GKA:We are happy to present the second half of this three part interview with Raymondl. Stick around you might learn something
GKA: Why is it that western heroes don`t seem to latch on to audiences that much anymore?
Marvel constently gives us Spider-Man, X-Men,
Hulk Avengers etc but for the life of me I can`t put my finger on why the newer heroes don`t seem to captivate audiences and "stick" the way Wolverine or Green Lantern did in their time. What must a hero do to get really noticed and stay endearing at the same time?RL:I'm not sure if its Western heroes only that don't stick in people's minds anymore. I think that Western heroes are already at their limits on what is "original". I think Alex Ross said it best in an interview I read in WIZARD that superheroes fit into a few categories that have been "pigeonholed". For instance, there is the "all-powerful, justice-seeking" type of heroes that Superman & the Martian Manhunter are prime examples of.
Then there is the "dark loner on a path of vengeance" types that Batman and the Punisher exemplify. There is the "all-beauteous, virtuous super female" types that Wonder Woman and nearly all super-heroines qualify under. The "techno" heroes like Iron Man and Steel come next. There is the "magic-based" heroes that Drs. Fate and Strange are in and to a point Green Lantern, and then there is the "kid who gets a chance to be a hero" types that Captain Marvel (Shazam) and Spider-Man fall in.
Almost every Western hero comes under one of these umbrellas--but Alex Ross put it way better than I just did. I think after reading that interview, I can see why new Western heroes don't seem to have that staying power, because it begins a "been there, done that" routine. Even the "newer" heroes like Spawn or Hellboy all fall under one of these categories. With that in mind, there really hasn't been any new hero concepts in the West other than a variation of any of these iconic types.
While it's always enjoyable to read BATMAN or THE AVENGERS, there really isn't anything new about superheroes in decades, which is why these days, I tend to stray towards the non-hero fare like 100 BULLETS, FABLES, Y--THE LAST MAN, 30 DAYS OF NIGHT, GOTHAM CENTRAL, and THE SIMPSONS for a change of pace, even though I still like reading JSA, BIRDS OF PREY, and other hero stuff. 9)
GKA:Lets take a look at todays heroes. Give us a overview of what you think of the current Anti-Hero trend.
RL:Ooooh, the touchy subject of the "anti-hero". I'm mixed about them. Some are done well, like Jesse Custer in PREACHER, or Vic Mackey on THE SHIELD program, and some are down right annoying, like how Marvel approached Venom in the late 1990s, or how Lobo devolved into a parody rather than an "anti-hero".
Their moral ambivalence certainly attracts readers, but since the line between hero and villain (to me at least) is so thin, that writers can't help but tip them over to one side or another, and most of the time, they tip towards the side of good. Wolverine was once an anti-hero, but it's clear that he is a good guy, no matter how much so-called "killings" he's done, since he never really kills anyone that is clearly a good guy like Captain America or Reed Richards. He just kills off the really evil guys.
The Punisher is another one like that--he never sets out to shoot Hawkeye or Ant-Man, but he'll take a potshot at some cruddy villain. With that in mind, the writers lose touch of the character's "anti-hero"-ness and puts them squarely on the moral side. The characters in THE AUTHORITY, whose methods are quite brutal and violent, are probably the only ones closest in my opinion of being a true "anti-hero" idea.
Their goals don't always serve in the best interests of the majority, they perform actions sometimes without dealing with the immediate consequences, yet it always turns out for the better. Perhaps the best writing of an "anti-hero" is Vic Mackey on THE SHIELD--no matter how much good he does on the streets of L.A., the show's writers always remind viewers that Vic has shot & killed a fellow cop that was investigating him, has stolen drugs to fund his actions, hidden away evidence that would incriminate him, and other dirty dealings. At the same time, his brutal methods have cleaned up the streets, made criminals fear him, and the outcome of a lot of his actions come out positively.
I don't think there is a comic out there right now that hits the "anti-hero" idea right anymore, so comic book writers have to tread that thin line between hero and villain, and taking a cue from Mackey is a start.
GKA:America's Spider-Man has enjoyed the most success in Japan, why is this and who do you think from the US would also be accepted as a brother there?
