Sunday, December 18, 2011

Jerry Ordway's "Power of Shazam" (1995-1999)

One thing that surprised and amused me about the Jerry Ordway "Power of Shazam" series were the surprising number of jokes built around incest-related misunderstandings, to the point it reminded me of a slightly more innocent version of "Arrested Development."

When Mary Broomfield (really Mary Batson) disappeared for days at a time with Billy Batson, there was a joke about how the suspicion is the two eloped and ran away together. And someone points out an entirely logical theory about the Marvel Family the general public might have: it is often assumed Captain Marvel and Mary Marvel are married and Captain Marvel, Jr. is really their son.

Another running gag in "Power of Shazam!" is centered around another squirm-inducing premise that's perfectly in keeping with the "how'd they get away with that?" Arrested Development sense of humor: Captain Marvel, as a boy in the body of an older superhero, has aggressive older women throw themselves at him. This always results in awkwardness on the part of the poor Captain, but the crazy part is, only at first. By the final year of the series…he actually starts to like it!

Gee, I wonder why that could be.

There are a few things I like about the 1995-1999 series.

One desperately needed key difference between CM and Superman: Billy Batson's powers come from the wizard Shazam, and the wizard Shazam can take them away if Batson goofs off with them. Also, Shazam can do things like wake Batson up at four in the morning to take care of a crisis.

It does have a few weaknesses, however. One is plotting, in that a lot of the long-term plot threads have resolutions that I either missed or don't make any sense. A big plot point: Mr. Tawky Tawny is a stuffed tiger doll who is able to come to life and give advice to Mary. The story takes a somewhat mysterious/sinister turn when Tawky Tawny tells Mary the wizard Shazam didn't send him, and that she shouldn't tell Shazam he's able to come to life.

Kids? Never trust an adult who says "let's keep this our little secret." Danger, Will Robinson!

I was very excited by this development, because Tawky Tawny is one of those characters Captain Marvel historians – who in general have a way higher tolerance for Casper/Richie Rich/Wendy Witch type kiddie stuff than I do – specifically finger Tawny as the shark jump point for CM's classic era. The guy is, in short, Captain Marvel's version of Jar-Jar Binks and Scrappy Doo…even by the terrifyingly low standards of occasionally nostalgia-blinded classic Captain Marvel devotees.

I expected them to deconstruct the character a little. Remember how it turned out a megalomaniac Scrappy-Doo was really the villain of the Scooby-Doo movie? To my mind, that's the only way to do something like Alvin and the Chipmunks in live action, have them be malevolent little imps whispering evil thoughts to Dave Seville, and when he isn't around they assume their "true forms."

Alas, the resolution to this plot makes no sense, because when you ultimately learn exactly what Tawny is, there's no real reason for him to have hidden his identity from Shazam.

Another plot thread resolved to absolute confusion is Ebenezer Batson's son, who, if I'm keeping track correctly, was mind-controlled simultaneously by Sivana, the Devil, space invader worms, and a Dick Tracy crime queen (not making this up).

I do appreciate the attempts to try to connect the Marvel Family with DC's continuity, and the other Fawcett heroes specifically. For instance, remember the long-standing Superman enemies Blaze and Satanus going all the way back to Marv Wolfman's tenure on the book in the early eighties? The ones who played a big role in, among other things, Death of Superman? Well, turns out they're actually demonic twin children of the wizard Shazam!

It was a treat to see an old school talent as enormous like Curt Swan doing the flashback stories to World War II with Spysmasher and Bulletman fighting Captain Nazi. Nobody paid attention to this series because Ordway only did the covers; the interior pencils were done by Guy-With-A-Familiar-Name.

It was even more of a delight to see all these Fawcett guys show up in a book as supporting cast. It made the Marvel book feel bigger and more peopled, and gave the book a stronger sense of identity. "Power of Shazam" was about the entire Fawcett corner of the DC Universe.

At one point, the wizard Shazam even briefly retires, leaving his duties in the hand of Fawcett character Ibis the Invincible. Incidentally, Ibis happens to be the only Golden Age character I can think of who has after his original appearances, was since presented as a non-Caucasian.

Another big problem with the series? There was no "Sivana" story. In 46 issues, there was really no tale where Sivana was the main villain where we see why the guy's an interesting baddie. Considering there was a whole story arc around Mr. Atom, I have a hard time believing this.

I always had the feeling Mary Marvel makes a heck of a lot more sense in the Spanish-speaking world, where, considering how common the name "Maria" is, a "Maria Marvel" would hardly be a dead giveaway as to her identity. The name Mary isn't as common as it used to be, at least among the non-Irish. These days, if she wanted to be incognito, she'd have to be called "Jennifer Marvel."

There was a lot of resistance to the idea of Mary Marvel's corruption by Black Adam a couple years back. Actually I think it's a rather interesting idea, and one that can actually make Mary grow and be a different character at the start than at the end.

And this was also the greatest gift ever given to cosplay girls.

I don't agree with the objections but I understand why people make them. In fact, the writers should have anticipated that very reaction, if they were at all in tune with how fans think: the fan-boy overprotectiveness of female characters.

