The Gutter: Whatz so Civil 'bout War anyway?
written by @vertigoDC
In this week's blog we look back at Marvel's 2005's Civil War storyline and look forward to the 2016 movie adaptation. Be wary sailor... for these are spoiler-infested waters indeed.
A very warm welcome to this month's edition of The Gutter, my kind-of-regular-in-theory-but-probably-not-in-practice blog on whichever comic books I happen to be reading at the moment - although that last part isn't strictly true: unlike a lot of comic books I read, this month's humble offering didn't occur simply out of happenstance. Let me clarify what I mean that by that: my consumption habits when it comes to reading comics are pretty random. I don't have reading lists or a to-do pile as such - one of the reasons I stopped reading monthly books was because I didn't like feeling that I had to read a certain title every month. (There's another reason too; I'll get to that later.) I suppose that in this way my reading habits make me the Bruce Wayne of comic book readers: I hook up with a lot of attractive propositions whenever the mood takes me but as soon as things look even remotely like becoming routine, I hightail my eligible bachelor-backside back to the cave to brood upon the nature of evil and act like a dick to my loyal English butler.
Erm... is it too late to take that Bruce Wayne analogy back?
So like I was saying, with the exception of the Before Watchmen prequel series, which I did think carefully about before reading (see last month's blog) I generally just pick up whatever takes my fancy. I've still got graphic novels ranging from Alan Moore's From Hell to Marvel's Deadpool MAX sitting on my shelf (where they've been for the last couple of years), eyeing me sullenly as I write this because - I don't know - despite looking like books I know I'll like, they've just never leapt to the top of my mind when I've been hunting for something to read. Today's topic is different though dear reader - I specifically went back and reread these books especially for you:
All one hundred and seventy-odd issues.
That's right, one hundred and seventy-something issues. Never again will you question the lengths to which I'm willing to go to, the depraved depths I'm prepared to sink to for the sake of The Geek Beat. (If I can read that many comics in the name of blogging then human sacrifice would be a trifling matter at most.) Civil War was a behemoth of a company-wide crossover when it landed in 2005. The main storyline itself, written by Kick-Ass scribe Mark Millar and pencilled by Steve McNiven only lasted for seven issues; Frontline, a companion title that examined the superhero conflict from a range of perspectives ran for eleven. The other hundred and fifty-odd issues? Lead-ins, aftermath stories and crossovers. Lots of crossovers. The nature of the Civil War storyline - where a tragedy, caused in part by the ineptitude of a young group of inexperienced heroes leads to the United States government demanding that all heroes unmask and register, means that pretty much every character in the Marvel Universe has a stake in it. Every hero faces a choice: turn in the safety of your secret identity for a spot on one of Iron Man's franchised global police teams, hunting down heroes that you used to call friends? Or refuse like Captain America, the Sentinel of Liberty, go underground and continue to live the life of a hero whilst being hunted as a criminal by your own government? By those that were once your allies? Every character in Marvel's seemingly endless stable of superheroes faced an impossible choice and the House of Ideas made it their mission to make sure that we experienced every single one.
Crossovers had been commonplace in the Marvel Universe long before Civil War came along: Secret Wars was probably the publisher's first company-wide crossover back in 1984 and was conceived as a way to sell toys. Sure enough, Like Elvis wolfing down his first fried peanut butter and banana sandwich, It kickstarted a trend, which spiralled out of all control as it grew and grew. Throughout the nineties you couldn't pick up an issue of X-Men or Spider-Man without finding yourself in the middle of some convoluted story arc with an overly dramatic title like Maximum Clone Onslaught Saga; generally they required a scholarly history of Marvel's other books just to comprehend what the hell was going on.
Cut to the mid-naughties, Civil War rocks up and far from being an excuse to sell toys, Marvel were clearly creatively on-point; in a post-9/11 world where national security was perhaps the hottest conversation going, the precarious equilibrium between state intervention and personal liberty meant the company's stories were at their most relevant. In the years hence however, Civil War's critical reception has been mixed; the concept was truly inspirational, not only from a topically socio-politically perspective - but also, who wouldn't pay to finally see heroes tank on each other? It's not even the project's execution so much that has been called into question. Millar's writing is fantastic and McNiven's realistic style is simply stellar: it gives the book a Hollwood-blockbuster aesthetic, perfect for what was grandly billed as 'A Marvel Comics Event'.
