Let Me Get This Straight: NOW A Bunch of People are Worried About Russia and Their Privacy?

Let me get this straight: A bunch of American citizen had zero cares about the idea Russian tech-experts were manipulating Facebook and other social media in an effort to influence the 2016 Presidential Election, but now suddenly are up-in-arms because pictures of them looking extra-young or extra-old might be in the hands of--you guessed it--Russia? That is the saga with this FaceApp that has been getting press. Apparently if the dumpster-fire candidate you want to win (Donald Trump) gets elected and his being in power doesn't negatively affect you because you're White and Christian, who cares if a foreign power interfered? Once these same carefree individuals suddenly find they could be affected by a foreign power (due to it having a whole bunch of personal pictures they consented could be used for anything because they did not read the terms and conditions of the app) however, well that is a travesty. I know tons of people may have downloaded this app who are concerned about privacy and foreign powers interfering in our politics, so I am by no means being sarcastic at them, my scorn is for all the folk who just loved the idea Russia helped get Trump elected but now are terrified.

I guess if Russia put your favored politician in power you don't care about the immigrants in concentration camps, persecution of LGBTQ individuals, or the destruction of a woman's right to choose. If Russia can take your smiling face and theoretically use it on a billboard, in an AI program, or make a deepfake where it looks like you're having raunchy sex with someone else however, suddenly you care about foreign powers with close ties to companies that do a lot of work in social media and social apps. Funny how that works, isn't it? Now a bunch of people suddenly are mad and care about how outside forces can influence our lives because that silly nude selfie they took to see what they would look like as a naked old dude/lady is in the hands of Russians who can do all kinds of terrible things with it. We started running a metaphorical tab when many people shrugged at foreign powers getting into our Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, and other social-media apps. Now just one instance has occurred of the check coming due and folk are scoffing at the bill indignantly. They get none of my sympathy.

Yes, these are real.

Those people who wore shirts in public that said they would, "Rather be a Russian than a Democrat," can shut-up and accept it as the chickens come home to roost. Your President and his party isn't going to do anything about this, with Democrats actually expressing concerns about privacy, but Trump staying interestingly mum about a Russian tech company with possible Russian political ties doing all this shady stuff with their FaceApp. In the end, the thing that gets me is how could someone not be suspicious of a program as blandly named as, "FaceApp," considering all the scam/spam apps with equally weirdly-simple names? This is such a mess, as America seems to be daily ever since Trump assumed power.

Let Me Get This Straight--People Still Aren't Reading, "Deathstroke?"

Let Me Get This Straight...

Since getting to the point I barely read any Marvel titles due to, "Legacy," being miserable I now am mostly enjoying Image, DC, and other Indie books. I of course will talk with other folk who read DC titles at various times and always hear about them picking-up the bigger-name books such as, "Batman," the Superman-titles, "Wonder Woman," and of course secondary books will get mentioned too. Far too often people seem to leave out, "Deathstroke," however and how it is arguably the best super-book coming out from DC right now, with many a person I've talked to saying, "Deathstroke? Why would I want to read a comic about him?" So, let me get this straight, there are still people out there not reading, "Deathstroke?"

The Magic/Skill of Christopher Priest

I never cared about the character of Slade Wilson AKA Deathstroke. He was a dully written villain who failed to grab my attention with his mercenary adventures. He was an assassin who was good enough to go-up against super-heroes and was often written as a bit of a Mary Sue/Gary Stu who we were encouraged to consider so badass, when in fact he came-off more like a tool. A dangerous killing machine, but also just lame. Christopher Priest is a writer who has been around decades and with his work on, "Deathstroke," since it re-launched has shown that with his magic/skilled touch even a character like Slade Wilson has potential. The fact Priest was one of my favorite writers of 2016 and, "Deathstroke," was a favorite comic that year tells you a lot, methinks.

