
Superman #75 is one of the most important stories in comics, and of course it means attempts to emulate it have been far and wide. Not only with Superman himself in two separate animated movies, one of which has a sequel, but in the recent Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Injustice Against Characters You Love And Grew Up With. Superman’s death at the hands of Doomsday was big news. At the time Superman was still DC’s flagship and most popular character. Now they use some dark and broody version of Batman but even now Superman is usually the superhero standard. He’s the highest we can achieve as being not because of “powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men” but because of his love for people, his courage to press, his desire to instill hope and justice in others, and other things that come from his heart instead of a yellow sun. That’s why those of us who are Superman fans love him so much and wish we were him.
Granted, being able to fly through space and shove planets around helps. 🙂
I don’t think anybody actually believed Superman was going to stay dead even outside of comics fandom. Superman meant way too much back then. It was a marketing gimmick, but really what story isn’t? It’s all about coming up with a story that will draw in readers. “The Death Of Superman” was in turn followed by “Funeral For A Friend” and “Reign Of The Supermen”, the latter indeed finding a way to bring back the original Man Of Steel while also introducing three new character: a heroic version of The Eradicator, Steel, and a new take on Superboy, this time a teenage clone with telekinetic powers instead of typical Kryptonian ones. It drew a lot of attention…which sounds just wonderful to modern writers. They want the praise and adulation. They want to be able to say “I wrote the big life-changing event that everyone loved and changed comics forever”. The problem is they and their editors don’t understand what made the “Death & Return Of Superman” storyline work. Let me see if I can explain it.
Continue reading →
Tell others about the Spotlight:
Apu And The Stereotype Issue
The Simpsons began as a series of short appearing on The Tracy Ullman Show, a skit show in the style of Carol Burnett. The shorts followed a family that was a bit dysfunctional but in the end loved each other. Imagine if Married…With Children had less annoying people. The shorts did so well that the family got their own Christmas special, which began fleshing out their world. That did well enough that a full series was created, which meant more characters. One of those characters was Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, the owner of the local convenience store in the town of Springfield, the Kwik-E-Mart, a take on stores like 7-11 (more of a guide than a commentary), but easily the cheap and legally questionable version. 7-11 even ran a promotional campaign for the theatrical movie by becoming Kwik-E-Marts so I guess they didn’t have a problem with the gag.
However, somebody had a problem with Apu. They say the character is a horrible stereotype. This came to a head after Indian comic Hari Kondabolu put out the documentary The Problem With Apu, which showcased the exact problems. I haven’t seen this so I can’t comment. I do know that I really haven’t watched the show in years and even when I did, in the show’s early years, I only watched it occasionally. So to put this in perspective before I give my thoughts here’s a reason v-log by one of my fellow Reviewers Unknown contributors, Joey Tedesco of the Cartoon Palooza. He’s working to get into animation and sets up my thoughts on the whole debate.
Continue reading →
Tell others about the Spotlight:
Posted by ShadowWing Tronix on October 30, 2018 in Animation Spotlight, Television Spotlight and tagged Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, commentary, The Simpsons.
3 Comments