To my mind, the problem lies with aspects of the series' legacy. It changed things for a long time; kind of broke comics in a way. From a personal perspective, Civil War, despite being an amazing read that I enjoyed immensely, was also the progenitor for me leaving the ranks of regular Marvel readers. No matter how well you argue the toss from a creative standpoint, the release of so much crossover material was overly-gratuitous and smacked a little of the ol' cash grab; you know when characters like Howard The Duck are getting their own Civil War tie-in then the shark has not only been jumped; it's been moonsaulted by a squad of synchronised luchador seals.
I'm probably being a tad unfair to the little guy there; Howard's story was one part of a wider anthology and like his cameo in last summer's Guardians of the Galaxy movie, actually showcased Marvel at their irreverent best: to my mind, one of the key features that distinguishes Marvel from DC is its ability to poke fun at itself both in the books and the movies. Don't you think that DC just just takes itself way too seriously? They need to lighten up; that path takes you down a dark road, just look at Man of Steel. That movie was about as humorous as a fart in a space suit. Pardon the digression but my point still stands: tie-ins that could generously be described as tenuous for characters like Moon Knight, Blade and groups like X-Factor seemed like an attempt to wring a few more dollars out of their loyal fan base, offering little to the overall storyline of the saga. Not only that but the giant crossover then became an annual affair. Crossover after crossover followed yet nothing changed. Characters became stagnant and fans became jaded.
Elements of this cynical commercial approach crept into Civil War's storytelling too. Someone had to die, right? I mean, it's war - people die, even in the Marvel Universe, people die. (Although in comics, death is usually an analogue for "I'll be back in two months with an all-new issue #1 relaunch!) What Marvel really didn't have to do was bring in a token character to fill the red shirt slot. Especially when that character was a black guy. You might think I'm overreacting here but I think not. When Reed Richards, Hank Pym and Peter Parker all initially choose to side with Tony Stark's pro-registration team - and with the Black Panther back in Wakanda with his new bride Storm, brooding over whether to end his country's neutral standing, the heroes of Cap's anti-registration forces are left a little short on the genius front. (It's enshrined in superhero law that every superteam needs at least one genius; otherwise how would they figure out how to synchronise their electric blankets? Who'd explain Inception and other vaguely confusing-but-not-really-if you-think-about-them movie climaxes to them?)
So enter Bill Foster, a.k.a Goliath, or Black Goliath as he was formerly known back in the seventies when comics companies were morally compelled to warn potential readers that they were about to read a book based on the adventures of an 'ethnic character' by prefixing their title with their skin colour. Foster's character was a talented scientist - and though his appearances in the Civil War book were limited, it seemed kind of cool that a new character was maybe being elevated to the pantheon of Marvel's (mostly white) MENSA brigade - that was at least until he was murdered by a second-rate Thor clone built by Tony Stark and Reed Richards. It became apparent at this point that Marvel, far from expanding their best and brightest with a little more diversity, were instead guilty of rehashing the most stereotypical of cinematic tropes: killing the black man first. Goliath had been introduced to the saga, not because of the strength of his character added to the story but because his death served a purpose - namely causing several more notable characters (such as Peter Parker) to switch sides.
A cynical dramatic device indeed.
Crossovers had been commonplace in the Marvel Universe long before Civil War came along: Secret Wars was probably the publisher's first company-wide crossover back in 1984 and was conceived as a way to sell toys. Sure enough, Like Elvis wolfing down his first fried peanut butter and banana sandwich, It kickstarted a trend, which spiralled out of all control as it grew and grew. Throughout the nineties you couldn't pick up an issue of X-Men or Spider-Man without finding yourself in the middle of some convoluted story arc with an overly dramatic title like Maximum Clone Onslaught Saga; generally they required a scholarly history of Marvel's other books just to comprehend what the hell was going on.
