Posts Tagged ‘Spider-Man’

Michael Clarke Duncan is dead at 54

Monday, September 3rd, 2012

Michael Clarke Duncan was a “hulking” individual, and used his size and strength to his advantage for many roles, especially genre roles, including Daredevil, where he played the Kingpin of Crime.

He passed away of a heart attack.

Clarke died Monday morning at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, where he was being treated for a heart attack, said his fiancée, Reverend Omarosa Manigault, in a statement released by publicist Joy Fehily.

The muscular, 6-foot-4 Duncan, a former bodyguard who turned to acting in his 30s, “suffered a myocardial infarction on July 13 and never fully recovered,” the statement said. “Manigault is grateful for all of your prayers and asks for privacy at this time. Celebrations of his life, both private and public, will be announced at a later date.”

Apparently trading meat for vegetables did not save him. Eating healthy and living a more healthy life is possibly a way to extend your life, but more important is that eating vegetables actually made his life more enjoyable and more comfortable.

So taking actions to extend the quality and quantity of life are both good, but enjoying and using the life as you have it, in a productive fashion or fun, is very important. I won’t mind-read but given how prolific Mr Duncan was I doubt he would dispute the quality of his life.

He played the Kingpin in the film adaptation of the Marvel Comic DAREDEVIL. He played that role again in the MTV-made SPIDER-MAN adult cartoon soon after.

Among the genre films Mr Duncan has made

“The Green Mile” and such other box office hits as “Armageddon,” “Planet of the Apes” and “Kung Fu Panda,”

and SIN CITY, an adaptation of Frank Miller’s noir series. his current project was a supporting role in the television series THE FINDER.

Haven’t had enough of seeing Stan Lee? Here you go!

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011

The Complete Guide to Stan “The Man” Lee’s Marvel Movie Cameos.

Which do you think are the most significant Super-Heroes and are the number of the most important only seven?

Wednesday, December 8th, 2010

Adherents has had a website dedicated to exploring the respective religions of various fictional characters for some time now and whenever I wander over there (which is very rarely) I find it fascinating.

One of their side pages is The Significant Seven: History’s Most Important Superheroes.

It is, for the most part, an excerpt from a book by Mike Benton that I never read entitled The Comic Book in America: An Illustrated History. So when I dispute adherents’ conclusions, I dispute Mike Benton’s ideas, but considering that at the end the site wants us to contact them if we find what needs correcting, I suppose we should contact them for the one thing I find factually incorrect in Mister Bention’s assertions. The rest is historical speculation, opinion, or genuinely correct.

I notice he limits himself to only comic book super-heroes, of course, as Batman and Superman have slightly limited originality if you count their pulp fiction fore-bearers. There is also only characters that are currently owned by DC Comics and Marvel Comics. Although then the characters were genuinely significant Plastic Man and Captain Marvel were owned by Quality and Fawcett Comics respectively.
The Significant Seven are as follows:

Wonder Woman
Captain America
Captain Marvel
Plastic Man

My questions are not whether these characters are significant for they surely are and certain I can dispute just how much more significant they are than most other characters. Yet I wonder if they really are only seven significant super-heroes in the fashion that the author intended.

Superman is Superman, that which other costumed characters follow. Wonder Woman is the Woman, and regardless of the creator’s intent she is now the female super-archetype in comics for better or for worse (usually for worse). Batman is the peak human being; his presence is the indicator that one need not be superhuman to fight evil. So we have Super-Man, Super-Woman and Man-Man.

What they’re missing is Green Lantern.

For my point any Green lantern will do, from the original to the modern to the one that was simply in print the longest consistently.

Batman is a normal human being with no special powers beyond what a man can gain or obtain with extra-normal amounts of time and ambition. Leaving aside the factor of talent there are professional athletes that could be real life comparisons. Superman’s core attributes when it comes to sheer ability and power are beyond us mere mortals obviously but then comes Green Lantern. He is a mere mortal, a normal human like us, that wields the power of gods through an artifact, a mcguffin. Green Lantern is a man and not a god (although that really could be arguable). Superman would have to be someone else entirely to not be Super; Green Lantern just needs to remove the ring, not recharge the ring, or in the contemporary comics discharge the weapon completely. He possesses abilities but they do not come from him; they are not internalized. His identity like Batman is of a man but his abilities as a super-hero are separate because of his powered artifact, and those capabilities are closer to Superman than a mere mortal.

Green Lantern is the midpoint of Superman and Batman. That is precisely why he is Significant.

I also think the article should have the first hero that only has one power but I cannot say for sure who that is.

comic book super-heroes tv themes

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

This was rescued from the ancient vintage ComicBookResources’ Apr 20, 1999 TV Themes website. Incredibly a lot of the sound-files are now on the Internet Archive Wayback Machine servers and are not just dead links so they are available for download. (more…)

The Arthur Effect

Monday, June 25th, 2007

The Arthur Effect is the process in which the things that make an intellectual property unique are smoothed out in order to gain a wider audience. For example, the original Lee-Ditko Spider-Man was a very angry and moody young man. He lived in a moody, atmospheric world and fought bizarre villains, like the Vulture and Doctor Octopus. He resided with his Aunt May and was very lonely.

After Ditko left, Peter Parker moved out of his aunt’s place and became damn near gregarious. Bland, “normal” villains like the Rhino or the Kingpin were more likely to crop up than the more colourful ones. The mood of the title under Romita was more romantic, both in terms of interpersonal relationships– Peter now had a real honest-to-God girlfriend– and in terms of storytelling: big, Kirby-esque superhero battles.

In short, everything that made Spider-Man Spider-Man was gone, and as a result, he became more popular. The Spider-Man of the hit Sam Raimi films is Romita’s– not Ditko’s.

I call this the Arthur Effect because of the Marc Brown character, Arthur Read the Aardvark. In the first book, Arthur’s Nose, he looked like this:

Arthur, unhappy with his long aardvark’s nose, goes to Dr. Louise, the rhinologist (who is, naturally, a rhino). In the end, he decides that he likes his own nose the best: “I’m just not me without my nose!”

But now let’s take a look at a more recent book in the Arthur series.

What happened to his nose? The whole point of the first book– that we should accept, and celebrate, the things that make us different– is completely invalidated by the rest of the series. And it’s this noseless Arthur– more bear than aardvark– that makes up the bulk of the series, stars in chapter books, has his own television program, toys, oversized plush dolls, backpacks, lunchboxes, stationary, music cds, and posters. Nothing differentiates him from all the other cute, cuddly children’s book characters– and so he’s more palatable to a wider audience.

I’m not saying this is always a bad thing, nor is it always a direct result of trying to capture a wider market. Because of the Comics Code, the friendly Silver Age incarnations of Batman and Superman are vastly different from the brutal Golden Age originals. And in the case of Superman, I think that’s an assest: no one wants to see him hurtling war criminals like javelins.

With these rough edges and quirks gone, they became more acceptable to the mainstream audience, and more-or-less codified the concept of the superhero. Really, the Arthur Effect is one of refinement.

But what a character or story might gain in beauty, clarity, and thematic unity– all very attractive to the widest possible audience– they often lose that most mysterious and precious of things: vitality.