Here's an example of what I mean: remember that slimy creep Terry Long, an older chest hair and gold chain wearing community college professor divorcee who oozed and sleazed his way into the heart of Wonder Girl with Saturday Night Live quotes?

Reading Teen Titans, I kept on waiting for a plot twist that just never came.

I can totally understand why they felt the urge to have someone like Terry Long in Teen Titans, who is just a regular guy. One of my problems with X-Men is, nobody anywhere is ever really "normal." Even Nightcrawler's girlfriend turned out to be some kind of sorceress.

But fans didn't like Terry Long because he was not only an annoying creep, he was marrying Wonder Girl. This kind of reaction didn't happen when the Vision and the Scarlet Witch or Green Arrow and Black Canary got married, since both the Vision and Ollie were heroes, worthy of their respective women. Notice Steve Trevor hasn't really returned in Wonder Woman continuity.

And look at how Spider-Fans get ludicrously jumpy about the virginity of Gwen Stacy. We care more about the guys she's dated than her father probably did!

Thus, a savvy editor should have shut the idea down, even if it might have resulted in a great story, the same way editors shut down interesting but problematic proposed stories like the one where Daredevil became mayor of New York or Bill Mantlo's idea in the 1980s for Spider-Man to have an illegitimate baby.

Here's another piece of advice I have for writers who want to do Captain Marvel in the future: don't listen to the Captain Marvel die-hards like Erik Larsen. What, you think they'll be grateful to you for doing anything with Captain Marvel? Ha!

The reason it's pointless is this: Captain Marvel, unlike Superman and Batman, was denied continuous publication. If you look at the stories told in say, Superman in the late 1940s, they were very similar to Captain Marvel stories, with Superman fighting bad guys who were practical joke themed. However, Superman was continually published, and eventually the practical joke baddies disappeared, replaced by a kind of science fiction epic grandeur that drew from space opera which reached a high point in the Schwartz years.

The Legion of Super-Heroes started off as an Otto Binder-style cute gimmick story. Would you have believed it if I were to tell you they'd one day be the subjects of grandiose, epic space stories like Earthwar and Great Darkness?

Because the only image we have of CM is from the Bad Old Days, unlike Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, our very definition of what makes CM who he is comes with the demand his stories be "wacky."

What's more, since the 1960s and Marvel comics (the other Marvel comics), there's been the requirement characterization and consistent continuity will be a part of any comic, just like there's the requirement every movie made since the 1920s will have sound and every movie made since the 1950s will be made in color and widescreen: these things are a non-negotiable expectation.

Ask any comics fan you want, or even members of the general public on the street, what the appeal is in Captain Marvel, and they'll tell you it's all about a kid who gets to be an adult superhero by saying the magic word. It's the "hook" the entire character is built around.

But ask die-hards like Erik Larsen and he'll tell you a different answer. Captain Marvel is a totally different person from Billy Batson! And anyone who says he's a kid in the body of an adult doesn't understand the idea at all!

Do hardcore Captain Marvel fans think it's really that important that CM be a different person from Billy? Consider the disturbing implications of that. It means when not summoned the Captain really exists in some negative zone. What if Captain Marvel wants to stay on earth, or falls in love? He's entitled to a life. It also means Billy is not really important at all: he's just a "bottle" Captain Marvel is stored in. Captain Marvel's heroism, courage and resourcefulness doesn't really come from Billy because they're different people. Anybody could be Captain Marvel.

Alan Moore's Miracleman showed the horror potential in very powerful heroes, and even used the notion of separate people to create chills. Miracleman had a contempt for his ordinary identity and said "I don't trust Mike Moran in a crisis." If you want to make Captain Marvel creepy, this is the perfect way to do it.

Why do types like Larsen say something like this? As a Superman fan, and someone with experience with the worst kind of Superman fan, I can provide an answer. A lot of Superman fans, in opposition to the now-undone Byrne/Helfer reboot of 1986, made a big point about how in every past version of the character, is actually Superman that is the true identity and Clark Kent that is the disguise.

That was just never true, though, even before the reboot: many writers had different opinions on the matter, and one famous Maggin/Bates story insisted triumphantly and explicitly Superman was both Superman and Clark Kent. Heck, Schwartz-writer Len Wein even insisted that it was Superman who was the put-up job, not Kent.

The reason classic Superman fans say this is not because it's true or accurate, but because of contrariness that leads them to misrepresent what they're defending. Know how lots of Superman fans demand the return of Super-Pets? Then you have the emphasis on the Lieutenant Marvels, who only had appearances that could be counted on the one hand of a wood shop teacher who raises piranha. This isn't nostalgia, because nostalgia is something you feel for something remembered fondly, impossible in the case of such negligible nonentities. The reason they're big on the pets is because they piss off what they imagine modern age fans are like. In short, contrarianism.

I must admit, I've seen fans be contrary, but to negate the entire hook of a character just to be oppositional to the modern age is really breathtaking.

Get it? They will literally never be satisfied ever with anything you do for all these reasons. There is no point in second-guessing yourself, no point in wondering if you might produce something that would please older classic Captain Marvel fans. Their voices can be ignored and discounted because their demands are not reasonable.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Christopher Hitchens died – it's gloating time!