Priest has kept Slade as a dangerous and smart killing machine, but he's also taken the time to explore what such a person must actually be like, and how miserable their life must be. Slade started the series as a villain who was great at killing people, but in the process had isolated himself from basically anyone who ever cared him and finds relating to people outside of butchering them to be a great challenge. Slade's way of showing his daughter he cares is by putting a hit out on her and then hanging-out by her side fending off would-be killers just so that she's forced to spend time with him. Priest takes Slade's unfeeling and dangerous persona and doesn't go, "Wow, isn't this cool?" but instead asks us, "Wow, isn't this sad?" I'm not alone in loving this book either, with other critics finding it insightful as well.

Evil No More?

During the series so far Slade had an awakening of sorts when he stole some time-travel powers from the Flash (a younger, Wally West version) and discovered no matter how hard he tried to change the past he still just ruined things. With that revelation, Slade has been trying to be a good guy lately. this has entailed creating a super-team named, "Defiance," and stating he has renounced killing. This upset a group of fellow villains who send for him a number of issues before the extra-sized #25 which just came out and features Slade captured by them and being interrogated on if he's truly, "Gone good." A variety of bad-guys from the DC Universe such as The Riddler (serving as Slade's defense of sorts), Hector Hammond, Black Manta, and Killer Frost (who herself has been a bit heroic lately) torture and question Slade as he claims he's become someone good now. In the process just what, "Evil," is comes-up and a hallucinatory-test is conducted where Slade thinks he's been freed and proceeds to kill all the members of the group...thereby proving to them satisfactorily that he is the same as ever and all this heroism is a passing-phase.

Priest intentionally never makes it clear this issue whether Slade knew it was a test and that he wasn't really killing anyone or if Slade in fact would have reverted to his old form and violently murdered his captors. We as the reader are left to wonder how much Slade has really changed and how much is him just thinking he's different. These 25 issues (plus a few extra taking into account a cross-over) have been amazing and shown me--someone who didn't know much at all about Deathstroke before this series--that with a skilled writer even a character who seems hopelessly lame can become a stellar focal point of a fascinating book.

Read it Already!

Seriously people, you don't have to know much of anything about Deathstroke (I didn't) or even the DC Universe to be able to read and greatly enjoy these books. You just have to love great writing and philosophy with a good dash of action thrown-in too. I know this book isn't super-unpopular or at risk of getting cancelled (at least, I hope not), but I feel like many, many more people should be checking this out and loving it as much as I do. You can buy trades of the book at places like Amazon, Things From Another World, or read it for free via Hoopla if you have a library card--seriously, free! Get on it people, you don't know what you're missing.

Let Me Get This Straight--There Are Going To Be How Many "Star Wars" Variant Covers This Wednesday?

What I Understand

This is the actual, "standard" cover.

Once upon a time Marvel published "Star Wars"comics. Then they quit caring about the brand enough that Dark Horse swooped in and printed a ton of comics related to that galaxy set far, far away. However, Disney bought Marvel, and then some time later Disney bought the entirety of the rights to Star Wars. It doesn't really make sense for you to continue publishing comics with a company you don't own if there is a perfectly good one you do have complete ownership of, and that led to a big change.

Therefore, "Star Wars" has returned to Marvel and a big hullabaloo is being made of it, with Marvel conveniently forgetting how they essentially ditched "Star Wars" long ago and this isn't a homecoming so much as being forced by the House of Mouse to print comics that will undoubtedly bring in a decent amount of money as we approach the new "Star Wars" flicks coming out. This all makes perfect sense, and isn't what I need to get straight. No, what is bothering me is how many variant covers "Star Wars" #1 may in fact get.

What I Don't Understand/Let Me Get This Straight...

This is a variant you get via your Gamestop points.
Yes, really.

Let me get this straight: Over 100 variant covers will exist for this first issue of "Star Wars" coming out Wednesday, January 14th, 2015? Wow, and it may very well be a record-breaker. You have the variants stores get for ordering a bunch of copies of the first issue, you have store-exclusive variants, you have variants you can only buy through using Gamestop points and I imagine if you have a friend who once doodled a picture of Darth Vader that has its own variant too, considering how crazy this is all getting.