Cut to the mid-naughties, Civil War rocks up and far from being an excuse to sell toys, Marvel were clearly creatively on-point; in a post-9/11 world where national security was perhaps the hottest conversation going, the precarious equilibrium between state intervention and personal liberty meant the company's stories were at their most relevant. In the years hence however, Civil War's critical reception has been mixed; the concept was truly inspirational, not only from a topically socio-politically perspective - but also, who wouldn't pay to finally see heroes tank on each other? It's not even the project's execution so much that has been called into question. Millar's writing is fantastic and McNiven's realistic style is simply stellar: it gives the book a Hollwood-blockbuster aesthetic, perfect for what was grandly billed as 'A Marvel Comics Event'.
I don't know why, but every time I look at this cover, I think 'Boy Band'.
To my mind, the problem lies with aspects of the series' legacy. It changed things for a long time; kind of broke comics in a way. From a personal perspective, Civil War, despite being an amazing read that I enjoyed immensely, was also the progenitor for me leaving the ranks of regular Marvel readers. No matter how well you argue the toss from a creative standpoint, the release of so much crossover material was overly-gratuitous and smacked a little of the ol' cash grab; you know when characters like Howard The Duck are getting their own Civil War tie-in then the shark has not only been jumped; it's been moonsaulted by a squad of synchronised luchador seals.
Yes, the bearded dude who hightails it is named 'Hipster-Man'. His powers include drinking flat whites before Starbucks started serving them and unwittingly gentrifying rundown areas. He fears ducks because they're too 'mainstream'.
I'm probably being a tad unfair to the little guy there; Howard's story was one part of a wider anthology and like his cameo in last summer's Guardians of the Galaxy movie, actually showcased Marvel at their irreverent best: to my mind, one of the key features that distinguishes Marvel from DC is its ability to poke fun at itself both in the books and the movies. Don't you think that DC just just takes itself way too seriously? They need to lighten up; that path takes you down a dark road, just look at Man of Steel. That movie was about as humorous as a fart in a space suit. Pardon the digression but my point still stands: tie-ins that could generously be described as tenuous for characters like Moon Knight, Blade and groups like X-Factor seemed like an attempt to wring a few more dollars out of their loyal fan base, offering little to the overall storyline of the saga. Not only that but the giant crossover then became an annual affair. Crossover after crossover followed yet nothing changed. Characters became stagnant and fans became jaded.
Elements of this cynical commercial approach crept into Civil War's storytelling too. Someone had to die, right? I mean, it's war - people die, even in the Marvel Universe, people die. (Although in comics, death is usually an analogue for "I'll be back in two months with an all-new issue #1 relaunch!) What Marvel really didn't have to do was bring in a token character to fill the red shirt slot. Especially when that character was a black guy. You might think I'm overreacting here but I think not. When Reed Richards, Hank Pym and Peter Parker all initially choose to side with Tony Stark's pro-registration team - and with the Black Panther back in Wakanda with his new bride Storm, brooding over whether to end his country's neutral standing, the heroes of Cap's anti-registration forces are left a little short on the genius front. (It's enshrined in superhero law that every superteam needs at least one genius; otherwise how would they figure out how to synchronise their electric blankets? Who'd explain Inception and other vaguely confusing-but-not-really-if you-think-about-them movie climaxes to them?)
So enter Bill Foster, a.k.a Goliath, or Black Goliath as he was formerly known back in the seventies when comics companies were morally compelled to warn potential readers that they were about to read a book based on the adventures of an 'ethnic character' by prefixing their title with their skin colour. Foster's character was a talented scientist - and though his appearances in the Civil War book were limited, it seemed kind of cool that a new character was maybe being elevated to the pantheon of Marvel's (mostly white) MENSA brigade - that was at least until he was murdered by a second-rate Thor clone built by Tony Stark and Reed Richards. It became apparent at this point that Marvel, far from expanding their best and brightest with a little more diversity, were instead guilty of rehashing the most stereotypical of cinematic tropes: killing the black man first. Goliath had been introduced to the saga, not because of the strength of his character added to the story but because his death served a purpose - namely causing several more notable characters (such as Peter Parker) to switch sides.
