For Spider-Man's 1000th issue, Aunt May forgets who Peter Parker is

Comic Book Club tells the premise of the thousandth issue for Amazing Spider-Man:

In the cliffhanger of the last issue of Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker’s beloved Aunt May had a stroke. Well, thanks to a new preview from Marvel of Amazing Spider-Man #1000, we know what’s happened: she’s forgotten Peter Parker.

Alongside the preview pages, which include an appearance by May’s biological son Cormac, who has been appearing recently in the series, we’re also getting covers for the second printing, which will arrive on October 28 with pencilled versions of the covers by Pepe Larraz and John Romita Jr. (check out if the controversial cover looks better without the coloring). That’s because the issue has already sold over 400,000 copies to comic book stores [...]

Spider-Man faces his greatest fear and his most frightening new villain in decades… RAVAGE! Plus, some of the greatest creative minds on Earth honor one thousand issues of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN! NOAH HAWLEY (Alien: Earth, Fargo, LEGION) makes his comic book debut, Frank Miller and Peach Momoko collaborate for the first time, Stuart Immonen and Brian Michael Bendis return to Spider-Man together, and some of the best ASM creators return to the title!

It's much too late for introducing new relatives of the Parkers to the title, and with Bendis aboard, something's obviously wrong. Even Miller's involvement does nothing to improve what's clearly just more publicity stunts. I don't know if Mary Jane Watson shows up, but if Bendis and/or Miller are allowed to script a story where MJ appears, it's only plain dismay.

Just like it's long too late for there to have been a 1000th Superman issue, it's too late for a 1000th Spidey issue, and besides, what are the chances they'll soon be resetting it to a number one, as became a sad staple in the years since a number of Marvel titles were first relaunched in 1998? The customers have hopefully long learned why it doesn't pay to buy all these brand new relaunch premieres that won't amount to much on the speculator market.

Film director defends comic adaptations

Variety reports film director Chloe Zhao, who worked on the unsuccessful Eternals movie, and is insisting on defending them as a form of entertainment:

When Chloé Zhao was growing up, she dreamed not of directing movies but becoming a manga artist.

“But I wasn’t very good at drawing. I wasn’t up to standard,” she said with a laugh during a wide-ranging masterclass presented by Cartier on Friday afternoon at the Venice Film Festival. “I wanted to tell stories. I didn’t think cinema was an option for me.”

Of course, Zhao found her way into film and directed acclaimed movies such as 2020’s Oscar-winning “Nomadland” and 2025’s Shakespearean drama “Hamnet.” She was eventually able to meld her passions with 2021’s Marvel adaptation “Eternals,” which starred Gemma Chan, Richard Madden, Kumail Nanjiani, Brian Tyree Henry, Barry Keoghan, Salma Hayek and Angelina Jolie and revolved around an immortal alien race sent to protect Earth from evil beings.

“I loved doing it,” she said of directing the movie. “For any of you who love anime, I know you know this was a girl’s dream come true. Comic books are the western equivalent of [manga]. They are very different, but I live in the west, and that’s what I had access to.”

Although superhero movies have waned in popularity since the pandemic — even “Eternals” fell short of box office expectations with $400 million globally against a $200 million-plus budget — Zhao sees the value in all forms of entertainment. That’s unlike, say, Martin Scorsese, who has infamously likened Marvel movies to “theme parks.”

“I do feel it’s important to not write off stories because we don’t consider them high art,” she said. “The purpose of storytelling for me, humbly, is to create containers for people … to try to process what they need to process. Archetypes are such a great way to do it — and we see them in myths — is because it’s something we all share.”

The problem is that political correctness has long taken over - even the Eternals movie had its own share of that - and it's drained the adaptations of whatever potential they had. If Zhao's creative license was restricted, that also says something about the film she directed, which was one of the first serious failures for modern comic adaptations to screen.

And since manga came up, it's vital to recall there've been at least a few Hollywood adaptations that were failures too, like the Saint Seiya film. That one, IIRC, wasn't even released with much fanfare. Some mangakas are also against following certain "western" principles. For all we know, the least successful adaptations of manga could've precipitated the failure of USA comics movies. Another problem is that the adaptations only seem to build on action and comedy themes, not unlike how animation is marketed in the west. If Hollywood's not willing to try out projects based on comics and manga emphasizing drama and romance, it just illustrates the failure of the western film industry to expand beyond certain themes and be more creative, not to mention give the audience something that could be more challenging.