Therefore, we now reach what I really don't understand: Why does Disney/Marvel think we need this many "Star Wars" variant covers? Is it because the brand is so popular and about to come back in a big way this year (i.e. the movie)? Could it be various retailing entities wanted a piece of this "Star Wars" pie and the easiest way to to do so was to give them a variant cover? Maybe this is really just all about how the publisher knows some people will spend countless dollars on variants so why not put them out--especially if you can make retailers order a ton of copies of the normal cover in order to make them even eligible for the sought-after variants? It is probably a mixture of all these reasons, really.

Here is the blank variant edition.
Interestingly, having an artist you like sketch on it would probably harm its value.

Putting aside reasons for the variants, let's be honest for a moment here; in a good year or so all those standard-cover versions of "Star Wars" #1 will be in the dollar-bin, especially considering this comic is going to sell over a million copies with all those covers combined. The reason for the "binning" will be so many copies were printed and ordered of this comic that the regular cover is all-but-worthless with only variants having maybe any value (although it wouldn't surprise me to see some more common variants thrown in the dollar-bin too). With so many copies being printed and all these variants anyone who thinks this comic is going to be worth much is crazy.

It isn't like this is a comic that will be hard to find, it will be an incredibly common comic with some rare covers. That usually isn't as big a value as an actually hard-to-find comic. After all, "The Walking Dead" #1 didn't have many issues printed and is worth a ton, while the 100th issue had a bunch of variants with some worth more than others, but that issue of the comic itself ain't pulling in much scratch compared to the series' debut.

I"ll admit this variant by Alex Maleev is neat.
It's limited to 3,000 copies though so don't expect to find it easily.

Comics in general are not a good investment unless it is an already old and valuable issue of something. That said, you are more likely to make some cash off of a comic that is hard to find than you are with a variant that is rare, in most cases. A comic with a bunch of variants can still be found and read with its normal cover, a rare comic is something that you can basically only enjoy via trades, reprints, or a digital purchase.

This is why I'm having trouble getting this all straightened out. I just don't understand why so many variants seems necessary (or why variants in general are necessary), and if my past posts are anything to go by I usually won't see the point of a variant. The only time I've bought a variant is if it is relatively cheap, the comic is one I enjoyed, and it is a really cool cover. Unless those three attributes can be met I generally am not going to seek out a variant.

This variant exclusive to a store in Sydney, Australia is at least humorous.

It all just seems silly in the end, with all these people seeking out the comic for the variety of covers, and not the admittedly quite solid creative team working on the comic (Jason Aaron is writing, John Cassaday is supplying art). I suppose in the end it is something I will never be able to get straight, or understand. Whatever the case, I hope everyone enjoys the comic and its variants with the official release tomorrow.

The Fallacy of an Automatically Successful Cinematic Universe AKA Quit Copying Marvel!

Alright, let me get this straight: because Marvel's Cinematic Universe is proving so successful we will be seeing other studios try to emulate this to a point where we now are being told there might be a movie-verse for Robin Hood? Seriously, freaking Robin Hood? What are we going to do, have a movie all about Little John and how he came to join-up with the only character in the Robin Hood myths people care about, i.e. Robin Hood? This whole concept of a "Shared Cinematic Universe" is clearly getting out of control if we are at a point when that could seriously happen.

I suppose it was inevitable people would see the income from Marvel's flicks and say, "Damn, we need some of that sweet, sweet 'Avengers' money," and proceed to attempt and build a franchise out of an intellectual property where there wasn't one (and really doesn't need to be one). After all, it's not just "Robin Hood"; some time ago we had heard rumblings of Universal wanting to start a shared film-world for their various famous monsters they owned the rights to also, with it recently confirmed the new "Dracula Untold" movie is basically a stealth-launch for the franchise where if the film does well it will officially be folded-into the cinematic universe. This would join other planned features such as a "The Mummy" pseudo-reboot and a most-likely a Hugh Jackman-less "Van Helsing," thereby making me uninterested in the movie (as I enjoy his acting) along with other folk (who enjoy his rock-hard abs). Plus, we of course have DC, "Betting the farm," as it were on, "Batman VS Superman," in the hopes it will allow them to spin-off a bunch of other heroes into movies and undoubtedly move forward with a "Justice League" flick. The thing is though, all these movie studios are being incredibly presumptuous and believing in the fallacy that a shared cinematic universe is an automatic money-maker when it has only been so successful for Marvel due to a mixture of factors.