RL:I can't explain SPIDER-MAN's appeal in Japan. It might be because he's an American hero that doesn't look all-American, especially with Japan's slight xenophobia towards non-Japanese ideas. While Japan has embraced cultural icons such as Mickey Mouse, Marilyn Monroe, James Dean, Steve McQueen, and King Kong, the ideas that are "super pro U.S.A." aren't as popular, such as Superman, or Captain America, and evident in the failure of G.I. JOE there. SPIDER-MAN, I guess, is just "super-hero" enough not to have any nationalistic allegiance towards anyone at first glance.
The movies did really well in Japan, as well as having Japan's own version of Spidey in a tokusatsu program, but I think his weird look also helps. Spidey has one of comicdom's best costumes, bar none. You ask anyone who's never heard of comics before and ask him to point out who could possibly be a "Spider-Man" and most likely, that person will identify him in a group picture with little difficulty.
Perhaps that's the appeal, since the Peter Parker storyline doesn't seem to matter as much to the Japanese as the Spider-Man aspect of the character. I don't really have an answer to this one. As for an American hero that is doing well over there, BATMAN seems to be the best bet. His dark overtones, his frightening persona, his obsessiveness--all of these have been mentioned in Japan as akin to a samurai mentality, so his appeal is strong.
Otherwise, the Japanese seem to have enough heroes on their plates not to require an embracing of any U.S. hero that I currently know of, though people's tastes change and I could be wrong within days. Who knows what will be popular--there could be a craze soon for Iron Man for all I know!
GKA:Is it a good thing that America is being so influenced by Japanese heroes? Or is it bad thing that the west seems to show a lack of appreciation of it`s own heroes?
RL:I think that the influence of Japanese heroes towards American heroes is OK--up to a point. I've noticed that a lot of publishers are seeking the "manga" look, or attempt to draw their characters with exaggerated proportions similar to manga, or outright present a hero with a Japanese undertone these days.
That's OK, but not to the point where the American idea is completely buried and doesn't seem to even exist anymore. Take for instance the recent MARVEL MANGA line where they tried to draw heroes like Spidey, Iron Man, Cap, and the rest of the guys with an all-manga style. They drew Iron Man's armor almost to the point of mimicking a Japanese mecha robot, which isn't what Iron Man is. Iron Man needs to be more "man"-looking than "bulky Japanese robot with multiple boosters, swords hidden in his hips, and able to combine from all of your Mom's household appliances".
Cartoon Network is seriously guilty of this--a lot of their newer programs are so Japanese-like, that it seems they aren't even remotely American anymore, even though the property is U.S., like TEEN TITANS and that SUPER MONKEY program. While it would be nice to emulate some story ideas from Japan, or have some art styles similar to Japanese anime or Chinese manwha, someone as American-iconic as the Boy Wonder shouldn't look like he fits in with the cast of DORAEMON, at least, not too much.
I appreciate the fact that Americans are beginning to be more interested in the Eastern style of storytelling, and that they respect the appeal of the Japanese anime style. If that's the case, then simply bring over the Japanese properties uncut, and do a joint international trade where American ideas can be aired over international TV stations and books. By totally converting over to a Japanese style, American shows are losing it's visual definition.
As a kid, you could tell that BATTLE OF THE PLANETS wasn't American, and to find out more about it, it appealed more to you that it was a foreign project. As a kid, you could tell that HE-MAN AND THE MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE was clearly an American-made idea, and you were comfortable with it. These days, even G.I. JOE--clearly an American appeal only, is drawn by Studio Gonzo in Japan for G.I. JOE: SIGMA SIX. That makes G.I. JOE less identifiable with its original theme of being American soldiers fighting for the truth, justice, and the American way.
It's good in some ways that American producers are trying something new, but they should use some common sense and incorporate those new foreign ideas into their own original projects rather than converting over so completely. It's like if the art team from Hanna-Barbera took over GUNDAM in Japan--GUNDAM would lose its national appeal & identity.
GKA:Superman or Batman?
RL:Batman--most definitely. Actually, I'd like to make a more specific version--the Bruce Timm / Paul Dini-animated series version of Batman is the best. There have been some terrible interpretations of Batman over the years, and I think the animated version is the most clear-cut, most definitive of Bob Kane's original interpretation of the character.
I like Superman, but I haven't really liked him since the old Curt Swan / Kurt Schaffenberger days in the late 1950s / early-1960s where he used to fight all kinds of weird stuff. The current Superman has too much drama outside of his Super-ness. .
Be back here next week as we conlclude this in depth interview with Raymondl
No comments:
Post a Comment