Boys, Toys, Electric Irons and TVs Archives - Comics Should Be Good! @ Comic Book Resources
The title of this post should have read “Boys, Toys, Electric Irons, and TVs 28: Futures End #29, New Avengers #26, and Avengers #38,” but Diamond shorted my shop on New Avengers #26, so it and Avengers #38 (which I haven’t read yet since it comes after New Avengers #26) will be discussed next week with Futures End #30 and New Avengers #27 (bet on it being a Hickman-heavy post). I don’t actually mind, because that means Futures End #29 gets all of my attention this week and it’s an issue I don’t mind digging into a little, being the first one-story issue of the series since issue 21’s spotlight on the Earth 2 folks and the build-up of Cadmus as something Green Arrow wants to take down. Here, we get an origin story for the new Firestorm.
Looking at the preview for Futures End #29 at the end of this issue and noticing that it all relates to the Tim Drake/Firestorm story, I began thinking about what we have been told about the future of this series through solicitations. It’s a comic about the future, so why not look at the brief glimpses of the future that we have at our disposal?
I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned it before, but I’ve always been fascinated with the superheroes who quit and why they would do so. I’ve railed against the endless cycle heroes who, after a time, become responsible for the deaths that their enemies commit despite numerous examples that the ‘don’t kill bad guys’ policy is completely ineffectual. “Sorry, Batman, but the Joker will kill again no matter what and you know that, so…” It’s a fairly common argument and one I won’t bore you with here. But, related to it are the superheroes that give it up. For whatever reason, they decide to stop doing what they do and, as a result, people almost certainly die. While these absences are almost always temporary, there is that middle period where they have given up and I love what it means. Futures End has, in a large part, been about this.
This has been a year of considering the same things over and over again. I first did it with my in-depth examination of Age of Ultron #10. Now, I’ve fallen into that habit here every week, examining the same ideas again and again and again as they pop every week in Futures End and Jonathan Hickman’s Avengers titles. I’ve been doing it elsewhere in my life as well. It’s rewarding to continually find new things in the same. But, I want to try something different this week: a close reading of Futures End #26, where we’ll go scene-by-scene and see what’s there. Maybe I’ll just wind up repeating the same old ideas anyway. Who knows.
Last week, I rambled on about the lack of superheroes in both Futures End and the two Avengers titles written by Jonathan Hickman (or about what constitutes a ‘superhero’ at this point) and, as much as I’d like to find some other topic to ramble on about this week, a couple of big ol’ softballs were lobbed up in the form of shirtless, bearded Superman and obsessive, cranky old-man Captain America. The two most ‘superheroic’ characters in DC and Marvel depicted as men that barely resemble their so-called superheroic selves. If these two aren’t superheroes anymore, what hope is there for anyone?
What is a superhero? Both Futures End and New Avengers have spent two dozen issues dancing around this question, neither providing answers yet. This was an easy question to answer in the past, but, as stories became more morally complex and easy solutions were eliminated by increasing demands of realism and logic, the exact definition seems more elusive than ever. When the enemy is cosmic entropy where you’re faced with the options of your planet dying, saving your planet by killing another, or both planets dying… what is the heroic action? How much are you expected to give? Is sacrificing your life more noble than sacrificing your soul? What are the ethics of a secret identity and when do you cross the line between protecting yourself and lying to your loved ones? For a lot of readers, these questions are a nuisance in a genre that’s supposed to be escapism and pure entertainment. For me, these are the only questions that matter anymore.
In stories that take place in the future, the reader is always playing catch-up to some degree or another. It’s a way to mimic the sensation of picking up an issue of a series in the middle of its run, albeit designed to be new reader friendly at the same time. How much you’re told depends on how much the writer wants to reveal at any given moment; and, unlike picking up an issue of a series in the middle of its run, you can’t go out and buy some back issues to fill in the blanks. It’s like being someone who lives in the middle of nowhere with no internet access. It’s something that Jonathan Hickman likes to do quite a bit and does in ways that are quite surprising.
The idea of someone else taking up the mantle of a superhero who dies or retires is so engrained into superhero comics that I imagine many reacted to the reveal that Shazam is the masked Superman five years from now like I did: so what? It was an interesting mystery to see how and why Superman had changed from the character we know, but the fact that someone else was Superman wasn’t anything good or bad. It was a neutral move, one almost expected from a superhero comic set in the future. Of course someone else was Superman. If not him than Batman. Or Green Lantern. Of the Flash. It can’t be a superhero future without at least one replacement hero. That people would feel betrayed by someone else donning the mantle of Superman is somewhat foreign to us as readers. It’s one of the things Futures End has gotten exactly right.