A cynical dramatic device indeed.
Black Goliath gets attacked by 'White' Widow, 'White' Hercules' and... this is stupid. Abort joke.
It will be interesting to see how the coming movie adaptation, Captain America: Civil War will deal with this conundrum. The plot needs death to create a sense of peril and to raise the stakes - yet so far when it comes to their cinematic universe at least, Marvel have proved remarkedly reluctant to have any of their characters 'meet The Reaper.' (POSSIBLE DEATH STAR-SIZED SPOILER AHEAD) The smart money is on Sam Jackson's Nick Fury to die, thus bringing some pathos to the proceedings but personally - my money is on an accumulator for both Fury and Cap himself to kick the oxygen habit - Chris Evans has made no secret of his desire to take a break from being in front of the camera and whilst the Captain doesn't die in the book itself, he is assassinated in the story's aftermath. That eventuality wouldn't quite tie in with Evans' remaining Marvel contract, (he'd have one left) but it's possible that Marvel would find a way to then bring him back for 2018/9's The Infinity War. (For an excellent article over at Den of Geek as to whether Marvel will reboot their universe post-Infinity War click here.) If not, Marvel have a given themselves a couple of options with regards to who wields the shield: in the comics both Bucky Barnes, (the former Winter Soldier) and Sam Wilson (The Falcon) take up the mantle in Cap's absence; in the comics I believe Wilson in fact, is the current Sentinel of Liberty.
And herein lies the problem inherent with filming Civil War - if at least Marvel are intending to replicate the same story beats that made the comic book so memorable: Spider-Man unmasks to the world, altering the character in a way that Sony would surely never agree to; Iron Man becomes the world's biggest ass-hat, pulling moves that are despicably heinous: (he builds a murderous clone of Thor without the Asgardian's knowledge or consent; constructs a Negative Zone prison to contain his former allies without public trial; creates a war with Atlantis to further his own agenda; releases known costumed killers onto the streets as his new stooges - I could go on and on...) This week's title was of course the closing line from Guns'n'Roses' epic Civil War and is completely apt when it comes to Stark and the seemingly unending bag of dirty tricks that he possesses. There is nothing civil about the character's narrative direction in the book. Naturally he's punished for all this deviousness and malice by being made the new Director of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Art mirroring life? Sure sounds like modern politics to me.
Art mirroring life? Sure sounds like modern politics to me.
Douchebag Stark explains to a bereaved mother how he used her tragedy to further his own power-mongering ends. Before presumably slipping her a roofie or something.
The point however, remains. Marvel face the choice of either significantly altering the elements that made the comic book such a blockbuster release - or permanantly damaging characters that are worth billions of dollars. How did they get past this problem in the books? Retcon baby - (to retroactively convert ya noob!) I mentioned earlier in the blog that there were other reasons as to why I stopped reading Marvel's monthly books after ten years and these were it) Marvel's answer to writing themselves into a storytelling corner that they couldn't escape from was to have Spidey reverse his public unmasking by literally make a deal with the devil (as if!) whilst Tony Stark eventually deleted his own brain to get rid of the final remnants of the Registration Act storyline, allowing Marvel to restore the world to the way it was before as if nothing had ever happened. If I was watching that on a TV show, I'd turn over and I wouldn't turn back. And so ended a decade's worth of monthly hook-ups between Marvel and I. We still date once in a while but I'm seeing other comic books these days and feel much the happier for it.
So what will Marvel do? We already know from the recently-revealed synopsis for the movie that it won't focus on revealing the heroes' secret identities - in the MCU, most of them don't have one. Instead the focus will be on superhero regulation - it makes sense then that Marvel will apply the same storytelling nous to other key plot points of Civil War: it's not like they've put much of a foot wrong so far when it comes to their cinematic universe.