No Hugh Jackman? In that case, no "Van Helsing" for me.

What are these factors I speak of? Well, first off as a major element of comic-books themselves is the concept of a shared universe ,Marvel already had an advantage. Yes, they might have lacked the rights to a variety of franchises due to desperate business decisions back when bankruptcy seemed imminent in the early 2000s, but they still had a hefty catalog of intellectual properties. The fact that it wasn't out of place to see one character pop-up in multiple comics lent itself expertly to such a thing happening in the Marvel movies. This argument however raises a potential counter in the form of, "Well, Spider-Man is a Marvel character too and Sony's attempts to spin him off look like they may be in trouble." To your claim I can simply say that while you are right about the comic-book element you're overlooking my next point about what is important--namely, people didn't get the full story they wanted.

Marvel Studios let its franchises grow organically, they started with movies that could mostly stand alone perfectly well but planted bits and pieces to allow them to build-up to the "Avengers" movie. For an example of a studio doing basically the complete opposite we look to the aforementioned Sony with their "Amazing Spider-Man 2," which was met with an at-best lukewarm reception by critics and a decent-but-nowhere-near-what-was-hoped-for box office intake. It seemed as if any review I read pointed-out it felt more like "ASM2" was trying to set-up other movies and franchises than it was focused on telling its own tale. Basically, by spreading the metaphorical meal too thin people didn't receive a full entree and a tasty appetizer for what was next (as Marvel has done), but instead got half-a-course and were teased with, "We can't give you the rest of the dish now, but just wait a couple of years and we promise in the end you'll feel it was worth the wait!" 

 

Begins, and then possibly ends prematurely.

This concept of jamming everything into one movie with little pre-introduction and thinking people will walk away satisfied with a little taste of everything clearly didn't work for Sony to the point rumors are now circulating that they and Marvel might be working-out a deal so as to benefit both studios, and this makes me worry how, "Batman VS Superman" will fare. After all, we already have it confirmed Wonder Woman will be appearing in the film and it feels like every other week we hear a new casting rumor about another hero potentially appearing in the movie (Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, and so forth). I could be wrong and in the case of "Batman VS Superman" people actually will enjoy just getting a taste of various characters and turn out in droves for the movie and it's potential spin-offs; or, it could also turn out the movie is indeed tightly plotted and does what Marvel has been doing with their, "Full meal, plus an appetizer of what's next." I honestly don't know because "Batman VS Superman" is so far in the future that little is known at all about the plot. However, "Batman VS Superman" does lead into my third point about a factor that helped Marvel, that they had a foundation on which to build.

When Marvel made "Iron Man" there was no guarantee it would succeed how it did and lead to many other movies and the eventual "Avengers". Sure, they laid some groundwork and threw in that Nick Fury cameo at the last second, but once people enjoyed that and other Marvel films they had the thought, "Okay, I liked those earlier movies so I bet 'Avengers' will be good." After all--if I may return to the food metaphor--I bet if you were served two tasty meals and told to come back to an establishment in the near future for more I imagine you would hesitate less than if a chef were to come up to you and say you ought to stop by their restaurant multiple times as they have a variety of dishes planned, but you haven't even tried anything. That's basically what the article on Hitfix I linked to above (here it is again) is saying DC is wanting people to be okay with, declaring they have all these grand plans, but not giving us anything substantial yet to get an early measurement of if we think the overall plan is even any good.

 

I really do hope this is good.

There hasn't been much like the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Sure, the old horror-movies of the black-and-white era would have cross-overs, and we've seen it with Freddy Kruger and Jason Vorhees duking it out, but otherwise it has been less cross-overs between various properties and instead one franchise growing with multiple films, like your "James Bond" or "Fast and Furious" movies--but without any sort of spin-offs. You could maybe, just maybe, make the case for the X-Men movies as they have had "Wolverine" spin-offs and rumors are always swirling of a "Fantastic Four and X-Men" cross-over, but the "Wolverine" movies were more like a prequel and sequel to the X-Men flicks, and we don't even have the new "Fantastic Four" out in theaters yet to consider the idea of a cross-over, so let's not play the "X-Men" card.

