. Batman is a popular character but it takes a special kind of person to pull it off. I thought Bale was good even though he gave Batman some serious throat cancer. Let's see what happens down the line, good luck to Ben Affleck.

CAN SUPERMAN EVER REALLY DELIVER?

Now that Man of Steel is coming out it's fair to ask if Superman can once again deliver, as it did once before. I think it's a tall order especially considering a number of factors that have a bearing on the success of Superman. Superman's costume, his attitude and the level of willingness to engage and less than kind practices, all matter. People want to bring up the success of the original 1940's serials and the 1950's series when talking about Superman. In the 1940's the serials actually combined animation with film and while it was a fairly new concept Superman was still a comic book.

The 1950's series with George Reeves did not make use of the source material and as such created fairly self containing stories that were usually resolved within a 30 minute time frame. You flash forward 20 years and you have the late Christopher Reeve taking over the mantle with a film that broke ground. The reason why Reeve's Superman was such a hit was because there were no major releases focusing on comic book characters in the 1970's. Everything marble did was televised and cheap, just look at Spiderman. While DC had a focus on television as evidenced by Batman, and the 1979 Legend of the Superheroes which was extremely campy.

Superman was box office gold because there was nothing like it. When you examine the series of Superman films you realize it was the only superhero attempting to go beyond the comic into an extended story with real conflict. When the 1980's rolled around the climate changed and Superman was considered a relic of a by gone era. While Superman remained strong in comics the idea of another film was not really a consideration until after The Death of Superman became the biggest selling comic book up to that point. For something close to fifteen years a franchise was proposed and Superman once again became the talk of the town, because of lost revenue.

While Superman was a hit on television with Smallville there was talk of a film and that film was finally made. Superman Returns was hailed as the re birth of the man of steel but really it was an attempt to modernize the 1970's series with a similar formula. An unknown actor was brought in to take the role while established stars served as support. Ultimately it was sad to see that the best performance came from the digital re creation of Marlon Brando's cut footage from the original. Superman did not really make it's money back, in fact Superman it lost money. With Man of Steel coming out it's fair to ask if Superman can once again do what it did in the 1970's in terms of the box office.

Man of Steel looks darker and somewhat darker and grittier, like it's trying hard to copy the formula for the new Batman series. The problem I see is that DC still has Superman as the perennially good boy scout that really only works for the government. I know this isn't the fact but I think Superman will be truly successful when it strays from the squeaky clean image of the character into a darker story. As a Superman fan though, I do hope the movie succeeds and creates an opportunity for exploring darker territory.

NO ONE CAN BEAT THE BATMAN STORY

When a story and it's main character can undergo a million transformations and still stand the test of time you know it's something special. I am speaking specifically about Batman in light of the recent announcement of DC's transformation of the Batman mythology. The fact is that if you are a true follower of Batman's then you have seen a broken Batman, a scarred Batman, a despondent Batman, and just about every emotion in the depressive spectrum. 

What makes the character special is the way that duplicitous nature of Bruce Wayne plays out.The character can trick so many people into thinking he is a vapid playboy when he is really a brooding, stubborn, untrusting, tormented soul. The way the character is written in almost every comic book and film makes him impossible to completely love and hate. Batman creates that ambivalence that does not fully lend itself to a complete devotion to the hero or complete hatred for his sometimes antagonistic behavior. What is special about the bat? 

The fact is that unlike Superman, who is a capitalist democracy boy scout, Batman believes in order at any cost. The single time that Superman subscribed to that belief was during Kingdom Come. While Superman was portrayed as a Reganite puppet in the latest DC animated feature Batman was portrayed as a hero taken to limits, putting himself in a self impose underground exile in order to continue his work as a maligned but effective protector of a city that has lost the understanding of peace and civilization.

As a rogue hero willing to kick the crap out of Superman while almost sacrificing himself and as an all out juggernaut willing to take every enemy of society to an ungodly limit one thing is for sure, Batman really kicks ass. 

BATMAN WILL KICK SUPERMAN'S ASS EVERY TIME

I know a lot of Superman fans will hate me for this but I guess it goes with the territory. Batman is way cooler than Superman and will always kick Superman's ass. I know Superman is from another planet and is practically invulnerable to anything you throw at him. I am keenly aware of the fact that Batman is a human being without superpowers as opposed to the man of steel.

Batman has intelligence and the ability to think in terms of what's right in the end as opposed to every moment. I find Superman to be a sort of puppet of the system. I like Superman from a science fiction perspective but I see him as a sort of idiot that doesn't understand that in life you can't always do what one man tells you is correct or follow every imposed law or rule.

The latest DC Universe animated film shows that Batman is a far more developed character than Superman because within his flaws he tries to work for the improvement of society even if it means going to places that are dark and somewhat unnecessary. Superman is like that annoying kid in the classroom that's always polishing the apple and snitching on the other kids even though he isn't always right.

From a character perspective in just about every way Superman will always be Batman's Sunday bitch. Sorry Superman fans but facts are facts so learn to live with it.