So what's the use of defending comics-based live action films if they're going to remain so PC, and not expand to more challenging themes? There's whole shiploads of independent comics out there too that could serve as a wellspring, and they eschew all that for the sake of adapting mainstream comics that've been throughly ruined over the past quarter century. Indeed, what good does it do to watch live action adaptations when the original comics are being destroyed? If the original comics are turned stale, it just makes a mockery out of the idea to adapt them in the first place.

What former DC editor Joseph Illidge works in today

Newsweek interviewed veteran editor Joseph Illidge, who worked on the Milestone imprint 3 decades ago, and is now running a company titled Illuminous:

For more than three decades, Joseph Illidge has moved between the creative and corporate engines of comics, and while his résumé includes Milestone Media, Batman, Spawn Universe, and a slate of original graphic novels, his latest venture begins with a deceptively simple question: What if the story someone has carried for years finally received the architecture, talent and business strategy required to become real?

Illuminous, Illidge’s production and creative-services company, is built for those dormant epics, whether an entrepreneur has imagined a sprawling fantasy saga or an experienced comics creator wants to strengthen a new world before publication.

“There are so many people out there” with a “nagging idea,” Illidge told Newsweek, and because many cannot see a path from private inspiration to publishable intellectual property, he wants the company to make such possibility tangible.

The company grew out of a career spent protecting established characters while opening doors for new ones. Illidge began at Milestone, whose founders created an inclusive superhero universe amid an industry that had marginalized them and their identities, and he sees a direct connection between that entrepreneurial example and Illuminous.

“It really stems from starting my career at Milestone,” he said. “Starting my career at a company like that really led in a straight line to Illuminous, and founding that company so it could provide empowerment for a new generation of creators [and] veteran creators.”

I should hope they're actually trying to develop something meaningful, years after Dan DiDio almost singlehandedly ruined DC, and Joe Quesada similarly ruined Marvel. But if it's DC/Marvel we're talking about, Illidge failed epically to protect established characters, some of whom saw new ones built on DEI brought in at the expense of the old ones. An Asian Atom, Black Firestorm and Latino Blue Beetle, in example, introduced through forced and contrived situations, and they've largely vanished since, though at the same time, DC seems opposed to fully reinstating Ray Palmer and Ted Kord to their roles, not to mention some of their civilian co-stars like Jean Loring. If Illidge is obscuring what came at the time of Identity Crisis, he's done a terrible disfavor.

“Comic books are the fastest and relatively least expensive way to get an idea to market, to start identifying and growing an audience and building a community,” Illidge said. “It is the beginning of how intellectual properties and projects are identified by other companies for adaptations.”

Illidge sees opportunity in an entertainment economy whose attitude toward originality can shift with a pair of hits. He pointed to Sinners and Weapons, two 2025 films whose success followed an era of “peak IP” thinking, when studios favored reboots and familiar franchises.

“Suddenly the narrative changed, and Hollywood wanted original ideas again,” he said. “We’re not at a time of fatigue of stories. What people do want is an original take on the familiar genres.”

Well if Hollywood's relying on darkness and the horror theme, as a title like Sinners could suggest, I'm not sure "original" ideas are seriously being considered. What's certainly lacking is more comedy stories, along with more optimism. Something that isn't clear so far from what Illidge is telling. Also, it can't be built upon woke themes, or contrived DEI. Also, if adaptations are what he cares about, that's unfortunately a problem. What has to matter first and foremost is the comic story itself. I seem to recall AWA Studios, founded as it was by Bill Jemas and Axel Alonso, built on the hopes of producing comics that could be adapted to other mediums, and that only undercuts the potential of the comic itself.

A creator’s first meeting with Illidge moves quickly past spectacle, since he begins with two questions whose answers expose the story’s emotional foundation: “Why this story?” and “What’s the theme of your story?”

Half of his clients, he said, arrive without a clear theme, while others treat premise and theme as interchangeable; once the distinction emerges, however, the entire project gains direction.

“We’re going to discover [the theme] together,” he tells them. “Once you know what your theme is, which is really the underpinning of your story, you’re truly off to the races.”

His framework is ICWTC: idea, character, world, theme and cast. The idea defines the project; the lead character gives readers someone to follow; the world creates pressure; the theme clarifies the story’s deeper argument; and the cast either supports or challenges both protagonist and theme.

“In any story, you need a primary character for the audience to care about,” Illidge said, adding, “For drama, the world has to create tension for the character. The world cannot be in the character’s favor; it has to be the character’s macro enemy.”