As I've said, Marvel has three factors working in their favor in addition to a fourth I haven't yet mentioned. To review those three:

1. Comic-book movies draw from the shared universe concept of comic-books.

2. Marvel let their franchises grow organically with complete stories.

3. Marvel has had a foundation on which to build.

What is the fourth element? It is multi-faceted in that, Marvel has picked the right directors, writers, and actors to make their movies (mostly) quite good. Sure there have been some misfires (Marvel would prefer you forget about Edward Norton), but overall each movie has had its own tone, been marketed extremely well, and been overall a fun time. Honestly, who would have thought a year ago a movie set in space featuring 1970's music and a talking tree would become the highest-grossing film of 2014 so far?

"I am Groot, and I am making the paper!"

In conclusion, just because Marvel's cinematic universe has been a smashing success that doesn't mean every other one will make a bunch of money. Therefore, my request to film studios is please don't make a movie-verse unless it actually makes sense. DC I can understand, maybe even a monster one, but when I start hearing about it for Robin Hood its obvious things are getting crazy. Although, if they could get Lil' Jon to play Little John I could probably go for that.

Let Me Get This Straight--DC Is Actually Calling Their Event, "WTF Month"?

"WTF," indeed.

I'm going to tell you story about something that seemed like a good idea at the time but turned out to be one of the stupidest things ever attempted. I was in junior high and there was a big contest our science club entered (yes, I was in science club, I am a nerd). The idea was you had to drop a pumpkin from a certain height and have it protected enough by padding/boxes/whatever you chose that it didn't break at all.  Anyone who came up with the best design and showed it off won...something, I don't recall what. Anyways, we all came up with ideas in our science-club groups and one group decided they had the most genius concept of all. They wouldn't put the pumpkin in a box or something. No, they would get something really light such as a milk crate, place the pumpkin in it, and then outfit the milk crate with various complex parachutes that would result in the pumpkin floating to the ground from the 500-feet-or-so it was dropped completely unharmed. The crate would not have a lid, packing peanuts, or anything that could cause it to weigh more than the pumpkin and its parachutes. In other words, there was nothing to protect the pumpkin but this:

You probably sense things aren't going to end well.

The day came when we tested our designs out and the local fire station was kind enough to send one of their trucks over. Each team got in the fire-ladder, it would go up to the requisite height, and we would drop another teams box (this was to prevent any sort of cheating or something, I guess...although how you could cheat at this I don't know). I had the honor of taking the milk-crate pumpkin up and dropping it with the rest of my team. The group who had assembled it were looking proud. Yes, their pumpkin would gently come down to the ground utterly unharmed and they would look awesome, or so they thought.

The fire-ladder reached the required height, my team held the box over the edge, and things got ugly. The crate immediately flipped upside-down as we tried to let go and the pumpkin fell out. About 3 seconds later a loud, "POP," was heard as the pumpkin hit the ground and shattered into more pieces than all the King's horses and all the King's men could ever put back together. A split-second later the pumpkin was followed by the milk crate which had failed to deploy its parachutes even without a pumpkin inside it.

What had seemed like a good idea at the time was in fact one of the worst thoughts ever dreamed of. If only someone on that team had said, "Hey, maybe this won't work," something could have been done to prevent the tragedy that befell the pumpkin that day. No one did anything though, so when the team debuted their "genius" design and it failed spectacularly, all we could really do was ask, "What were they thinking?" and proceed to clean up the countless bits of pumpkin that had scattered everywhere.

I'm telling you this story because DC is doing something that I bet within their offices seemed like a good idea when they thought it up. No one in the office said, "Hey, maybe this isn't the best plan," so DC kept things going and before you could say, "Uh oh," they had announced, "WTF Month," for April's comics, and the metaphorical pumpkin had fallen out of the milk crate.

