Sunday Best: The Catholic Skywalker Awards 2019- BEST IN COMICS

With 2019 coming to a close, it is time for us to choose what the best entertainment of the year was.  And just as the Academy Awards have their "Oscars, " so too the Catholic Skywalker Awards have their "Kal-El's"

Now, you may be wondering why a blog called Catholic Skywalker would choose a Superman statue as it's award, and not something from Star Wars.   The reasons are 3-fold:

1.  The Catholic Skywalker Awards will cover movies, television, and comic books.  Superman is an icon for all three.

2.  The pose he has here, revealing his inner hero, is symbolic of the revelation of truth and beauty that we should find in all good art.

3.  It's a statue I actually own, so I can use this photo on my blog.

Catholic Skywalker: Best in Comics:

Best Series

Detective Comics

When it became clear that Tom King's Batman run was on its way to crashing and burning, I was worried that we would not get the Batman stories we want.  Thankfully Peter J. Tomasi took over Detective Comics.  Tomasi understands Batman and the entire Bat-Family.  Even though is was shackled by the events in King's book, Tomasi gave us some great adventures of the Dark Knight.  The introduction of the Arkham Knight was a neat way to fold that character into the comics continuity from the games.  His handling of the Mr. Freeze story was a welcome evolution of the character.  In this story, Freeze is able to take his wife out of suspended animation and make her like him.  At first Nora is horrified, but slowly, the processes turns her into a monster worse than her husband.  It is wonderfully tragic to see that by "saving" her, Freeze loses her all over again.  But my favorite story this year was Batman's interaction with the Spectre.  I loved the juxtaposition of Batman's relative humanity to the Spectre's relative omnipotence.  It was also a wonderful exploration of the relationship between justice and vengeance.  Artist Doug Mahnke is at the top of his game, making the stories visceral as we see the strain that the never-ending mission takes on all the characters involved.  This is the Batman comic you should be reading.

RUNNERS UP
Hawkman

The Flash

Justice League Dark

SHAZAM!

Best Mini-Series

DOOMSDAY CLOCK

I waited to write this article until the final issue of Doomsday Clock hit the news stands.  I wrote this last year:

Geoff Johns and Gary Frank are taking putting all of their talent to try to do the impossible: create an antidote to Watchmen.  The Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons masterpiece is a perfect piece of nihilistic fiction that deconstructs the notion of superheroes and heroism in general.  The themes are dark and horrid, but they are presented with such genius and talent that they demand respect and attention.  Johns and Frank are going to try and create a piece of fiction that constructs the notion of superheroes and heroism in a way that adequately answers the challenge of Watchmen.

To do this, Johns and Frank are meeting Moore and Gibbons on their own ground.  The style is exactly in keeping with Watchmen.  And Johns is not taking any shortcuts.  He is dragging our beloved DC icons into the moral muck of the Watchmen.  Every issue raises the stakes.  Johns is tying up our heroes into a Gordian Knot that seems impossible to untie.  But this makes the story all the more compelling.  Can Johns and Frank succeed?

The answer: Absolutely!

Everything comes down to Superman vs. Dr. Manhattan.  But this is not just a conflict of characters, but a conflict of ideologies and philosophies.

Alan Moore's thesis was that fallen human beings like us should not go around playing hero because our broken nature would only make things worse.  Geoff Johns says that while heroes are not perfect, they are necessary to help people to strive to an ideal.  This is a very Catholic idea and can be found in the veneration of the saints.  Perhaps my analogy is a bit strained here, but I think it is along the same lines.  The saints are not demi-gods.  They are men and women who gave their all to show us a better way.  God allows them to perform miracles so that we look to their moral example.  Johns says that true heroes have been gifted withe extraordinary power to show how to live lives of courage and sacrifice.  You can see this in the relationship of parents to children.  Parents are the idealized heroes to their kids.  Parents give the examples their children need to become the heroes of tomorrow.  Moore gets stuck at the part where we grow up and realize that our parents are just as flawed as we are.  But Johns sees deeper and sees that if our parents raise us in love, we can change the world by giving that love to others.