This has been a truly terrible year for comics fans. Living legends of the Golden Age like Jerry Robinson, Joe Simon and Eduardo Barretto have passed on, leaving with their tremendous talent and connection to our history. It's natural to be a little depressed as a result, and I sure am.

I thought nothing could take me out of this funk, but I was wrong. Vile Iraq War cheerleader and Bush toady bootlicker Christopher Hitchens just croaked from throat cancer.

This video should about summarize my reaction to the news.

This has truly been a great day. I feel like tap dancing. I'm more cheerful than when Bin Laden died.

Even in death it's impossible to muster sympathy for this bloated toad because his death was so obviously his own damn fault (constant cigarette use = throat cancer) so it's impossible to cough up the obligatory crocodile tears. It has a beautiful note of poetic justice. At least cancer got the guy to shut up.

Why does Christopher Hitchens deserve this kind of ire? Lots of pundits argued delusionally that Iraq was a clear and obvious danger connected to international terror with terrifying weapons ready to use at a moment's notice and any possible invasion and occupation would be one-sided, brief and cheap. He tirelessly suckered the public into a war I said from the beginning would be a giant clusterfuck…but a lot of other members of the scumsucker pundit class did what he did, too.

Why does Hitchens merit so much scorn?

Chris Hitchens wasn't just another arrogant talking head who was totally wrong about Iraq.

He was a self-appointed "leftist radical" (because he said he is one, not because of anything he'd done or views he's held, in that respect similar to his hero George Orwell) and because of that self-description he had a lot of credibility with hardcore liberals and moderates, and he lent that credibility to bootlick Cheney's scheme. Chris Hitchens made it possible for moderates and liberals to support the Iraq War. He was the sole example that could be pointed to in order to show all sides of the political spectrum supported invading Iraq. And finally, he demonstrated it was possible to be an "intellectual" and support the conflict.

His tireless support, in short, created the illusion of broad consensus, an illusion that made the Iraq War both possible and inevitable.

And Hitch has never apologized or admitted error for the bloody history his arrogance helped author.

I sincerely hope Hitchens is wrong, and there is a God, because the idea of a supreme being who holds human beings totally accountable for deeds they escaped punishment for in life is an extremely appealing one right about now. Did any neocon toady ever suffer even slightly for supporting Iraq? Have any of them lost any credibility for being totally wrong about everything?

I'm a patriot, not a sucker. Learn the difference, huh?

Oh yeah, atheism – the real reason faux liberals are crying crocodile tears over this sycophantic warmonger. Hasn't it even occurred to anyone else the two main targets of Hitchens' ire were the Catholic Church and Islam? Hitchens' atheism was nothing more than every petty hundred year old prejudice learned by the English in the nursery room, hatred of the Pope and the Irish, and hatred of immigrant groups.

His atheism wasn't Star Trek-style rational clearmindedness. All he did was drag rationalists into a long-standing, picayune tribal gang knife fight.

If all the shameful and disgusting eulogies have got you down, try reading this one. It was written a year before his death...but why wait?

I wonder…were Hitch's final moments rather like the death scene of the bad guy in the 1990 movie "Ghost?"

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Review: Heinlein's "Rocket Ship Galileo"

Rocket Ship Galileo was written in 1947 and yet it spoke to me for many reasons.

The book is about some American kids who, with traditional Yankee know-how, develop a rocketship in their own backyard to travel to the Moon. As astounding as that premise is, Heinlein makes you believe in it and here's why:

The boys are shaped by a defining event that changed their entire worldview. A couple years before, they heard about the atomic weapons used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The boys are "bitten by mathematics, science and engineering like it's a bug," with a rapacious, devouring hunger and greed for knowledge. As a person with a science background I've never heard it put better.

The boys have clueless parents that just don't get it, though. It's not that their parents are stupid, it's that they don't understand how the world changed in 1945 with the power of the atom and still have that old way of thinking that means they just don't "get" the boys.

The book was written in 1947 but it's easy to see how a lot of people today can identify with it. I certainly can. I have absolute genius and brilliant parents with PhDs…but who need help plugging in their wifi network and they think everyone on the internet is some kind of rapist. People that are older and younger than myself probably had and (are having) similar epiphanies about science and technology those more set in their ways don't get.

In fact, when I went to visit older relatives for Thanksgiving, I remembered it's been a while since I've seen anybody with actual DVDs in their home. The technology seems so old fashioned. Not because it's been superseded by some other format like HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, which are just steps sideways and equally old-fashioned. But because of streaming, technology like the iPod, and online software purchases, it seems downright retro to require a physical format at all to "own" some media.

Reading Rocket Ship Galileo, Heinlein's first novel ever, is a little shocking because it's hard to imagine Heinlein as a young person. I'm so used to him being the dignified, classy old man of science fiction not unlike his wise old man characters. For one thing, it's one of the few stories of Heinlein's to show the energetic fan-boy enthusiasm and influence of E. E. Smith, with the plot having some similarities to Smith's Skylark of Space, another novel about All-American amateurs who build their own rocket ship.