Within any of the mainstream DC titles you cannot under any circumstance have a character say, "Fuck," unless it is bleeped/blacked-out/etc. Sure, the Vertigo books can have all the swearing and nipples they want, but Superman won't be dropping F-bombs anytime soon. Therefore, I ask you to let me get this straight, DC is actually calling a month of their comics, "WTF Month?" For those who don't know, that stands for, "What The Fuck?" Generally this is used negatively, but DC apparently feels that with this month of comics that feature special, "gatefold covers," people will be so shocked when they fold the cover open to reveal the surprise they will exclaim, "Oh fuck, DC, you got me you motherfucker, what the fuck?" in one loud sentence of harsh expletives. Besides my finding it funny DC actually is encouraging people to pick up their comic, reveal the full cover, and swear loudly in front of everyone in their comic store (some folk whom may be children or not appreciate random cursing), I think that actually saying your comics are, "WTF Certified," or whatever is pretty stupid.

Saying, "fuck," generally just comes off as crass. If someone swears all the time you kind of think they have bad manners or are trying too hard to look tough or cool. DC does not allow the word, "fuck," to be uttered within any of the comics they are dedicating their, "WTF month," to this April, which makes this seem even worse because it is as if DC is trying to have their swear-cake and eat it too without suffering any consequences of using the f-word (with said consequences being people not picking up their comic for the children DC claims to be targeting more since the reboot). 

Anyone I have spoken with or read the words of on the internet seems to think this is a stupid idea. Do note I'm not saying having shocking covers is a bad idea. That could be a cool promotion that gets someone to pick up a comic they don't normally read, see the surprise when they fold the comic out, and maybe even buy said comic out of curiosity. However, actually calling this idea, "WTF month," is idiotic beyond belief. The pumpkin has hit the ground, but this time instead of a marvelous explosion we've just gotten a, "thud," of disbelief.

I'm sorry DC, but you've lost the pumpkin-dropping contest for the upcoming month of April.

Let Me Get This Straight--Archie Comics Has The Most Well-Balanced Gay Character?

Let me get this straight (no pun intended, I do this segment all the time), but Archie comics, the company that does pretty tame and I suppose you could say "conservative" comics is doing their four-issue spin-off mini-series about recently-introduced gay character, Kevin Keller, and he is more realistic and well-balanced than arguably any other gay character in comics? He isn't stereotypical or cliche? He isn't used just for jokes? They don't just use the fact that he is gay to do a lame story with a message about acceptance as many comics seem to do (although one of the stories is about how he came out in the first issue of this mini-series)? He's just a regular well-rounded guy who happens to be gay, and Archie comics are the people publishing this? I mean, he does have a schtick like all Archie characters do, with Reggie being a jerk, Veronica being a rich snooty pain-in-the-ass, Betty being a push-over, and such. Kevin is able to eat a lot of food just like Jughead and they often make it a competition, and this comic has a story about that. Still, Archie comics?

Marvel and DC at times seem to have trouble trying to utilize characters that aren't white, straight, males. They've gotten a bit better with heroes who aren't males, sometime are better with those that are of color, but when it comes to anything but heterosexuality? Yeah, there are some issues. It seems so many of the heroes who are gay are defined by nothing more but their being gay; its boring, lame and the only time they are used is for when a story is needed about acceptance of being different. Yeah, its a shoddy way supposedly being more open about things while actually just ghettoizing your characters to certain stories and having only one defining characteristic. Things have gotten better, after initially botching her introduction during, "52," DC seems to have a Batwoman book finally on track after countless delays and she is a well-rounded individual who happens to be a lesbian, but there is still a long way to go. That is what makes it so interesting that the company that seemed to be stuck in the past is suddenly looking very forward-thinking with their comic focused on what is quite possibly the most realistic gay character ever. What makes him so realistic? Archie comics remembered that gay or straight the character is a human being.

Let Me Get This Straight--Is DC's New Publishing Plan Genuis or Just Plain Stupid? Really, Which Way Will This Go?

Let me get this straight--and I'm just getting this information out having heard it briefly ago--in September after Flashpoint ends, DC is going to launch 52 new comics in the sense that every previous comic is canceled and possibly being re-started with a new #1 issue. That's 13 new comics a week. Also, we are getting all-new creative teams with, "three quarters of creative teams being shuffled around," and Superman may not longer be married and hooking up with Wonder Woman who also no longer has her hated continuity change that Straczynski did. Plus, Grant Morrison is going to write an in-continuity Superman book.