In that case, I hope he recognizes just how artificial DC and Marvel's "plans" were in the past quarter century. Why, come to think of it, while an argument about need for a lead to care about is valid, shouldn't entertainment value be the foremost importance? It should also be noted DC/Marvel weren't interested in actually getting audiences to care about the characters when they turned out Identity Crisis and Avengers: Disassembled. Even before that, I can't say they actually wanted anybody to care about Kyle Rayner as a 3rd Green Lantern, no matter what nonsense they spouted 3 decades ago. And lest we forget, Emerald Twilight was all done at Hal Jordan's expense, a decade before they subjected a number of other characters to the same, this time under the confidence that, because the characters in question were more minor, nobody would give a damn. That's but one of the reasons the atrocities of the 2000s are so offensive.

Illidge then describes how he hires whom he believes are the perfect artists for the job:

As the story takes shape, Illidge begins looking for artists whose work carries the project’s tone while inviting readers into its world. “Art brings people to stories, and the writing keeps them there,” he said.

The right collaborator can also reveal possibilities a writer never envisioned, which is why Illidge urges clients to reject a command-and-control relationship with the person drawing their book.

“Try to think of the artist as your partner,” he said. “They are going to do things you could not have conceived, and it’s going to surprise you.”

Brian Hitch provides Illidge’s clearest example of visual authorship becoming industry architecture. Hitch’s naturalistic work on The Ultimates, created with Mark Millar, helped establish a cinematic vocabulary later associated with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, while his earlier work on The Authority demonstrated how forceful design and widescreen composition could make superhero spectacle feel immediate.

He considers artists with such overrated resumes the best choices? Oh for heaven's sake. This also reminds me of the time author Sean Howe argued almost 15 years ago that making comics look like movies is a losing formula. So why must we hear somebody who worked with Mark Millar on stories emphasizing shock value is a great choice? Only if Hitch can prove he's willing to try out something less forced and more inspiring than what the aforementioned stories turned out to be.

Illidge’s years editing Batman comics trained him to balance interpretation with the nonnegotiable principles that make a character recognizable across generations. Readers arrived through Adam West’s colorful television version of Gotham, Frank Miller’s harder-edged comics, Tim Burton’s 1989 film and Batman: The Animated Series, yet each audience expected an essential core to survive.

“As a caretaker of the intellectual property, which is what an editor is, you have to be the guardian of those rules,” Illidge said.

Batman’s rejection of guns and killing offers the clearest boundary, though Illidge frames such rules as engines for drama. A gun destroyed Bruce Wayne’s family, while his parents’ lives in medicine and social work anchor his reverence for life; therefore, a writer can push him toward a moral precipice while preserving the choice which defines him.

This only compounds the perception Illidge builds too much on cinematics and drawing in the same audience. And again, considering DC's stable of creations went south due to contempt by DiDio in the past 2 decades, it's awfully rich for Illidge to say he was a "caretaker". Also, seriously, did virtually all readers take to the Masked Manhunter's tales just because of the West TV series and Burton's film? Or even Miller's contributions? I wouldn't be that narrow in assumptions. Some could also argue that if villains like the Joker aren't brought to an end, then it only weakens the whole premise of Batman not killing. Then, look what else Illidge apparently worked in as writer:

Writing Bloodletter inside Todd McFarlane’s Spawn Universe showed Illidge how a new creation can honor a franchise while filling a space its founder has yet to imagine. After McFarlane explained the universe’s rules, Illidge and his co-writer found the final piece of their story.

“The job was to create something additive,” he said, describing the goal as an idea the universe “hasn’t even occurred to [its creator] it needs until we present it.”

A mature intellectual property, in Illidge’s view, eventually becomes large enough to welcome other writers, artists and producers, whose additions create fresh dimensions without erasing its identity. Robert Kirkman wrote The Walking Dead comic, while its television incarnation grew through a larger creative team; David Chase created The Sopranos, whose writers included Terence Winter and Matthew Weiner before they built major series of their own.

So Illidge considers the horror genre a great wellspring? That's unfortunately also a problem, much like if he only saw Batman as the ideal franchise to edit, but not Superman.

Illuminous extends beyond story development because a finished comic still needs legal guidance, publicity, marketing and a route to readers. Illidge’s network becomes part of the service, connecting clients with specialists once the project is ready to enter the market.

“If I work with you to develop your idea and realize your idea, and then cast you to the wind, and you don’t know what to do with it in the landscape, then I’m not being of service,” he said.

Crowdfunding, especially Kickstarter, has widened access by letting creators reach audiences directly, while webcomics and vertical reading formats offer additional entry points for projects which may never fit a traditional publisher’s list. Even so, Illidge cautions against launching an entire universe at once. Marvel’s interconnected mythology grew over decades, whereas a new creator still has to earn attention one powerful story at a time.