Smith had a lot of passion but he was very amateurish – Skylark was an awkwardly written adventure story. "Rocket Ship Galileo," even at that early stage of Heinlein's career, was about something.

(Interesting side note: Smith published "Skylark of Space" in the same issue of Amazing Stories as Phillip Francis Nowlan's "Armageddon 2419," the first Buck Rogers novel. In fact, Buck Rogers even got the cover over Skylark!)

Even Heinlein's usual stock character of the wise old man the hero bonds with and learns from was (are you ready?) a recent college graduate, a cool, hip younger relative who "gets it." You know how they say old age is always 15 years older than you are now?

The main plot comes when arriving on the Moon, where there are Nazis who used advanced rocketry and went to the Moon to plot their return and revenge, which isn't farfetched considering how advanced Nazi rocketry was towards the end.

Recently, I saw the proof-of-concept special effects reel trailer for "Iron Sky," a low budget movie about the Nazis returning from space, a project the creators are trying to get money to fund. This reminds me a little of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, another big budget movie that started as a five minute special effects reel, a film that was tragically overshadowed by the release of Sin City a few months later.

I'm withholding an opinion on Iron Sky because…how can you have an opinion based on nothing? A special effects/proof of concept reel, even a viral one, is just that.

Still, a few warning signs jump out at me from the trailer. One of which is, there aren't any characters in it. Who's the main character, the hero we're supposed to root for? His girlfriend? Is there like a main Nazi leader, like a "Darth Vader" type?

We don't see that, and that tells me the people making this are too much in love with the idea of the story (Nazis from the Moon, an idea which was cribbed from Rocket Ship Galileo anyway) as opposed to the stuff you need when something becomes an actual movie as opposed to a demo reel.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Review: Dynamite Comics' "Buck Rogers"

November is Buck Rogers Month here at "Julian Perez Conquers the Universe," and in that spirit, here's a look at the recent (2009 to today) Buck Rogers comic from Dynamite Entertainment by Scott Beatty and the incredible Carlos Rafael, an artist with a tremendous amount of talent for a guy with two first names.

The Dynamite Entertainment Buck Rogers comic has just the perfect tone: it is fun and kitschy and doesn't take itself too seriously, with cyborg bear-men hunting humans and giant single-celled paramecia invading earth.

By contrast, the TSR roleplaying game Buck Rogers XXVC was Buck Rogers if Christopher Nolan ever did Buck Rogers: it tried to be a gritty hard-science reboot emphasizing plausibility. While the gritty-reboot-of-a-goofy-pulp-character idea was very original and unique in 1990, it's since become overdone and all the creative power has been sapped out of it, so it's actually great to see someone do something very different.

A while back I compared Buck Rogers to the Final Fantasy series, in that nearly every version of Buck Rogers in existence are totally different to the point of total unrecognizability, with zero in common except a hero who is a man from modern-day.

This variation is shockingly far beyond even the usual tweaks made with a long-lasting pop culture hero with different media adaptations. James Bond, the Green Hornet and Superman may have crucial differences in every radio, movie and television version, but at least there's something recognizable about say, every Superman take, even wildly divergent ones like Smallville or the 1940s radio show.

For that reason the comic is interesting in that it tries to put all of the different versions together. Wilma's younger brother Buddy from the 1940s comic strip is here, and serves very much a similar function as a firey little sparkplug teenager keen to mix it up and not get left behind. Twiki's head can be seen in a cameo. Thankfully, he's a 16-20 year old and therefore doesn't violate the greatest of all science fiction commandments: thou shalt not have a cute little kid.

(The second greatest science fiction commandment? Thou shalt not have a cute little kid supergenius.)

There are even some references to the version of Buck Rogers I'm most familiar with, the Buck Rogers XXVC roleplaying game, including the presence of monstrous, muscular deformed creatures called "Gennies" including some who actually look like the monster from the cover of a Buck Rogers XXVC adventure ("A Matter of Gravitol," which had a pretty cheesy resolution but was a good adventure overall), and earth is divided into city Orgs, just like with XXVC.

The Han Airlords from the original 1919 "Armageddon 2419 AD" novel are here, though they're not the main bad guys. It is pleasant to discover they still have their Gernsback-esque, spotlight-like Dis Rays. This blew me away because I never, ever thought to see the Han in any Buck Rogers project, although this time they're not Asian anymore…not even the politically correct green-recoloring given to space Asians like Ming the Merciless and Jonny Quest's Dr. Zin so they don't look like super-racist chrome-yellow comic book Fu Manchus.

(Anyone else think of the Shaver Mystery when they hear "Dis Rays?" That's why I always had trouble ever accepting anybody ever thought Shaver was telling the truth: everything about the Shaver Mystery was way too 1940s to be about a real interior civilization.)

One new addition is that of hyper-evolved animals who occasionally hunt humans. This has a lot of great imagery and leads to some fun moments, including a twist reveal that average people will find surprising but people even moderately into science fiction will see coming from a mile away.