Ultimately this story is about why Superman matters.  This is a timely discussion as it has been leaked that Warner Bros. doesn't know how to make him relevant.  One of Johns most brilliant writing choices was to remove any interior monologue from Superman.  He is iconic but a little distant.  It's not that he is cold, but that he is far above us.  It is exactly what Steven Spielberg did when he made Lincoln.  He creates a sense of mystery and wonder not at Superman's power, but at his heroic spirit.  We actually end up identifying more with Dr. Manhattan and wonder "How is Superman so good?"

All of this is done in a way that doesn't feel preachy and is integral to the story.  Every issue felt like an event.  Gary Frank's art is some of the best I have ever seen in a comic and that is not hyperbole.  Johns and Frank made sure to make Doomsday Clock first and foremost a compelling story.  And while they were at it, the fathomed the depths of the medium itself.  

Bravo!

Best Single Issue

Doomsday Clock #12

SPOILER ALERT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT READ WATCHMEN.

I don't think I anticipated a single issue of a comic like this in a very long time.  Geoff Johns writes in a teleological way, where everything builds to the conclusion.  (Contrast that to the end of Tom King's Batman run which dismissed the end conflict within a few pages).  The two icons of the book (Superman and Dr. Manhattan) finally meet.  At the same time, the world seems to be falling apart around them.  Each page, each panel ratchets up the tension until the moment when Superman charges towards Dr. Manhattan with fire in his eyes.  I remember holding this two page spread open for a few minutes, waiting to turn the page.  I knew that the answer was about to be revealed and I wanted to revel in the journey that brought the story to this point.  I tried to guess at what would happen when I turned the page.  And I knew I would only get one chance to read the finale for the first time.

I turned the page and Geoff Johns and Gary Frank brought the journey full circle and answered the question.  I wrote last year that Johns was trying to write a Gordian knot that seems impossible to untie.  But Johns not only repudiates Alan Moore but pays tribute to him at the same time.  SPOILER AHEAD.  Dr. Manhattan cannot see past his confrontation with Superman.  He believes that this fight will end with either Superman killing him or Dr. Manhattan destroying everything.  There is a line from The Matrix movies that says "No one can see beyond a choice that they do not understand."  That is why Dr. Manhattan is blind.  It is Superman who says, "What if there is a third choice?  That choice makes all the difference.

The issue takes us to the literal darkness of despair and then raises us up to see why comics and why super heroes matter.  Sometimes the most heroic thing is realizing that you aren't the hero, but that you can help someone else become the hero the world needs.  And isn't that what all parents do?

Best Artist

Gary Frank (DOOMSDAY CLOCK)

As I wrote last year:

Gary Frank is one of the best artists working today.

Period.

And when he is paired with Geoff Johns, the two of them make magic.  Their collaborations of Action Comics, Batman: Earth One, DC Universe Rebirth, and SHAZAM! have been incredible.

But Doomsday Clock is on another level.  Frank has the challenge of keeping the look of the book consistent with Dave Gibbons legendary work on Watchmen, while at the same time making it his won.  And dare I say, he has surpassed Gibbons.  Every character panel is filled with character and action.

The long delays in the story were absolutely worth the gorgeous art.  He can take you on a characters complete emotional arch in two panels with how he changes their expression.  And he can set the stage for epic action that will fill the eye with wonder.

RUNNERS UP
Bryan Hitch: Hawkman
Ivan Reis: Superman
Doug Mahnke: Detective Comics
Clay Mann: Heroes in Crisis

Best Writer

Geoff Johns (DOOMSDAY CLOCK, SHAZAM!)

photo from besignyawn

As I wrote last year:

Readers of this blog may be sick of me constantly putting Geoff Johns in the best writer spot, but I refuse to penalize him simply for being so good.


I read one book right after the other and it not only re-affirmed Johns unquestionable talent as a writer, but also his versatility.  His books are diverse in the best possible sense.  Everything Grant Morrision writes feels a little crazy.  Everything Garth Ennis writes feels sadistically violent.  But Johns can write two stories with just as much skill but feel like they were written by totally different writers.

Johns put all of his creative energy, skill, and talent into Doomsday Clock.  It balances the mind-blowing epic scale with the interior personal journey.  The last page and last quote are some of the things I will remember forever from reading comics.