“Start with the one story, the one potent story, and then work your way out,” he said.

On this, I wonder if he respects conservative writers and artists? Would he be willing to publish say, Mike Baron's Private American? If not, that would sum up quite a problem with his own MO.

In the end, if there's any flaw in Illidge's approach to publishing, it's if he views comics as more of a wellspring for moviemaking. But that's just another mistake that's brought down comicdom. I think working in the independent scene can have its advantages, but if Illidge follows a PC narrative, he's not doing enough to fully realize the potential of creator-owned comics any more than the mainstream. And will he ever admit what went wrong in the 2000s? Probably not. It's also very problematic if he thought the genre Spawn's built on makes for great storytelling, but not what Superman was. That's a problem indeed.

A decade after Lara Croft was dumbed down for woke's sake, Tomb Raider's programmers still only care about just that

As somebody who's admired the original Tomb Raider series of computer games with Lara Croft, I've been as disappointed as the next person that modern programmers in charge of the franchise repeatedly only show interest in watering down her sexuality, and as the following news from the Straits Times reveals, they still go to all that trouble just to make a point about something that affected some, if not all, of the comics adapted from the game:

Lara may have beaten a path for more female heroines and encouraged young women around the world to pick up a controller, but in the early days, the publicity for the game leaned heavily on her shapeliness.

With the market for video games now expanded well beyond the stereotype of adolescent boys, the team behind the new game says this time they are focusing on Lara as a strong character.

“The way we’re rebuilding Lara, we’re trying to respect the fact that she’s female and we’re just trying to make her powerful, not as an object of sexual attraction,” said the game’s art director Arek Tomaszewski.

Eight years after the last instalment Shadow Of The Tomb Raider and ahead of an all-new entry planned for 2028, Tomb Raider: Legacy Of Atlantis aims to revisit the original adventure “through a modern lens”, Siqueira said.

I've heard that ambiguous narrative about "strong character" before tons of times, and all the game designer is doing is insulting the whole premise of Wonder Woman, to name but one most prominent example from comicdom. It reminds me that a decade back, Gal Gadot told how she encountered people online who claimed WW "can't be intelligent because she's attractive". And I guess she can't be strong for the same reasons? The directors of this new entry in the Tomb Raider series certainly seem to think so, even though, from the pictorial samples I've seen, ironically or not, Lara's actually wearing a shirt with cleavage (something I don't think she wore in the early games), yet her bosom doesn't look that big in most of the photos, so obviously, they've still got very icy cold feet about such petty issues. And that doesn't improve perceptions of the newer video games at all. Must I also point out that, even in the early years of Tomb Raider, there were women who played and practically designed it too, without issue?

So it's utterly disrespectful for modern video game developers to lecture the audience about what the franchise should be. As though it weren't bad enough even the animated cartoons have suffered repellent PC in recent years to boot. I think it'd be best for the franchise to cease as video games, or be sold off, because repetitively producing them according to PC dictates has not improved their reputation, and it's insulting to the intellect to make it sound like boys don't deserve a lady to love. Also, are we to assume the developers have no creative freedom, let alone courage? Well, that's another something you could glean from such a pretentious article. I think it's best to continue saving money on new game purchases if they insist on insulting players' intellect.

An 11-year-old working on comics wants to remember 9-11, but will the MSM do the same?

NBC-KXAN gave a report about an 11-year-old who's into comics, who wants 911 to be remembered:

Benjamin Faundez loves to tell stories.

The 11-year-old Arlington boy is an avid reader and wants to be a writer one day. He’s also a film director — making tales come to life with a phone camera and help from his younger sister Florencia.

But more than anything, comics are the way Benjamin expresses himself.

“These are all the comics I’ve made over the years,” he said, scurrying into the living room with a thick white binder. Inside were dozens of comic books he’d written over the last three years, neatly slid into protective sheets to keep his creations in mint condition.

Flipping through his immense catalogue, Benjamin says he’s most fond of his fictional protagonist ‘Sacred Sargeant.’

And while he headlines dozens of comics, Sacred Sargeant was absent from Benjamin’s most notable piece — a story about the first responders who responded to the twin towers on 9/11.

‘I wasn’t supposed to be at that spot’

On Sept. 12, 2024, one day after the 23rd anniversary of 9/11, Benjamin’s parents Paulina and Miguel took their family to New York City. While the four got to experience several highlights — including the Back to the Future musical and visiting the site Miguel proposed to Paulina at — Benjamin’s fascination with recent history primarily motivated the 1,600-mile trip.