By the way, the minute I found out about the animal-people I kept thinking "okay, this is the context the Martian Tigermen will show up" (hopefully this time not as a lame scarred bald guy). I mean that makes sense, right – especially since this comic is full of winking little nods to previous takes on Buck Rogers?

It never fails to amaze me how Buck Rogers creates big science fiction ideas in which new takes on traditional characters would totally make sense, and then fail to use it. For instance, in Buck Rogers XXVC, it's established uploaded minds reside in computers, ghosts in the machine called Digital Personalities, exist. So…wouldn't that be a logical way to throw in Dr. Theopolis from the 1970s show? The idea never really seemed to occur to anybody at TSR.

One thing I did really like about the Dynamite Comic take is that it looks visually different and distinctive. Future technology emits light constantly, even the rocketships. This is the first time I can think of where science fiction has caught up to the iPhone and iPad aesthetic, emphasizing organic lines, single button intuitive interfaces and all-in-one personal devices that do everything instead of specialized devices (speaking for myself, since I got a cel I haven't owned a watch). The Buck Rogers transsuits are so high tech they make Iron Man's armor look like a 1992 CD-ROM PC clone with a bubble jet printer.

Unlike the comparatively dated Star Trek, this is definitely what the future will look like…at least from the perspective of right now.

On first reading, I had no idea what the world of Buck Rogers would be like this time (because it's always different) and so the first few issues do a great job of actually being disorienting and creating mystery. Figuring out what things are really like in the 25th Century is the most interesting part of the story.

With that in mind, my favorite character in the reboot is Wilma Deering because in the first few issues, Buck arrives with no idea what's going on or how to deal with the situation, so the savvy amazonian Wilma does all the asskicking and has to protect Buck from danger. This totally sidesteps one of the greatest problems with female action girls, who we're constantly told are action heroes but turn into hostages and never really manage to beat anybody (see: Kevin Costner's Robin Hood).

Like Princess Leia, every time Wilma shoots, she hits something. Not bad for someone with a fat chick name like "Wilma."

Above: NOT a fat chick. 

By the way, I'm in love with Angelina Jolie as much as every other guy in the whole cosmos, but it was a real mistake to make Ardala and Wilma both blue eyed, black haired thick lipped women, because in panels where they're together it really gets confusing.

Also, with the addition of a black-haired Wilma, Colonel Deer has officially had every single color hair in the entire spectrum!

The comic's Dr. Huer was an incredibly likable, classy, scatterbrained old chap who stays pleasant even when threatened with danger, and the comic has some powerful moments about a time-lost Buck Rogers who lost everything that ever mattered to him. These moments get all the more poignant because they don't overdo them.

Ardala is absolutely great in the series: she's manipulative in a coy way, pretending to be a lot less competent than she really is so men protect her. She's too important a character to just be peripheral to the evil schemes of other villains, though.  She should be a Big Bad and master villain, instead of some schemer on the periphery who takes advantage when the Big Bads do something. If you read the first story arc, Ardala doesn't actually do anything at all.

I also did not like their take on Killer Kane, who just like in the 1970s series, was a henchman of Ardala – a position that always diminishes his importance to the Buck Rogers mythos. Kane should be a villain in his own right, who hooks up with Ardala, attracted to each other by their mutual evil.

Apparently, this series works under the logic moustache = criminal type, so Black Barney's got a killer 'tashe too. In the comic he was yet another stock character dashing rogue who is theoretically supposed to be scene-stealing.

My all-time favorite version of Black Barney is the Buck Rogers XXVC version, but that isn't too hard, though: Black Barney in the 1970s show looked and acted like homosexual community theater version of Sinbad the Sailor hamming it up.

In the 1991 RPG, Black Barney was a combination of the Captain America villain Crossbones with Ice-T, Gully Foyle, and a heaping extra layer of pus, trash and grime, a cynical, black humored, intimidating crook, not too intelligent, not too talkative, but with a totally ruthless cunning like a predatory animal, with absolutely frightening strength and agility, an inhumanly deep and menacing voice, a killer instinct, and zero hesitation to fight dirty. He doesn't smile, laugh or joke around. In the game Barney was a terrifying fighting machine, a scarred, ugly thug who did time, which I always thought was more interesting and truly intimidating than this tendency to make him either a dashing rogue like Han Solo or a sanitized, family friendly Ben Grimm-type tough guy that's really a softie deep down.

Black Barney in the TSR game became a good guy only because he respects power, and therefore respects anybody that can beat him, which Buck Rogers did - that, and curiosity too. After all, Barney was surprised after his failure he wasn't immediately killed. Black Barney gave the setting a badly needed Boba Fett type antihero compared to the squeaky clean and optimistic Buck Rogers.

The Dynamite Buck Rogers comic got that tone and spirit right and does have a few original ideas, but despite all that, it occasionally has the feel of "been-there, done-that." The new Buck Rogers reminds me of a meal with leftovers you have at the end of a week with your family, where it can be a game to spot what dish there came from what meal. The liberal borrowing becomes so obvious at times the pop culture savvy Buck Rogers, even in the comic itself, points it out.

