X-Men Origins: Wolverine

It was alright. Certainly not the worst comic book movie out there, but not the best. There are some stupid, unnecessary shots and some lousy lines, but it’s still good that they made a solo Wolverine flick.

The first scene is rushed and WAY too melodramatic. After that, there’s a pretty kick-ass montage over the credits. Wolverine’s characterization is mostly solid, and most of the characters are presented fairly well. A big complaint I have is that there are about twelve back-flips in every fight. Also, some of the CGI looks really cartoonish. Wolverine’s claws looked great in the first three movies, but for some reason they’re pretty lousy and foolishly used in most of this movie.

While most of the actors do their jobs admirably, Hugh Jackman is certainly the best aspect of this movie. His acting is spot on. There’s a scene in which he gets his heart broken, and it is perfectly played. Hugh Jackman’s physique is impressive as well, though this is nothing new. Weak-ass pussies who never hit the gym should be inspired by this man who trained like an animal.

I read an interview in with the director in an issue of Wizard Magazine, and it was apparent that the director didn’t really care about the character. The movie shows that he doesn’t really do action well, and he should stick with drama/art films. If there is a sequel, I hope the producers go with a better, somewhat subtler action director than Gavin Hood.

If I go see it a second time in theaters, it will be because of Jackman’s great performance. Still, you should see it once. I know I’ll buy the DVD because I love Wolverine. If you do see it, make sure you sit ALL the way through the credits.

Dragonball Evolution

I was expecting worse.

I’m not gonna say it’s a great movie. Not even gonna say it’s a good movie. But it certainly isn’t the worst thing I’ve ever seen. Most of the acting is pretty lousy, and it’s pretty cheesy at many points. It’s effects-laden as opposed to substantive, and it isn’t clear as to whether it’s aimed at kids or an older crowd. Still, it has its genuinely funny moments, and some of the fights are fairly well done.

I’m a big fan of the series. I have been for years. When I was in elementary and middle school, I bought the toys, cards, comics, and seemingly countless videotapes. Even throughout high school, I enjoyed the comics and some DVDs. Now, even as I’m in college, I still read the comics and buy DVDs. I love the series. So, of course, I’d rather the film stayed more true to the source material. Even though it’s quite different in detail from the series, I think that the spirit is still there.

Justin Chatwin actually isn’t bad as Goku. Goku’s origin story is mucked up a bit, but this would force the filmmakers to go in a rather different direction if there is a sequel (though low box office could prevent this), and that could be interesting to see.
Chow Yun-Fat is great as Roshi. This was to be expected, though. Who doesn’t love Chow Yun-Fat? Idiots. That’s who.
James Marsters is pretty good as Piccolo. Piccolo really doesn’t have much screen time, though. And just how did he break out of the Mafuba?
Randall Duk Kim is pretty good as Grampa Gohan.
The rest of the cast is so-so, and often negligible.

There are many plot holes, unfortunately. How Piccolo got out of his prison is never explained. We never find out the origin of the Dragon Balls. Also, during the final fight, Goku’s (altered) origin is rather hastily explained. The first half of the movie is paced fairly well, and it’s not a half-bad quest/coming-of-age story, but then it starts to feel rushed. Towards the end, it’s feeling REALLY rushed.

Despite its flaws and great difference from the series that I love so much, I still think people should check it out. I’ll be buying the DVD when it comes out.

(I must note that I have no idea why they chose to call it “Evolution”. There doesn’t seem to be any real reason.)

...like unto iron.

A fellow blogger and proponent of fitness/self-improvement recently wrote about Iron Kung Fu training -- http://the-biomatrix.blogspot.com/2009/04/iron-palm-hurts.html -- and this has inspired me to write about it as well. It’s something that I know a tiny bit about, and I’ll even manage to talk about comic books while I’m at it.

Before talking about what Iron Kung Fu training is, let’s talk about what it ain’t. It ain’t magic, folks. The sight of people breaking staffs and boards over a monk’s forearms or stomach is not the result of supernatural powers. You don’t have to be born with any particular traits (though a higher natural bone density doesn’t hurt in this area) (also, those staffs are usually made of weaker wood than real bo staffs). In fact, anyone can do this with the proper and lengthy training.

Iron Kung Fu training basically consists of hitting a particular part of the body (or hitting objects with a particular part of the body), healing that part, and then continuing. Wash, rinse, repeat. Always repeat. This is the basic method that works for the palms, fists, forearms, shins, and head. The stomach is a bit different. While all of the various focuses of Iron training require some sort of breathing techniques and Qi Gong techniques, the stomach especially focuses on this. Training for Iron Stomach is usually much less about hardening the stomach with multiple blows, and much more about controlling inhalation and exhalation so as to limit the amount of pain a blow to the solar plexus causes. This is also true for Iron Crotch. Though multiple blows (different kind of blows, fellas) are a big part of training the groin area, it’s best for the practitioner to be able to contract certain muscles so as to suck his testicles up into his cavity.