There also have the big deal of every single comic being day-and-date digital, which means that the exact same day you can buy it on comic stands, you can buy it for your computer/phone/tablet device. This is quite possibly the biggest creative and financial risk DC has ever taken and I kind of am impressed by their sheer gall, but I share the concerns that some have.

This could either be a huge success (I mean, they got USA Today to talk about it, so that's cool) or turn into a huge belly-flop that kills DC in the market with their new #1 books not selling as well as they hope, or changing continuity too much and pissing off enough fans that they lose more readers than they gain, or they just can't make up cash for that whole, "Keeping comics $2.99" deal they have going. Still, I sorta remember when Marvel was though of as the company that took big creative risks and was, "out-there," on the cutting edge. Now, we've got DC comics doing something huge and Marvel...has Nazi robots attacking Washington DC while various heroes and villains pick up hammers that make them super-powered in Fear Itself. No matter what happens, at least DC wins the risk-taking award.

Let Me Get This Straight--Flashpoint #5

Let me get this straight; on August 31st, 2011 there will be only one DC comic released? Strange. That comic will be Flashpoint #5 and it mist have a big impact on the DC Universe that no other comic is coming out from them. This is either a genius or horribly stupid move.

Let Me Get This Straight--That Surprisingly Good Lyric Came From WHO?

Let me get this straight, Ke$ha came up with a lyric I find interesting? Really? How? Let me explain...

I have made it no secret on my blog that I absolutely despise Ke$ha. I think she is talentless, using little more than the miniscule sex-appeal and shock-value she has along with her vapid lyrics and annoying beats to make as much money as possible from shallow fools before her fame dries up (that's a mouthful). Therefore, on a day I forced to listen to the song "Blow" because friends in the car wouldn't let me change the channel, I was shocked when a lyric that could actually be interpreted as very clever and deep was said by my least favorite singer besides Fergie, "We're pretty and sick/We're young and we're bored." Huh.

In this era of focusing on beauty and wealth aren't we all being done in by our desire to be pretty, making us all sick? Aren't youth being drowned in so much media that they are bored and mindless? Am I trying to read too much into a lyric that means nothing and am instead seeing all these deep concepts of a post-modern exploration of loneliness, greed, and tedium with this world we live in? I suppose the answer is "Maybe" to all of the above. Still, it's just odd that someone as horrible as Ke$ha could make something that gave me pause. I guess I found the needle in the haystack. With the needle being something about Ke$ha I didn't hate, and the haystack being all the rest of her work output.

Let me get this straight--This Game is Delayed AGAIN?

Okay, let me get this straight: Duke Nukem Forever, arguably the most delayed game of all time at about 14 years past the original release date, which was picked up by the company Gearbox when it looked like it might finally be dead, and then was given an actual release date of May 2011...has been delayed yet again? For real? After all that talk about how Gearbox was finally finishing it they pull this trick and tell us we have to wait until June 14th for a game people already probably have way too high expectations for? That's what the case is? Okay, fine, I just wanted to be sure about that. I'm going to roll my eyes as high and hard as I can now at this news, realizing I shouldn't believe this game is ever coming out until it is actually sitting on store shelves and I can rent it.

Let Me Get This Straight--New Spider-Man Movie Already To Have a Sequel.

Okay, let me get this straight; despite not even coming out yet the movie, "The Amazing Spider-Man," already has hired its screenwriter to return for the purpose of penning a sequel. Really Hollywood? A movie scheduled for the Summer of 2012 already is so assured to be a success that you have to being making the 2nd one? Isn't that presumptuous? I mean, yes, the first trio of Spider-Man movies made some serious bank, but this just strikes me as over-zealous. I'm going to go let out a big sigh.