For instance:

  • The idea of animals evolved to superintelligence comes from David Brin's "Uplift" novels and the idea said hyperintelligent animals would return after a long time from deep space to menace the human race comes from Leonard Nimoy's "Primortals;"

  • The main villain having a wolf tracker henchman comes straight from Maugrim from the Chronicles of Narnia (the guy in this comic was killed off way too fast, by the way – he could have been a recurring baddie);

  • The Han Airlords ditched their Zeppelins and have a flying city that looks just like the Hawkmen's from Flash Gordon (seriously, LOOK at it!);

  • Ardala and Killer Kane started off as traitors to earth who after being rescued by other humans spend the majority of their existence disguising their guilt and treachery, just like Baltar in the recent Battlestar Galactica reboot;

  • Buck and Dr. Huer encounter a race of albinos who live under caves in a hidden vault after a cold war-flavored atomic exchange they believe destroyed the surface, an idea that is the premise of the Fallout games…and they worship unexploded atomic bombs. Even Buck can't resist a wisecrack at this similarity. They're even undone by bright lights, just like "The Mole Men."

All in all, the comic is above average at its best points, and is worth reading if for no other reason than Carlos Rafael's astounding pencils. There are even some bits that are actually funny, like how a plot point revolves around how nobody in the future can read cursive writing. Looking at Carlos Rafael's art I find myself saying...why have I never heard of this guy before?

Also - keep your eyes peeled for the bit where Buck and Wilma put on their 1930s comic-strip inspired suits!

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Game Review: Buck Rogers XXVC (1990)

Now here's an oddity I have trouble believing even exists: for a whole generation, the primary form we even knew about Buck Rogers at all was as a roleplaying game, and one that was a edgy reimagining of a goofy pulp character...before that was even a thing! It even does that word-salad XXVC subname, before hip, marketable undertitles shortened to the point of meaninglessness became a trend. In short, Buck Rogers XXVC is a game that was ahead of its time (though behind ours).

Of all the gritty reboots of a previously goofy pulp character, Buck Rogers XXVC, a roleplaying game produced by TSR back in 1990, has a certain logic I agree with: many science-oriented pulp characters were created with the intention they would be "state of the art," written with the best scientific knowledge available. This is undercut somewhat by artists and writers resurrecting pulp heroes with nostalgic, kitsch 1920s imagery like zeppelins and fin-helmets.

Buck Rogers XXVC is about a polluted earth inhabited by gangs exploited by a villainous, arrogant Martian megacorporation. This isn't as crackpot as it sounds for two reasons.

First, Buck Rogers still has alien monsters, space battles and ruthless villains, but in the words of the game manual itself, "while the flavor is the same, the ingredients are different." The unusual monsters and aliens are now products of genetic engineering, Mars and Venus are terraformed worlds.

Heck, the main means of interstellar travel in this game are rockets. It brings to mind how undervalued Goddard's invention is in science fiction, as rockets are the one vehicle that in real life has actually taken mankind to the stars, yet they're the least seen in science fiction these days. Making rockets the means of transport in the game is nothing short of a stroke of genius because with one creative choice it encapsulates the entire spirit of the setting: rockets are simultaneously plausible hard science, yet also evoke retro, classic science fiction.

Second, Buck Rogers is no stranger to varying takes. What's amazing to me about Buck Rogers is this: every single adaptation and version of the character is wildly different. It's like the craziest game of telephone ever played. The only other property I can think of where absolutely everything changes with every single new "take" would have to be Final Fantasy.

Take a look at the Dynamite Entertainment Buck Rogers comic. I haven't read it yet, but they're wearing friggin' Tron outfits so how similar can it possibly be?

Contrast that with Flash Gordon. It's shocking how almost every single version and adaptation of Flash Gordon from the 1930s serial, to the Filmation animated series, to the 1980 movie, have basically the same story structure and opening with barely any variation: Flash Gordon is caught in a plane crash with Dale Arden onto Zarkov's property. Zarkov captures them for a rocket launch toward Mongo. They crash and encounter Ming the Merciless as prisoners, where Princess Aura falls for Flash and Flash is sent to a gladiatorial arena to die, etc.

Heck, Mongo even looks similar in most versions of Flash Gordon.

Contrast that to the varying versions of Buck Rogers, where the basic relationships and even the location, enemies and setting aren't even permanent. The pulp novel Buck Rogers was based on, and the initial run of the newspaper series, didn't even actually have space travel. Can you think of anything more fundamental to the perception of Buck Rogers than space travel?

The villains were the Airlords of Han, Mongols who destroyed white civilization with superior airplanes and zeppelins. Yes, that's right: the original comic strip and novel version of Buck Rogers were based around a futuristic Race War with whites against the Yellow Peril.

And shockingly, our hero wasn't even called Buck Rogers until the comic strip!

We could be here all day listing the different versions of Rogers but the point is this: Buck is so wildly divergent, beyond even the normal variability of long-lasting multimedia fictional characters, that if somebody wants to do a state of the art, scientifically accurate version...why not?

The Setting

The principal conflict in the game is between a conquered earth ruthlessly lorded over by a Martian evil corporation, RAM, who arrogantly view earth as a mudball only fit to be exploited for natural resources. In the minds of the Martian RAM executives, they're the only good thing that ever came out of the earth.