“Around second grade, I started reading these books called I Survived — historical fiction about 10-, 11-, 12-year-olds that survived natural disasters or events that like Hurricane Katrina or the Chicago Fire,” Faundez said. “I ran upon the book called I Survived the Attacks of September 11… after I read it, I decided I wanted to learn more about what happened on that day.”

That's most amazing a younger reader wants to learn more about the subject. But does the news network want to provide the clear information? Because this article is superficial in the extreme, and doesn't say a word about the Islamic religion's role in the horror. How can the tragedy be recalled properly, and how is anyone to form an opinion if they don't know what the exact motivations were that led to such an abominable incident?

Benjamin took the pin and headed through the security checkpoint but couldn’t leave Passarella empty-handed.

“I was still working on the comic book. I hadn’t finished it yet … but at that time I just felt like I had to give it to him,” Benjamin said.

Then Passarella upped the ante.

“He went back to he went back to his office and took out a flag and explained to me that on the flag was everybody’s name who died on September 11,” Benjamin said.

The two went on their way, but Passarella exchanged numbers with Benjamin’s parents. Then a couple months later, Passarella’s agency shared the encounter online — showing off Benjamin’s work to the world. [...]

‘We’re never going to forget’

100 million Americans are now too young to have a first-hand recollection of 9/11. Some were too young to have lasting memories. Others simply weren’t alive. This includes many people Passarella oversees — something he thinks about ahead of the 25th anniversary on Friday.

“The greatest challenge you have is to instill in our workforce what Ben emits through his conversation and through his actions to never forget those who lost their lives,” Passarella says. “343 firefighters, men and women went in there innocently and their lives were taken.”

Despite being born 14 years after the tragedy, Benjamin plans to continue “remembering and honoring the people who sacrificed themselves and died to protect us from the bad guys and what they did to us and what they did to the country on that terrible day.”

Twenty-five years after the attacks, Passarella says Benjamin represents something unexpected: proof that the stories of that day are still reaching a new generation.

Unfortunately, if the article itself is any suggestion, information about the ideology that led to the tragedy is not reaching new generations. Also notice how they reduce any description of al Qaeda to merely "bad guys". That hardly says anything. At worst, it's obscuring the identities of the culprits. NBC's affiliate should be ashamed of themselves for omitting any meat-and-potatoes information about 9-11. Are they even disturbed by how NYC's Muslim mayor Zohran Mamdani handed a commemoration pen to an aide named Ramzi Kassem, who served as lawyer to an al Qaeda jihadist, an act that outraged 911 Families? That's something the pre-teen comics writer could develop 5 dozen comics about for history research.

It's admirable there's a young comics creator at work who enjoys the medium as much as he does, and his interest in the subject of 911 is also important. But without knowledge, there's no defense, and NBC's doing a terrible disservice to many people affected by the tragedy by omitting crucial facts from the narrative. Let's be clear. Just because the guy in the spotlight's a youngster is no excuse for reducing the entire narrative to something so superficial. We have to hope the young fellow will be able to research the exact facts, and even interview 911 Families/survivors, which could provide some important information that could help produce plenty of history comics for modern students to check out. For now, NBC's only setting a very poor example with their obscurations.

A sloppy article about Frank Miller's work on Daredevil

When it's not the Dark Knight Returns that's the overemphasized focus of so many puff piece news articles, it could be Miller's work on Daredevil instead, and that's what Inverse wrote about recently, since some recent TV shows drew from Miller's stories, but this is yet another news item that's decidedly not interested in maintaining consistency, let alone assuring us that Miller's work, good enough as it was there, isn't the beginning or end of what we could find impressive about Hornhead's original series, in sharp contrast to what came post-1998. First:

Whenever people discuss superheroes who have it rough, there are a couple of names that usually stick out. Spider-Man’s day-to-day life is notoriously bad, so the term “Parker luck” was coined because of it. Batman has had his back broken, several of his sidekicks killed, and consistently fights monstrosities and aliens all while just being a normal human being.

But it’s safe to say that few comic book characters have trials and tribulations comparable to those of Matt Murdock, aka Hell’s Kitchen’s own Daredevil. Those who love him can’t quite seem to stay alive, those who hate him can’t quite seem to stay in jail, and the Man Without Fear himself can’t quite seem to keep a handle on his own secret identity (a problem that has just recently followed him to the MCU in Daredevil: Born Again). But 40 years ago, one of the most celebrated comic book writers of all-time took it upon himself to drag Matt Murdock through hell and back, and in the process wrote not just one of the best Daredevil stories ever but one of the best comic arcs of all-time: the original 1986 Born Again.