Let me get this straight-Libya

Let me get this straight, Momar Ghadaffi (no one can agree how to spell his name, so I’m going with that) thinks he can blame the revolution that has swept Libya and resulted in his losing power almost everywhere but the capital of Tripoli on drugged-up teenagers? Yeah, he claims it is youth being led astray by Al-Queda and given hallucinogenic drugs in their, "Nescafe". Plus, the rest of his people all love him and will die for him. The only man more delusional than Ghadaffi is probably Charlie Sheen (zing)!

Seriously though, at what point will the man just give up? Will he refuse to leave and end up being dragged out of his palace while rationalizing it as people just wanting to take him for a walk? It’s just absurd how much this man refuses to see the facts in front of his face that the people are sick of him and want Ghadaffi to go, NOW. There has already been so much death and destruction, and I don’t know if it will be ending anytime soon. One can just hope things eventually work out for the best and Ghadaffi snaps out of fantasy-world.

Let me get this straight--Recent Revolutions and Technology

Alright, let me get this straight; because of the internet age, and people being connected via Facebook and Twitter, citizens of nations are doing by themselves what the United States in decades past spent tons of money encouraging--that is, fighting for democracy? We spend thirty-some years prodding Egypt to maybe have more fair elections, and after 18 days and the use of social media a nation's dictatorship is toppled. How the hell did that occur?

Plus we've got the original location this happened, Tunisia, and now Libya seems to be going through its own violent mini-civil war--and that's another nation the US has politely asked to be more fair in our sheepish way we do when a nation has something we want but we can't invade it, and yet again a long-time dictator may be out soon due to a bunch of people connecting with each other on the internet.

Now, I'm happy these nations may finally achieve democracy, but am annoyed by the idea that all the US had to do for these places to shift to a new political model was give people an ability to make status updates. I swear, what a world we live in...

Let me get this straight--Another Representative Makes Stupid Statement.

Representative Paul Broun tweeted that President Obama is a socialist after the State of the Union Address.
Let me get this straight, a President who talked about small businesses is a socialist? Really? Broun also made veiled comments that he is an enemy of the constitution? People voted for this guy? Last time I checked Obama isn't trying to make the businesses that got bail-out loans a permanent part of the US Government, nor is Obama trying to silence free speech, which is made clear by Broun's idiotic comment.

Let me get this straight--Representative makes stupid comment.

Let me get this straight, Tennessee representative Steve Cohen (a Democrat) has said Republicans tell lies about Health Care Reform that are like the propaganda of Nazi Joesph Goebbels, and I quote, "They say it's a government takeover of health care, a big lie, just like Goebbels. You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie and eventually people believe it." Wow, that's pretty idiotic.

Yes, there are plenty of lies about Health Care and I have been clear in my support of it (it saved me from paying an ungodly amount for health insurance starting this month). I don't think the Republicans took a page from the Nazis however, and the absurdity of such a statement just looks bad. Plus, Cohen is Jewish, so you would think he wouldn't compare some political opponents to the very group of people who dedicated themselves to getting rid of anyone like him.

You know Cohen, if you want to make Republicans look bad, you probably shouldn't resort to the same name-calling some of them do. Just because someone says you're a Socialist doesn't mean you have to play the Nazi-card. So much for the new era of civility we were promised.

Let me get this straight--This person loves the Spider-Man Musical?

Let me get this straight, Glenn Beck loves the Spider-Man musical? So much he saw it twice? That is odd. I don't think "Glenn Beck" and "Spider-Man", but there it is. If I am able to see it and like it, that will be one of the things I can count on a single hand I agree with Glenn Beck about.

Let me get this straight--Gun Control

Time for the first-ever installment of "Let me get this straight."

So, let me get this straight: Republican senators who voted no on any form of gun control suddenly want a bill that makes it illegal to be carrying a gun within 1000 feet of them? Really? You don't want gun control for anyone unless it specifically protects you? I call bullshit on that. Don't be a hypocrite, if you want people to have easier access to guns, let them open carry, or buy an assault rifle, you can't throw a sissy-fit when one of them happens to walk by you.

I'm not totally opposed to guns, but also see where gun control makes sense. The idea of this law though? It serves no purpose other than to make some politicians feel safer from the very people they fought to make gun access easier for.