There are various scientific explanations for the effects of Iron Kung Fu training. One is simply desensitization to pain. If you’ve been hurt in the same spot a million times, you kind of get use to getting hurt in that spot. Another is calcium deposit increases. This is why the knuckles of boxers and fighters in general are generally bigger and harder than the average man’s. When you punch something hard enough (but not TOO hard), you can cause tiny, typically insignificant fractures in your knuckles. Your body then does its best to send calcium to where it’s most needed, and gradually the knuckles acquire more and more calcium than is normal. This Iron Fist training isn’t limited to boxers or Kung Fu practitioners, though. Check out the fists on any dedicated practitioner of Kyokushin karate, and you’ll notice that their knuckles are huge, but their fists are basically flat from years of gloveless punching, working the makiwara, and doing knuckle push-ups on hardwood and concrete. A similar thing happens to the shins of Muay Thai fighters and other kickboxers.



Matt Polly wrote about such training in his book American Shaolin. In the book, he talks about an Iron Crotch master he dubs “Monk Dong” (for obvious reasons). This Monk Dong is able to take hits to the groin area, hang cinder blocks from his penis, and pull heavy objects with a rope tied to his dong. Mr. Polly himself takes up Iron Forearm training and is pretty successful at it. He also describes a monk who is able to suction a bowl to his stomach, and no one is able to pull the bowl off of the monk’s body.




Shaolin monks have always been adept at these show-off type things. In fact, another photo of a young student being held up by spears is making the internet rounds. This is possible not only because of hard body training, but also because of proper distribution of weight over a certain surface area, and the fact that demo/training spears have dull tips.




I have advocated gloveless bag punching to all of my students and martial arts-minded friends for years now. If you start out pretty slow and just work your way up to hitting harder, you’ll be doing more realistic training while preventing injury. It’s good to punch and kick a variety of surfaces so as to best prepare your body for many different situations. Before I left my mother’s house for college, I would work the bag gloveless. I would also often punch a bucketful of rocks, trees, the floor, and any other surface I saw fit to hit. When I came to UCF, I had to leave my punching bag behind. I then mostly did shadowboxing, supplemented with hitting my floor (50 punches a day, six days a week), and occasionally punching and shin kicking a tree. Now, I’ve got a punching bag again, and I hope to continue to strengthen my fists (though I may have to take it easy for a while, as my knuckles have already bruised up).



One thing I’ve always been bad about is the healing half of Iron Kung Fu training. The smartest thing I do after bruising my knuckles and hurting my shins is icing them. I should be putting some salve or tiger balm on them, but I’m stupid. Pretty soon, I’ll probably have no other choice but to wise up and start doing some healing after each session.

Now, let’s talk about “Iron Fist”. Danny Rand is a master of all things Kung Fu. Like Richard Dragon, he was created to capitalize on the martial arts and eastern philosophy craze of the 70s. While the comics from the 70s to the 90s are mildly entertaining, the more recent “Immortal Iron Fist” series is brilliant. Ed Brubaker and Matt Fraction brought in new characters and ideas that mixed very well with the old, and the art of David Aja was pure genius. Now, there’s a new writer and artist, but it’s still pretty good. Danny Rand didn’t spend years punching trees and rubbing balm on his knuckles, though. He plunged his hands into the heart of an ever-reborn dragon, and fists became things “like unto iron”. He did spend years training in the martial arts, though. So don’t you youngsters go thinking that all you need to do is jam your hands into a dragon’s heart to become a master.





If you’ve learned nothing else from this much-too-long blog, at least let it be that you should check out The BioMatrix (http://www.the-biomatrix.net/index.htm), read Matt Polly’s book American Shaolin, and check out at least the first six issues of “Immortal Iron Fist”.

Now go punch a tree.

The "Reals" World

I'm about to break some old news here, but it was new to me when I read about it not ten minutes ago....

There are REAL superheroes in this world.

I frequently visit the BioMatrix website, and I just read the newest article - http://www.the-biomatrix.net/who-are-the-real-life-superheroes.htm - and learned about real-life superheroes, who are often referred to as "Reals".

Apparently there are some concerned citizens out there who have been taking to the streets over the last several years in attempts to better their community and effect change. They wear costumes and go by names like The Dark Guardian, Geist, and Citizen Prime. They do good deeds like pick up litter, give food to homeless, and occasionally try to take care of petty criminals.