RUNNERS UP
Tom Taylor: DCeased
Peter Tomasi: Detective Comics
Robert Venditti: Hawkman
Frank Miller: Superman - Year One

Film Review: Little Women

Sexuality/Nudity No Objection
Violence No Objection
Vulgarity No Objection
Anti-Catholic Philosophy No Objection


Last year I saw the critically lauded Greta Gerwig film Lady Bird.  You can read the full review here, but in a nutshell I detested it.  So when I heard that Gerwig was writing and directing an adaptation of Little Women, I was incredibly skeptical.  I was expecting it to be a post-modern deconstruction of the classic book filled with modern diatribes and lectures about how backwards the society of the day was.

I could not have been more wrong.

Gerwig has achieved something truly great with this movie. 

The story centers around the four March sisters in late 1860's New England.  There is Jo (Saoirse Ronan), the head-strong, independent writer.  Then there is Meg (Emma Watson), the conscientious actress and hopeless romantic.  Amy (Florence Pugh) is the immature, hyper-feminine daughter who grows into a woman of society.  Finally there is Beth (Eliza Scanlen), the reserved, musical, and tender-hearted daughter in the group.  They all live under the care of their mother Marmee (Laura Dern) while their father is helping the Union Army in the Civil War.  The girls become friends with the wealthy neighbor boy Laurie (Timothee Chalamet), who grows increasingly fond of Jo over the years. 

One of the most innovative and effective things that Gerwig does is jump back and forth in the narrative from adulthood to childhood.  Unlike most adaptation which presents the story in chronological order, Gerwig introduces us to the characters as adults.  This is a narrative risk, since there is a danger that you could lose all dramatic tension of their childhood if we know where they end up.  SPOILERS AHEAD FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT READ THE NOVEL.  We are told at the beginning that Laurie professed his love for Joe sometime in the past and was rejected.  We know from the beginning who Meg will marry and how her life has turned out.  But instead of taking the wind out of the narrative's sails, it makes the story much more interesting.  The early years are told with a literal and visual warmth and glow that contrasts so nicely with the strain of adult responsibility.  Gerwig has expertly divided up past and present so that one informs the other for the character's arcs.  This is especially the case for the romance between Amy and Laurie.  Amy is supposed only be a little girl when she first meets Laurie and they fall in love towards the end of the story after she has grown.  But here, Gerwig makes Amy only slightly younger than Jo and the first time we see Amy and Laurie in the story, they are both adults who have a clear connection.  It makes the love triangle much more interesting and engaging.

END SPOILERS

I have to say that this movie warmed my heart.  It is not cynical or post-modern.  There is a line where Marmee says she is ashamed of her country, but it is in the context of the existence of slavery.  Both Jo and Amy give speeches about the limited opportunities for women, but they do not come off as lectures.  They are born out of the story and the characters in a way that feels natural to the time and not some modern critique of it.  Jo says that her value is more than just to be an object of love, but this is not a rejection of romance as some kind of protest against society.  She may be more than someone who needs love, but she is not less than that.  Each of the characters feels completely fleshed out and not stereotypes.  Each of the sisters has a distinctive voice that creates a real sense of anger and affection like you would find in any family. 

The greatest thing about what this movie did for me is that in inspires me to be more generous.  The girls just sit down to eat a hearty Christmas breakfast when Marmee tells them about a family in need that has nothing and asks the girls to give up their morning feast.  You can clearly see the disappointment in them, but they comply and go off to give away their food not with sullen complaints, but with the joy of a family outing.  Seeing the squalor of the other family makes concrete for them the need for their gift and fills them with purpose.  Marmee is constantly seeking to do more, anonymously giving her own scarf to a poor man who needs it.  Even their mostly absent father is away so that he can do his part to help his fellow man.  Marmee tries so hard to pass on this virtue to her children and see it on screen without preachiness or too much sentiment makes me want to be a more generous person.  And all of this is done with the characters' Christian faith not being marginalized.