The guy who wrote the series bible was Transformers/GI Joe writer Flint Dille, and that is something of a surprise as he's a conservative. It's surprising to discover a setting created by a conservative would have the bad guy be an evil, powerful corporation. After all, wouldn't Buck Rogers and the rest saving the Earth from RAM's rapaciousness be nothing more than interference with free market forces?

Get a job, hippie!

One of the pirate bad guys has a rocketship named "The Free Enterprise."

The kind of science fiction conservatives like is Starship Troopers, Honor Herrington or Halo: reveling in militarism, with a monocultural society that is presented as morally superior to an enemy group that's a multicultural, visually diverse Federation. Along the way there's usually some metaphor about how appeasement never works and how it's always 1939 and every enemy are always, always the Nazis.

Another big theme of the Buck Rogers XXVC setting is genetic engineering, and how "Gennies," or genetically created people, are just as human as the rest of us but are treated as property. Sympathy for oppressed minority outsiders (who often stand in the way of good land with resources on them) is not exactly a theme one would expect from a conservative author, although Flint Dille only wrote the bible and the game was developed by other hands.

Thanks to Gennies, despite the setting being humans-only, the world is nonetheless filled with weird Star Wars cantina creatures.

My personal favorite Gennies in the setting are the Venusian lowlanders. On terraformed Venus, only the highlands are inhabitable to human-type life, yet a crucial cash crop can only grow in the lowlands. So humanoids were created to survive in that environment, Lowlanders, who look like the scarier brothers of the Creature from the Black Lagoon. The rub is, the highland Venusians are trying to terraform Venus…which threatens the entire existence of the Lowlanders. Despite their rebellion and the fact they look like scary monsters, the Lowlanders have a pretty sympathetic position.

Instead of stormtroopers, RAM use berserker, genetically engineered soldiers called Terrines, who look like the kangaroo supersoldiers from Tank Girl. In the minds of the Terrines, the highest form of life in the universe are Martian RAM corporate executives, with themselves as the second highest, and everybody else beneath them.

The canon characters

It's interesting to see what shape the traditional Buck Rogers characters take. Ardala Valdemar for instance, is a highly connected, high-status freelance Martian RAM agent who functions as a double-dealing information broker and espionage agent. In one of the sample adventures, she seduces the sample player character, slips them a drugged drink and makes off with a valuable information disk.

Killer Kane, though, is a heck of a lot more interesting: he was a former earth rocket jock who was a lover of Wilma Deering, who after being captured by RAM agreed to work for them so Wilma would be released. Along the way though, Kane's enormous ego got the best of him: he believes he's actually working for the betterment of Earth, which would be a lot better off with him as its RAM administrator…and there's the tremendous ego-wound of possibly being the second best pilot in the solar system to a fossil from the 20th Century, who also might take Kane's girlfriend, too.

"Doctor Huer" is a digital personality, a kind of artificially intelligent computer program.

There are no Tigermen, but Mars does have a nomadic cat-race who vaguely suggest the Martian Tigermen.

If there's any complaint, it is that NPC characters defining the setting are never used in the adventure supplements the game puts out. You never really interact with Ardala, Killer Kane, space pirate Black Barney (who is obviously this setting's scarred, sardonic answer to Boba Fett), but rather with no-name, who-cares characters like Carlton Turabian and RAM security chief Marcus Wolfe. Not getting a mission briefing or scientific pointers from Doctor Huer is especially inexcusable, since it's not like a computer program is ever going to overshadow the player characters – the whole point of the character is to give quest missions and provide exposition, after all.

The failure to use the signature characters gives the overwhelming feeling the Buck Rogers elements are awkwardly welded on a totally different setting.

Why does this game even exist?

Buck Rogers is an IP that is frankly, overvalued. If anything, the association with Buck Rogers might have damaged the future of Buck Rogers XXVC, because a lot of gamers avoided this game thinking it was "cheesy."

(See also: the Lone Ranger. Recently, Gore Verbinski refused to direct "The Lone Ranger" starring Jonny Depp as Tonto because Disney wouldn't cough up a $250 million budget. Now, what, I ask you, about the Lone Ranger could possibly make it cost $250 million, unless Depp and Verbinski were straight up skimming $150 million straight off the top? And can anyone imagine any possible scenario on this or any other planet where a Lone Ranger movie makes more than enough to recoup that Waterworld-level cost?)

If calling it "Buck Rogers" hurt the game, why call it that at all? It's not exactly like the character has a built-in fanbase the way Indiana Jones or the Marvel superheroes have. Buck Rogers is one of those characters, along with Paul Bunyan, where everybody's heard of him, but nobody really cares about him.

The reason this game exists at all is, it was created to be a borderline-illegal money pipeline out of TSR, Inc. into the pockets of its chairwoman. I'm actually not making this up.

It kills me to say that, because this was quite possibly my second or third RPG ever (after Top Secret and the Palladium Ninja Turtles game) and discovering its reason for existence was un-kosher business practices is like discovering the show Sesame Street was created to be a cover for a pedophile ring.