While there's something naturally off about someone willing to don a costume and walk the streets at night, I think that anybody who is actually working to make the world a better place seems pretty sane.

Check out the BioMatrix article and all of the links it provides for more info. It's pretty cool.

Is Superman an Ubermensch?

The Superhero as a Nietzschean Construct

The concept of the superhero is often attributed to mythology. However, the idea owes at least as much to Nietzsche as to the ancient Greeks. In many ways, the idea of the superhero is similar to the idea of the Ubermensch. The superhero is someone who is stronger and generally better than the average man. A superhero typically operates above or outside the law. Like the Ubermensch, the superhero is someone who imposes his will to change the world to fit his desire.

Is Superman an example of Nietzsche’s concept of the Ubermensch? Denotatively, the words “Superman” and “Ubermensch” are the same. “Super” is Latin for “over”. “Uber” is the German equivalent. “Mensch” is simply “man”. Clearly, there was a Nietzschean influence on the creators of Superman, Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster. The influence extends beyond just the character’s name. Before they had refined their idea in 1938, the two young men had created a character whom they called Superman who was not a super-powered do-gooder, but instead a mad scientist type who sought to rule the world with his great mental strength. While beings with powers beyond those of the average man have been featured in stories since the original tales of gods and goddesses, the creation of Superman in 1938 was the birth of the comic book superhero.

There are various examples that can be used to illustrate the connection between the comic book superhero and the Ubermensch. One that can be rather obvious and deliberate at times is Alan Moore’s 1980s take on the British superhero Miracleman (Marvelman, in England). There are numerous references throughout the Miracleman series to Nietzsche’s works. In the first issue, there is a quote from Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The secret military experiment that led to Miracleman’s creation is even called “Project Zarathustra”. Several characters even refer to Miracleman as the “overman”. Miracleman, like many superheroes, at first has a strong sense of morality and acts accordingly, but he gradually becomes amoral, going beyond such foolish, human ideas as “good” and “evil”, and rules (really just watches and occasionally grants wishes) over a world of neutrality and Perspectivism.

Even the quintessential human superhero Batman can be seen as an example of the Ubermensch idea. Batman is a self-made man, a perfect example of Will to Power. He violently imposes his will, and will even fight against governing bodies or law enforcement in order to achieve his personal goal of justice.

Though perhaps not immediately obvious, the popular Marvel Comics character Wolverine can be considered an Ubermensch. Wolverine is typically portrayed as an outsider with physical and tactical superiority over many of the people around him. He has little to no respect for law or even society in general. Still, like Batman and most other superheroes, he will violently impose his will at a moment’s notice.

Of course, some good arguments can be made against the idea that superheroes are a Nietzschean construct. A rather obvious argument is that superheroes are based on archetypal hero characters that have been present since ancient mythology. One could also point out that many superheroes often work in conjunction with law enforcement agencies. Also, superheroes typically uphold societal standards of morality, whereas Nietzsche wrote against such ideas as “standards” and “morality”.

While it is true that modern comic book superheroes do owe a great deal to the mythologies that came before them, the same can be said of most fictional characters. Archetypes are considered archetypes for a reason, and they will most likely continue to pop up in works of fiction for as long as people tell stories. While most superheroes do seem to be agents of a societal order, it’s important to note that they are considered heroic because they act in ways that are typically not allowable in a lawful civilization. Superheroes are generally violent and operate without license. While they do act according to what they think are the proper set of morals, it must be noted that Nietzsche’s preferred philosophy of Perspectivism is inherently flawed. Perspectivism is logically self-refuting, as you could easily stump a Perspectivist with the question, “Is it absolutely true that there are no absolute truths?”. So, surely superheroes can be forgiven for being imperfect examples of the Ubermensch concept.

While some good arguments can be made to the contrary, it is apparent that superheroes are generally examples of Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch. Though they are imperfect constructs, they are Nietzschean constructs nevertheless.

------------------------------------------------------------------

(For my "Marx and Nietzsche" course this semester, I had to write a paper. I proposed writing a paper on the influence of Nietzsche on comic book superheroes, but my teacher said that comic books had nothing to do with philosophy. Before he denied my proposal, I had already written this short, rough draft. )

Master of Kung Fu

While at MegaCon a few weeks ago, I was walking by one of the many booths selling $1 back issues. Out of the corner of my eye, I saw someone flipping through the issues in a box beneath a table. That young man was looking at issues of “The Hands of Shang-Chi: Master of Kung Fu”. When the guy was done looking, I took over. I bought twenty issues. They are awesome.