You can see the effect that this has on the girls.  Even Jo's ambitions as a writer are not born out of selfish need for self-actualization.  She has gone to New York to become a writer because it is greatest talent and her best way to make money for her family.  She struggles with selling stories she does not like and writing stories that she does, but always with the needs of her family in mind.  This is also true of Amy who is the only one of her sisters who has a chance to marry into wealth.  This is not portrayed as mercenary but always with the eye of her responsibility to take care of the rest of the family.  As tense as things become, the love that covers all wounds is never forgotten.  Family always forgives because we are family.  As Jo says, "Life is too short to be angry with one's sister."

A short note about the most absent father.  I was worried that this film could easily degenerate into a statement about how women don't need husbands and fathers in their lives.  But Gerwig never lets us forget the hole that is left by their father's absence and the affections the family has for him never wanes.  As capable and strong as the Mach women are, his not being there is another hardship that they must bear and they never stop hoping for his return.

The performances are outstanding.  Ronan's Jo is a fireball of life.  She never gets too showy with her portrayal, making sure Jo is a woman of her day, though slightly ahead of it.  She plays the most wonderful contradictions of the heart all at the same time.  She is strong enough to negotiate a profitable book deal, but vulnerable enough to cry over the selling of her hair.  Watson does an incredibly reserved turn as Meg.  There is a scene where she complains to her husband about how ashamed she feels that they cannot afford the finer things in life.  In the hands of a lesser actress, Meg would sound cloying and materialistic.  Instead, we feel her pain even as she shatters the masculine heart of her husband.  Scanlen does a fine job as Beth, having the difficult job of portraying simple kindness and virtue in an interesting way. 

But the real standout is Pugh.  Her performance as Amy is worth of an Oscar.  The transformation she goes through from childhood to womanhood is so stark, but feels so natural.  She captures the unfiltered immaturity of youth perfectly with her face, her voice, and her body language.  Watching her run awkwardly after Jo and Laurie repeating how Jo promised that she could go ice skating with them is a scene that is stuck in my head because Pugh completely embodied the complete lack of self-awareness of a child.  And then this is contrasted with the poised and sophisticated woman that she turns into where every word, gesture, and tone of voice is measured and controlled.  All the while she endears you to Amy even at her worst.

I have not been one to understand the hype around Chalamet, but this movie shows off all of his charisma.  I think every girl who sees this movie will fall a little in love with him for his portrayal, which shows his passion, pain, devotion, and wildness.  Dern is great as Marmee.  Chris Cooper and Meryl Streep also have supporting roles that fit in perfectly with this film.

Again, Gerwig knows how to direct.  She makes life in the 1860's, even as difficult as it was, look nostalgic and beautiful.  Gerwig makes Jo's process of writing fascinating and draws us in so that even the shots of the book-binding are fascinating to watch.  That is because instead of making a "modern" movie, she engaged in classic film-making, showing us how not so much how this story speaks to our age, but how it speaks to all ages.

This movie casts a spell on you and doesn't let go.  She took Louisa May Alcott's novel, found it's heart, and gave it to us on the screen.  There is a reason that this story keeps getting retold and refilmed.  This is a universal story.  It is our story.  It is the story about how we have to grow up and how the lessons of childhood should mold us into adults who follow our dreams but never turn our backs on the family that God has given us.   This movie is a modern classic that I believe will be the definitive film version of Little Women for years to come.

I left the theater with my heart warmed and a desire to be a better person.

Can you ask for anything more?

Film Flash: Little Women

15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)

An unexpected instant classic.  Beautifully written, directed, acted story about love and family.

Film Flash: A Marriage Story

15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)

Shocking! Two self-centered people who don’t understand love/marriage end up destroying their family

Film Review: A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood

Sexuality/Nudity Acceptable
Violence Acceptable
Vulgarity Acceptable
Anti-Catholic Philosophy Acceptable


"It's not really about Mr. Rogers."

This is a statement about a magazine article that is made towards the end of the new film A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood.  But this statement could be made about the movie itself.