Did it ever occur to them that if they describe DD's life as that bad, it could actually become less appealing to the audience? Also, since Batman does come up here, yes, there were a few, but if Spoiler's the one who matters, interesting there's no objective take here on a character who was a more notable recurring cast member of the Robin series begun by Chuck Dixon in 1993. And how Stephanie Brown was initially turned into a sacrificial lamb in the War Games/Crimes crossover, before this was eventually reversed 3 years later, and there were a few other bad directions that came at the time of Identity Crisis that were reversed later as well, though still too late at this point.

Since they speak of lovers, even Batman had at least one who was turned into a forced sacrifice in 2002 for the sake of a shoddy crossover, Bruce Wayne: Murderer?/Fugitive. Her name was Vesper Fairchild, and if there's any way to handle such a curtain call for a character that's less than organic, it's crossovers. So it's not like DD's the only one story-wise who underwent such incidents, whether the writing was good or bad. And of course, even overrated writers like Kevin Smith have turned out some of the worst storylines in DD based on exactly what Inverse unobjectively spoke of: wiping out Karen Page in the Marvel Knights imprint just 5 issues in. And to Inverse's writers, it means nothing. By the way, if any of DD's adversaries were written cheating death, doesn't that make Karen's death extremely hypocritical?

When Stan Lee and Bill Everett first created Daredevil all the way back in 1964, they were responsible for many of the character’s everlasting traits: he’s a blind lawyer named Matt Murdock, his father was a murdered boxer named Battlin’ Jack, and he works alongside Foggy Nelson and secretary Karen Page at a legal firm named Nelson and Murdock. But the original depiction of the character was a quippy, lighthearted Spider-Man-adjacent swashbuckler – it wasn’t until the late 70s and early 80s, when the title was in danger of cancellation because of declining sales, that Frank Miller took over as writer and forever changed the perception of the book. Instead of fighting vampires or villains pulled from science fiction B-movies like Stilt-Man, Miller emphasized the psychological turmoil of a Catholic vigilante and fleshed out the contours of Hell’s Kitchen’s criminal underworld (converting The Kingpin from a Spider-Man villain into a Daredevil villain), ultimately giving the book a hard-boiled, seedy film noir atmosphere that was instantly popular and has influenced other Daredevil writers to this day.

Umm, I think even before Miller came about, it was dark enough. And while it may have come with a bit of a twist, Stilt-Man did make an appearance in DD during Miller's run, though a crook Miller introduced stole Wilbur Day's mechanics so he could make use of them himself. Even Dr. Octopus made one appearance in DD at the time. So let's not think the series ever strayed far from more sci-fi oriented concepts.

What's more, how is it Ann Nocenti, who succeeded Miller in writing later, didn't provide an enjoyable perception too? I think Miller's DD run is good, but I'm not buying that favoratism at all costs. And IIRC, didn't Mark Waid at one point write DD with a brighter perspective in the past 15 years? It may have been at a time when Marvel's artistic quality collapsed, but the lecture Inverse delivers again becomes sloppy. And one more thing about Waid's run: whether he wrote DD bright or dark, he did a terrible disfavor at the time with heavy handed leftism.

After briefly stepping away from the title, Frank Miller returned with what is maybe his greatest narrative contribution to the Daredevil mythos: 1986’s Born Again storyline, which played out from February to August in the pages of Daredevil #227-233. A culmination of everything he'd built up over his original five years writing the character, Born Again opens with the reveal that Karen Page, who had been absent from Daredevil comics since 1969 (she left Nelson and Murdock to become an actor after discovering Matt’s secret), has become an adult film actor and heroin addict. In the throes of her addiction, Karen sells Matt’s secret identity for a fix, and that information ends up in the hands of The Kingpin, who decides that if he can’t defeat Daredevil the vigilante, he’ll defeat Matt Murdock the civilian by systematically destroying his personal life.