And what of Spider-Man? I actually started out rereading Civil War in its entirety with the intention of writing a blog exploring how the movie could work without such a pivotal character: Peter Parker after all functions as the moral centre of the story - his opinions change as the tale progresses, highlighting the complex nature of the debate and allowing the writers to explore the negative consequences of doubting both paths equally - he essentially occupies a position not dissimilar to the average reader: we value our security whilst equally cherishing our personal freedoms. I got about half way through the series when the announcement came that Spidey had been brought back into the Marvel fold - I for one am supremely stoked by this although it's sad to see Andrew Garfield hang up his webs. In spite of two average movies, he made a terrific Peter Parker and it'll be a shame not to see him fumble and wisecrack his way through encounters with some of the Marvel U's major hitters. Furthermore, one aspect of the Amazing Spider-Man movies that was done particularly well was the romance between Peter and Gwen. Like the death of Uncle Ben, Gwen's tragic demise forms an integral part of his character going forward. (If you've never read Spider-Man: Blue, go do so. Now.) She, not Mary-Jane is the real love of his life and to throw away a narrative arc that brings so much to the character, especially when Garfield's Spider-Man movies segue so well with the Marvel Universe anyway just seems wasteful.
It's probable that whoever the new Spider-Man is, he'll play a greatly diminished role in the upcoming adaptation and perhaps that's no bad thing - it is after all supposed to be a Captain America movie and Cap does have several hanging plot threads that need resolving. His ongoing dynamic with former partner/current frenemy Bucky Barnes, the Winter Soldier; his reaction to a world post-S.H.I.E.L.D. - and chiefly, his inability thus far to shed the feeling that he's a man out of time. How Marvel deals with this and where they go next, nobody knows. Trailers for Age of Ultron hint at divisions within The Avengers which the events of Civil War will do little to allay. Joss Whedon it seems, is doing a stirling job of readying the team to be retooled; Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Vision will presumably be waiting in the wings after Age of Ultron and with the Black Panther, a possible new Captain America and other new Marvel franchises on the horizon, it could be that when the major players decide to head into the sunset after the events of The Infinity War, a new version of the Avengers will emerge looking not unlike one of the team's later iterations.
Whichever way Marvel go, I'm there. I may have become disillusioned with the books a while ago following the horrendous retcon that followed Civil War but that didn't make the story itself any less compelling. The House of Ideas haven't got it wrong yet with their cinematic universe: here's hoping the upcoming Age of Ultron pushes their long-form storytelling into new directions and towards deeper waters for our favourite heroes as Phase Three finally begins.
A fair amount of Hulk smashing stuff won't go amiss either.
Here only because it makes me feel happy.
It's probable that whoever the new Spider-Man is, he'll play a greatly diminished role in the upcoming adaptation and perhaps that's no bad thing - it is after all supposed to be a Captain America movie and Cap does have several hanging plot threads that need resolving. His ongoing dynamic with former partner/current frenemy Bucky Barnes, the Winter Soldier; his reaction to a world post-S.H.I.E.L.D. - and chiefly, his inability thus far to shed the feeling that he's a man out of time. How Marvel deals with this and where they go next, nobody knows. Trailers for Age of Ultron hint at divisions within The Avengers which the events of Civil War will do little to allay. Joss Whedon it seems, is doing a stirling job of readying the team to be retooled; Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Vision will presumably be waiting in the wings after Age of Ultron and with the Black Panther, a possible new Captain America and other new Marvel franchises on the horizon, it could be that when the major players decide to head into the sunset after the events of The Infinity War, a new version of the Avengers will emerge looking not unlike one of the team's later iterations.
Like this perhaps?
Whichever way Marvel go, I'm there. I may have become disillusioned with the books a while ago following the horrendous retcon that followed Civil War but that didn't make the story itself any less compelling. The House of Ideas haven't got it wrong yet with their cinematic universe: here's hoping the upcoming Age of Ultron pushes their long-form storytelling into new directions and towards deeper waters for our favourite heroes as Phase Three finally begins.
A fair amount of Hulk smashing stuff won't go amiss either.
That's all from The Geek Beat this week folks. Any inaccuracies are a failing of my memory or bad Googling.
Head back this way next week to see what's new with ANA, my latest writing project.
Until then be sure to follow me on Twitter @vertigoDC. I think we both agree that you owe me that at least. Later.