Now, I suggest you homeboys (and possibly homegirls) go check out the wikipedia article on Shang-Chi ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang-Chi ). It’s an interesting character. Basically, because of Bruce Lee, Gordon Liu (36th Chamber of Shaolin star), and the “Kung Fu” TV series, there was an explosive martial arts craze in the ‘70s. Marvel Comics, of course, wanted to capitalize on this. Thus, Shang-Chi was born, essentially.

The issues I purchased were published between 1978 and 1980.
The series, on the surface, is half Bond movies (also popular at the time, of course) and half kung fu exploitation. Beneath the surface, there is some excellent dramatic exploration, thanks to the skillful and passionate writing of Doug Moench. The art is well done, especially by Paul Gulacy and then Mike Zeck.

The dramatic exploration deals with romantic relationships, fragile friendships, and familial loyalty. There is also the “fish out of water” problem, as Shang-Chi has to deal with this new, western and modern world.

Of course, it was the seventies, so some of it seems very tame and cheesy, but the overall quality is self-evident.

As both a martial artist and comic book fan, I greatly enjoyed the issues I bought and read. This was not my first introduction to the character, as I had known of him in general, and he was featured in a few issues of “Ultimate Spider-Man”. But before he was seen in the pages of “Ultimate Spider-Man”, he was the feature character in a couple of issues of “Ultimate Marvel Team-Up”. These issues are some of the finest martial arts-related comics I have ever read. And, being written by Brian Michael Bendis, they make up a good story in general.

I suggest that anyone with any interest in either comic books or martial arts check out “Master of Kung Fu”. Shang-Chi stands up there with Iron Fist, Richard Dragon, Lady Shiva, and other great comic book martial artists.

(Also, for me, bonuses with these old comics are all of the old ads for muscle building courses, x-ray specs, selling seeds, and assuredly crappy at-home karate courses. I can’t imagine what it must have been like to grow up in that era.)

Watchmen

It’s pretty good.

The good parts in it are actually fucking astounding, but the bad parts are utterly terrible. But, like with all things relating to superheroes, the good triumphs over the bad.

I typically cringe at the sound of someone saying, “They used the panels from the comic as the storyboard!” I don’t think that making a direct, shot-for-shot recreation of a comic book necessarily makes for a good film. So, I did go into Watchmen with some reservations as to whether it might be TOO faithful.
Luckily, that wasn’t the case.

Snyder and team did a good job of changing, dropping, or adding just the right things, for the most part. There are some parts of the book I would really like to have seen, but the movie does stand well on what it’s got.

While I don’t really agree with all of the bright color choices (which seemed extra odd, as the Watchmen book isn’t really all that brightly colored…), I do think that the film was amazingly beautiful to look at. The cinematography is really top-notch.

The music is perfect. All of the song choices were correct and well-placed, and the original score makes parts of the movie even more stunning (especially the scene in which Osterman is atomized).

The acting is good overall, but some of the performances reeked of ham. Silk Spectre II is portrayed with some one-note acting, and Carla Gugino does a surprisingly bad job at playing Silk Spectre I.
Jeffrey Dean Morgan is fantastic as the Comedian, somehow nailing the simultaneous hatred and pity/love that we must feel for the character.
Jackie Earle Haley does an admirable job as Rorschach, though some of his narration is a little difficult to take seriously.
Matthew Goode is good at making Ozymandias disturbing, and does a commendable job of adding some interesting back-story to his character.
Billy Crudup does an amazing job as the voice/movement/human part of Doctor Manhattan. He carries out the difficult task of delivering some of the most inhumane dialogue ever written in a voice that attempts at comfort.
Probably the best actor of the troupe is Patrick Wilson. His portrayal of Nite-Owl II is absolutely perfect. When he’s in the guise of Dan Dreiberg, he’s a genuine Clark Kent: clumsy, unattractive, and impotent. When he’s wearing his true skin as Nite-Owl, he’s the Overman: graceful, strong, and passionate.

It is a rather violent movie. While some moments of violent are examples of exploitative trash in a film that should be above that, most of the violence is done tastefully. When these guys fight, they REALLY fight. I really only take issue with the popping of bone out of the skin, the shattering of a leg with a bullet, and the far-too-detailed cutting off of someone’s arms. Other than that, I love the action.

It compares well with the book, I think, as they are two very different entities. The book offers much more characterization and philosophy, while the movie offers things that a comic book simply can’t: music and more dynamic action. Everyone should go see it. The 160 minutes go by quickly enough. And you should definitely try it in IMAX.

(Can't wait for this sequel!)