Here too, we have quite a flaw in history. Karen made appearances in DD at least until 1972 and issue 86, and afterwards, she made several appearances in comics like Ghost Rider and Marvel Two-In-One (and one more guest appearance in DD 138 from 1976) until about 1978, before going into limbo for 7 years. Inverse has just confirmed ever further they're unqualified for history jobs. Also, notice how they refer to a woman becoming an "actor" instead of actress? I've seen that woke PC tactic in the past few years, apparently their whole sick idea of how to belittle the fairer sex in an era where LGBT ideology was pushed all over the place. One more problem undermining this puff piece. Near the end, it says:

Frank Miller didn’t just write arguably the greatest Daredevil story ever told, but he also changed the way that superhero stories deal with human drama. Matt Murdock is a running joke for comic book fans because he’s a character who can’t escape his own suffering, but over four decades ago, Frank Miller showed us that the reason why Daredevil can handle it is that the hero is the man underneath the costume, not the bright red costum he’s known for.

If Matt can't escape suffering, isn't that a problem? It's also one if Marvel's adamant about keeping Karen in the grave, after what happened to her in the Knights imprint. Supposedly, Aquaman's been a running joke because he could communicate with undersea animals, but I don't recall Hornhead ever been described as a joke. Are they aware the original costume was yellow in 1964, changed after 6-7 issues? You might think that's a joke, but the problems Matt faced as both superhero and lawyer certainly weren't. What's certainly a joke are the inaccuracies in the puff piece, decidedly another example of somebody who doesn't want to say a word in depth about the runs coming before and after Miller's. Seriously, what's so hard about discussing Nocenti's run in the late 80s-early 90s at length? This elevation of one specific run at the expense of others has long gotten way out of hand. There's also plenty about Spider-Man that hasn't been brought up by these tabloid news sites. On which note, maybe early Hornhead was "lighthearted", but "quippy" was something he could've been written as even well after Stan Lee relinquished the job to other writers. I assume they mean DD could be written dishing out wisecracks like Spidey and the Thing, and in the stories I read, Matt certainly came close.

So let's be clear. Of course I recommend Miller's DD run, but I'm not going to say what came before and after wasn't worth the effort and the price you could pay for the reprint archives. Just because there've been TV shows adapting notable Hornhead storylines is also not a reason to focus almost solely upon Miller's run either. The original comics scripts are what should count, far more than any two-bit TV adaptation.

Brand new Green Lantern stories are considered the "best"

Comic Basics listed several runs of Green Lantern from the past decades, only one of which is worth considering (Denny O'Neil's early 70s run), while some of the others are predictably fluff-coated takes on modern runs. For example, there's Geoff Johns' run:

Writer Geoff Johns revitalized the franchise by returning Hal Jordan to the spotlight in the miniseries ‘Green Lantern: Rebirth’. The overarching narrative expanded the lore by introducing the Emotional Spectrum and creating diverse new Lantern corps across the cosmos. Major comic crossover events such as ‘Sinestro Corps War’ and ‘Blackest Night’ elevated the title into a cornerstone of the DC Universe. Johns collaborated with prominent artists like Ethan Van Sciver and Ivan Reis to deliver high-stakes cosmic action and deep character development. This nine-year run transformed the mythology and established the modern foundation of the Green Lantern mythos.

Some "revitalization" alright. There were several jarringly violent moments in the run, and most particularly telling was when Johns exploited the title for forcing Islamic propaganda into it, in the decade following September 11, 2001. The story introducing Simon Baz even resorted to the cliche of a white supremacist being the actual culprit. This is what Johns cares about, not actual victims? What he did was definitely telling.

Also note how conservative-leaning artist van Sciver was part of the GL project at the time, and a case can be made that some would-be right-wingers have blame to shoulder for bringing comicdom down to such an awful level. Plus, when there's the totally uncritical take on company wide crossovers, you know something's wrong. Another reason this run can be considered worthless is that it hinged on Identity Crisis, and thus came at a time that was simply too late for bringing back Hal. Another example listed here is the 1994-2004 run:

Ron Marz drastically altered the franchise by penning the controversial ‘Emerald Twilight’ arc, which saw Hal Jordan fall from grace and become the villain Parallax. Following the destruction of the Green Lantern Corps, Marz introduced artist Kyle Rayner as the torchbearer of the final functional power ring. The decade-long run focused on Kyle learning to become a superhero while maintaining a relatable civilian life in New York City. Notable storylines introduced supporting characters such as Jade and examined the legacy of previous ring-wielders. This era redefined the mantle for a new generation of readers and established Kyle Rayner as an essential DC hero.

Gee, a run starring a character who came off little different in the end from how Hal's characterization was perceived - as a cipher lacking in genuine personality. Also note how the writer doesn't acknowledge the heavy editorial mandates that defined this run, coming as they did before Spider-Man was subjected to much of the same the following decade. These mandates included that Rayner could not have a "civilian" girlfriend at the time, only an established superheroine like Donna Troy for starters, and Jade afterwards.