Rather, the game was created because the former president of TSR was Lorraine Williams, known as the woman who led a hostile takeover that kicked D&D creator Gary Gygax from his own company, for suing fans in the 1990s who created AD&D fan websites (giving TSR the name "They Sue Regularly"), and for her nickname among rpg fans, "the Wicked Witch of the Mid-West."

You see, Lorraine was the granddaughter of the rights-owner to Buck Rogers, and so she could allow TSR to pay for all the expenses while her own company received the profits. Lorraine essentially paid herself royalties based on 60% of the print run, despite the fact that by all reports the game didn't sell and unsold product was everywhere.

I'm not a finance attorney, but that doesn't sound entirely legal. 

How is it as a game?

It uses THAC0. Oh dear God, THAC0 – the most annoying calculation in RPG history. Old school gamers lock up with PTSD when it's mentioned, and it turned 2nd Edition into not so much something you play, so much as as something you survive.

As you might guess, Buck Rogers XXVC uses a variation on Second Edition AD&D for its "engine," and so it's a class and level based game with classes like Rocket-Jock, Rogue and Warrior. In yet another respect that makes it ahead of its time, anticipating the way, years later, the d20 engine would be appropriated for even wildly inappropriate high-tech genres. After all, if a game is barely functional, it is vastly improved by the addition of street slang and zombie apocalypses, right?

Buck Rogers XXVC game commits a faux pas common to early class and level games, one inexcusable for a game made at its late date: it makes necessary to group survival some un-fun to play support classes, Medic and Engineer. These classes are a great idea for everybody but the poor schlub player that actually has to suck it up and be the healer, that is. Yeah, that's exactly what I imagined myself as a buttkicking space hero: medic.

The big difference between the Buck Rogers game and AD&D is a surprisingly modern and progressive skill system using percentile dice. The relevant ability score is added (Dexterity of 17 adds +17%) and a chunk of points are given for class skills and outside of class skills.

Here comes the biggest hole in the entire system: there isn't really that much of a space combat system except for assigning statistics to vehicles.

There's a whole class based around skill with rocket piloting (Rocket Jock) but there's actually no bonus whatsoever in space combat for having high skill with piloting! There is no way to use pilot skill to coax speed or performance, no way to dogfight, no way to position oneself for a chance to hit, no way to perform evasive maneuvers.

Two ships with the same hit points, weaponry and dexterity bonus, but one with a 1st Level Rocketjock and the other with Buck Rogers, will have no discernable difference in combat statistics other than THAC0 for gunnery.

They mumble something about "special movement at the GM's discretion," an afterthought with no concrete functionality.

In the published adventures, the only times there are any actual rolls required for Piloting are for landings. Not even exciting landings, either, like gliding a crashing rocket safely…just regular, routine consequence-free landings, of the kind airline pilots make daily. In terms of drama and excitement this is somewhere up there with requiring skill checks for bathroom use.

The game lore makes a big deal out of Killer Kane and Buck Rogers' rivalry to determine who the best pilot in the solar system is, but considering piloting skills aren't a factor in ship-to-ship combat at all I have no idea how they could ever make that determination – or why it matters.

The damage done by futuristic weaponry in Buck Rogers XXVC is shockingly unimpressive. Laser guns deal 1d8 points of damage per successful shot. Considering that's the exact same damage as a sword in AD&D, and how lasers are just as subject to AC as swords are, and swords receive additional bonuses from high Strength and so on average do more damage than lasers...well, it's strangely pleasant to discover there really hasn't been much in the way of improvement in weaponry technology over the past 2,000 years.

(Didn't a Katana in 2nd Edition AD&D do something like 1d10 or 1d12 damage, depending on the sourcebook? A lot of games suffered from Katanaitis back in the day but this kicks it up a whole new level if the katana does the same or more damage than both a laser gun and a 1d10 monomolecular blade from 500 years in the future.)

That said, there are a few extremely cool parts of the system. The boxed set comes with a map of the Solar System, and it's an ACTIVE one. The orbits of the planets have ticks around them, with the position for January 2453 given, with each tick representing the planet's movement in a month. To determine where a planet might be at any given time, just advance (or subtract) its position by one tick for every month. So, if you want to know how far Mars and Earth are from each other in February 2454, just advance earth and Mars by 13 notches.


The system even comes with a transparent ruler you can put on the solar system map to measure how much fuel (measured in hit points) it takes to make a trip. As communications are far from instantaneous and happen at light speed, it can even tell how much delay there is between signals (it usually takes 13 minutes to send a message to Mars, which is 13 light-minutes away).

Overall though, the game has gaping flaws, though it is enough of a curiosity that I'd recommend it to the interested. I've never seen game art in my life where it's obvious the artist is just bored. Every problem I have with this game would probably be solved by a second edition – but considering the crazy reasons it existed at all, that's a guarantee to never, ever happen.

It will never be reprinted and so apart from secondhand on ebay it's impossible to obtain it legally. However, I would never, ever, ever, ever advise downloading it. Because that would be WRONG, you see…  :-)