Boys, Toys, Electric Irons, and TVs 20: Futures End #21, Futures End: Superman #1, Futures End: Booster Gold #1, Futures End: Aquaman and the Others #1, and New Avengers #24
I’ve had a lot of less-than-positive things to say about Futures End and DC’s theme month supposedly tied to it lately. The month was a flop, from my perspective, rarely enhancing the weekly series, often contradicting it, and, most likely, offering little for most regular readers of titles aside from a disruption (hell, I buy Wonder Woman every month, but skipped it this month… even while buying many Futures End one-shots… and Futures End being co-written by the writer of Wonder Woman, but he didn’t write the Futures End: Wonder Woman issue… wow, how did DC manage that scenario?). However, I’ve got to say, this week, I was fairly pleased with the Futures End comics that I got. Let’s shove Futures End: Aquaman and the Others #1 aside, because it functions as a conclusion to the story started three weeks ago in Futures End: Aquaman #1 and was, at best, a neutral book and, at worst, a complete waste of my time and money. The other three comics, though, are pretty much what I had hoped for this month.
Boys, Toys, Electric Irons, and TVs 19: Futures End #20, Futures End: Justice League #1, and Avengers #35
Comparing Futures End and “Time Runs Out” seems natural. It’s a bit difficult after 20 issues (and numerous one-shots) of the former and only one issue of the latter. You would think, under those circumstances, the future of Futures End would feel more fleshed out and compelling than the brief glimpse we get of Marvel eight months from now. I didn’t find that to be true. Avengers #35 was far more engrossing in the future it presents, how it relates to the ‘present,’ and how well it defines the changes that have happened. It genuinely feels different and new, like the future is supposed to feel. Has Futures End ever felt that way?
Boys, Toys, Electric Irons, and TVs 18: Futures End #19, Futures End: Action Comics #1, Futures End: Constantine #1, Futures End: Justice League United #1, Futures End: Infinity Man and the Forever People #1, and Futures End: World’s Finest #1
See, my problem is that I keep trying to find cohesion where there is none. Thematically, there are throughlines, perhaps, but they are often tenuous and, quite frankly, rely on me making small leaps to bring them all together. And that was when I was only writing about Futures End. Now that we have entered September and there’s the line-wide “Futures End” event, finding cohesion, even on a thematic level, is damn near impossible. We’re only in the second week and I’m not at all sure what DC intended with this month. Some titles hint at the events of the weekly series, most contradict part of them, and a few are focused enough to at least provide an issue for the monthly readers of the title to buy. If, you know, its issue this month is actually done by the regular creative team, which is iffy at best. Last year’s “Villain Month” line of books were at least willing to divorce themselves from the regular line, to do their own thing and, in a few rare cases, actually worry about the regular monthly readers. Hell, many titles had numerous one-shots under their banner, while a bunch of regular monthlies just skipped a month. There seemed to be plan there. This time around, I can’t see it.
Boys, Toys, Electric Irons, and TVs 17: Futures End #18, Futures End: Green Arrow #1, Futures End: Aquaman #1, and Futures End: Earth 2 #1
The first issue of Futures End ended with the death of Green Arrow and, aside from the funeral in the second issue and the two parts of Firestorm dealing with the fallout of not being there to save him, it’s completely faded from the book. It wasn’t until last week when Emiko mentioned the death of her brother to Barda that it really returned in any way. It’s been the sleeper plot of the book, there from the beginning, but never spoken of. I’ve been waiting to address it, figuring that the release of Futures End: Green Arrow #1 would be a good chance if the series proper hadn’t already done so… and who knew that the timing of that one-shot and the weekly series would be so good?
We are still reading post-The Authority superhero comics almost exclusively. While Grant Morrison and Howard Porter’s JLA kicked off the Blockbuster Widescreen Era of superhero comics, the Warren Ellis/Bryan Hitch/Paul Neary/Laura DePuy The Authority took that sensibility and added on a subtle question of morality and heroism that remains unresolved. Granted, that question wasn’t introduced there, but it was popularised – it became an integral part of the superhero comic language after that point, floating to the surface now and then only to be smacked down because of the terrible implications. Here, it has risen again and shows itself in very different ways in Futures End #17 and Avengers #34. Basically, how far must a superhero go to save the world? How far before they stop being a hero and become a villain? Is there even a line?
We don’t know what happened to Earth 2 yet. The word ‘refugee’ has been thrown around and we know that there is no contact with that parallel world anymore. Is the path between universes simply blocked? Is the world dead? Destroyed? If so, who destroyed it? The Justice League? Superman? Darkseid? Was its destruction malicious? Self-sacrifice? Pure survival on the part of the Nu52DCU Earth? Are there really heroes in Futures End? DC has always been oddly comfortable with killing worlds, whether their heroes were complicit in the act or not. “Worlds will live, worlds will die” was the tagline after all (more like “A world will live, all other worlds will die” by the end, eh?). It wouldn’t surprise me to know that Earth 2 is in fact destroyed and that it was already revealed in Futures End in such an offhand manner that I didn’t notice enough to remember.
So, what’s the deal with Superman? We’re rushing towards the big reveal of why Superman wears a mask now and why his personality seems to have changed, and it’s apparently none of the reasons people previously thought. His conversation with Lois here is one of the longer ones he’s had in the series – and one of the most revealing.