Interesting how no objective view is provided for whether it was in good taste to turn Hal into a murderous villain, nor any mention of the notorious fridging scene for Alexandra deWitt, the girlfriend who was introduced only to be murdered by Major Force about 6 issues in. These kind of steps are exactly what ensured sales would otherwise plummet in the long run, and I'd seen legitimate arguments made over the years that the Rayner stories weren't the big deal some wanted all to think they were. If the fridging of deWitt was retconned away of recent, that in itself is miraculous.

Oddly enough, the paragraph is accompanied by a coverscan of the 3rd volume's premiere issue from 1990, which was written by the disgraced Gerard Jones. Do they realize that could haunt the Rayner run for a long time, and only compounds why the 3rd volume is so otherwise obsolete?

Next, there's one of the spinoff series, GL Corps:

Running alongside the central flagship series, Peter J. Tomasi penned a critically acclaimed ensemble title focused on the wider Green Lantern Corps. The narrative centered on veteran Lanterns Guy Gardner and John Stewart as they led the cosmic police force through galaxy-wide conflicts. The series provided essential perspectives during major events like ‘Blackest Night’ while highlighting the camaraderie and sacrifices of alien ring-bearers. Artist Patrick Gleason provided distinctive, kinetic visuals that brought life to massive space battles and alien civilizations. Tomasi’s work added emotional depth to secondary characters and proved that the franchise thrived beyond Hal Jordan.

Oh, do tell us about it. I've long learned not to be fooled by such balderdash, and look where things have arrived today, with a TV show that practically throws Hal under the bus for the sake of DEI ideology. And why are we being lectured that a series with connections to company wide crossovers was "essential"? Yawn.

When stuff like this is all they can think of highlighting, and not the Golden/Silver/Bronze Age stories other than O'Neil's, something is definitely wrong. But I guess that's what to expect when the whole franchise plummeted into the abyss beginning with the Action Comics Weekly run, and nobody in the press is willing admit severe mistakes were made. That's how both DC and Marvel have been able to get away with their worst acts for decades now.

A former director of Marvel films tarnished her entries by celebrating murder

Warner Todd Huston at Breitbart reports a filmmaker named Lexi Alexander, who has some comics-related filmings to her credits, wrote obscene social media posts celebrating the murder of a deputy bank manager in NYC's Times Square:

Lexi Alexander, director of the 2008 Marvel film Punisher: War Zone, is taking heat for celebrating the stabbing murder of a Bank of America employee with an X post featuring Luigi Mangione’s face superimposed on a drawing of Batman’s bat signal.

Bank officer Erin Piacenti was fatally stabbed in Times Square, New York, shortly after celebrating her second wedding anniversary — and the day of her murder was her first day back to work from maternity leave. Piacenti, 32, was walking near West 42 Street and Seventh Avenue when 49-year-old Pamela Cisneros of Queens stabbed the young mother and another person in unprovoked attacks. Cisneros was later shot and killed by police after she threatened them with her two butcher knives.

After the murder, Alexander, who calls herself a “Palestinian filmmaker” (born in Germany to a Palestinian mother and father), jumped to her X account and posted a drawing of Batman looking up at the bat signal, but in the lighted image in the sky, there is instead an image of Luigi Mangione’s face. Mangione is now on trial for the 2024 assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. [...]

Palestinian American film maker celebrates the murder of a random white lady who worked in middle management at Bank of America.

32,000 likes pic.twitter.com/f7e4wxd54b

— Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 (@DrewPavlou) September 1, 2026

Her X post is still on her timeline, but it has been restricted from being embedded.

In a followup post, she accused everyone who criticized her post of being a “Hasbara bot,” meaning someone working for Israeli propaganda operations. [...]

After Punisher: War Zone bombed at the box office (a $10 million gross to its $35 million budget), Alexander has mostly directed episodes of TV shows such as Supergirl, S.W.A.T., and How to Get Away with Murder.

Well just look at that. More comics creations have been tarnished and desecrated through poor employment choices. As if it weren't bad enough the Supergirl TV show from the past decade was clogged with far-leftism. This is whom the studios that own Marvel and DC are hiring? What this makes clear is that Tinseltown is in serious need of reform, which they're tragically unlikely to work on. It's also got to be telling this repulsive "filmmaker" also worked on a TV show with a title that itself makes light of a serious issue. Alexander's career as a film and TV director will hopefully be over after this horrific case, which strongly hints she's as anti-American as she's anti-Israel. And no doubt, she also hates the Jewish creators and publishers of the comics the films and TV shows she worked on adapted.