The film focuses on Llyod Vogel, a cynical magazine reporter and new father.  He has a bad history with his estranged father Jerry (Chris Cooper) and this adds to the strain on his marriage to Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson).  So Llyod throws himself into his work.  He is an incisive journalist, but no one wants to be interviewed by him because of the way he eviscerates his subjects.  The only one who is willing to open up to him is Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks), the host of the famous PBS children's show Mr. Rogers Neighborhood.  At first Lloyd is disappointed by this seemingly empty assignment.  He dismisses Rogers as a simple-minded charlatan.  What takes him by surprise is that Fred is not interested in simply being interviewed.  Rogers wants to get to know his interviewer and Lloyd finds himself being interviewed as deeply by his subject.  Lloyd decides to devote himself to uncovering the "real" Mr. Rogers.  As he does, what he finds is a mirror pointing back to his own life and how Mr. Rogers' life begins to affect his.

The biggest flaw in the film is that it isn't really a Mr. Rogers movie.  Mr. Rogers is a supporting character in his own movie.  The movie is thoroughly and exploration of Lloyd's journey and Rogers world acts as the thematic glue that holds it together.  That is not necessarily a bad idea for a film, but it feels like such a wasted opportunity.  Director Mariell Heller gets a great performance from Hanks, but the gimmicky use of the style of Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, feels less and less fresh as the movie goes on.  

This is especially the case because Hanks shines as Fred Rogers.  He doesn't necessarily do an impersonation of him, but he captures his gentleness and kindness.  He presents him as innocent by not naive.  At one point, Fred describes something about himself on the show.  Lloyd says, "But that's 'Mr. Rogers,' I want to know about the real you."  Fred looks back an him dumbfounded and says, "I don't understand the question."  Fred is that rare person of true integrity, who does not wear different masks for different social situations.  He is the same person to whomever he meets.  

In one of Hanks' best moments, the camera holds on his still face for a solid minute.  It is such an unusual thing to do in a movie and it only works because Hanks projects Rogers moral authority and invites to participate in this moment of meditation as members of the audience.  

The best thing that the movie does is that highlights the basic Christian decency of a man like Fred Rogers.  I've read a lot of people who hold him up as the ultimate social good of benigning niceness.  I've read others who reject this as empty sentiment that ignores the harder Christian virtues.  I think both points of view miss the point.  Fred Rogers is not Jesus.  But he is the most Christ-like Fred Rogers he can be.  He always strives for gentleness and soft compassion because that is his vocation.  There are times to be harsh as Christ was sometimes harsh.  But Fred knew that this was not his particular vocation.  He needed to fill the void of emotional fulfillment that is lacking for many children.  This catharsis is not the end-all-be-all of the Christian message and I don't think that is what Rogers is trying to say at all.  But he knew his apostolate and he did it.  I was impressed that the movie did try to overlook Rogers Christianity.  It was an essential part of understanding his goodness.


Above all, the movie is about forgiveness.  Lloyd cannot seem to forgive his father for abandoning his family, especially when his mother became fatally ill.  Jerry does not deserve forgiveness and Lloyd wants no contact with him at all.  But slowly he comes to the realization through Fred Rogers that withholding forgiveness only makes you more resentful and bitter.  Without a forgiving heart, the heart grows cold and hard.  And whether you want it to or not, that lack of forgiveness will affect the other people in your life, as Lloyd begins to feel the strain in his relationship with Andrea and his infant son.  The same is true of all of us if we do not forgive the people in our lives who hurt us.

All of this is something I would have loved to have been explored in more detail.  Instead, the focus is on Lloyd.  Rhys is good in his role, as are Watson and Cooper.  But the film wants us to revel in Lloyd's journey, but instead it feels like it is treading water until Hanks comes back on screen.

If you ever loved Mr. Rogers, this movie will rekindle those affections.  It will make you want to spend more time with the man.  At least, it will make you want to have more time with him than A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood gives you.

Merry Christmas 2019

Now there were shepherds in that region living in the fields and keeping the night watch over their flock. 

 
The angel of the Lord appeared to them and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear.

The angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people.

For today in the city of David a savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord.

And this will be a sign for you: you will find an infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.”

And suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying:


“Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

Film Flash: CATS

15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)

Film that falls into the uncanny valley straight into the pits of Hades. Paws-a-tively awful