To Tall Boy: yep, real pic, I don't think it's recent though. I just searched Google for "Joe Quesada" looking for a picture of him drawing but saw that one and jumped.

And in further underwhelming news, Neal Adams' return to Batman is the hands-down most ridiculous looking cover drawing in decades.

Just kidding.

Seriously, although I haven't picked up a comic for a good long while, I do keep an eye on columns like this one from time to time, and somewhere along the line, I found some preview art for ACTION #858. And man, did I feel screwed.

Why? Because Gary Frank is doing the Superman art of my freaking dreams! You don't know how many years I had to suffer through goofball art from guys like Scott McDaniels, Duncan Rouleau, and Carlos Meglia, just to name a few. (All of which are lovely, talented human beings, I'm sure, but their art just wasn't my cup of tea.) Even the super-hyped Jim Lee run was kinda blah. (Although it is hard to tell whether it was just infected by the storyline.)

And now -- NOW that I'm out of comics, Gary Frank is there, drawing Superman comics like it should be drawn; like it should have been drawn all along. It's just not fair!

So naturally I had to go the local comic store and check out the comic itself, and the story was pretty damned good too. Here, like with Grant Morrison, Johns is writing a neoclassical Superman (Superman how we want to remember him, but like he never really was). In this case, Johns is working with elements like the mild-mannered Clark Kent and the classic Legion of Superheroes, but with closer attention to emotional reality.

Does Johns borrow elements from the Donner movies? Answer: Yes. But he also borrows elements from the Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Modern Age of comics, the radio show, THE ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN tv show, LOIS AND CLARK, SMALLVILLE, and probably even that TV commercial with Jerry Seinfeld. Again, neoclassical Superman: It's all in there, and it's all good.

So there you have it -- if you're looking for a reason to buy a Superman comic, check out ACTION #858 -- good enough to pull a lapsed comic fan (recovering comic fan?) out of deep hibernation.

(But of course, using "gay" in that context is wrong and offensive (and really, there's no need to lump innocent gay people in with Ford's bad taste), so I decided to change to "Greggers.")

What was it that gave me away? Was it my use of terms like "emotional reality" and "neoclassical Superman"? Man, that's tough to reread.

Meanwhile, hello Sleazy, hello @$$holes. The column looks like it's swimming along better than ever. Mazzle-tov.

As far as me getting that ARCHIE issue, you have to understand that ACTION #858 was just a little taste, and only because I was at a party. Sure, I can see myself having a comic with dinner every once in a while, but that's where I plan on keeping it. I have it under control. Really.

And the MAD MAGAZINE parody of Superman was called "Superduperman," and it was glorious. The cover featured Superman flying and carrying Alfred E. Neuman at night, ala Superman and Lois in the movie, only Alfred had a barf bag covering his face. The actual parody inside featured such comedy gold as:

Jor-El: "Our son is now on his way to Earth! It's his best chance of survival!"

Lara: "Best chance?? You just shot our son into space in a chandelier!"

Man, I loved that issue, almost as much as the issue with the Star Wars parody.

Is this where my love for Gary Frank's Superman art is coming from? Maybe. But this doesn't necessarily mean that Frank's art is bad, it just might mean that art from guys like Tom Richmond is really good.

We miss Greggers around the ol' TL@ Clubhouse for myriad reasons. His wit. His intelligence. His knowledge. His lawyer...

It's been said before, but I feel that Burton's version would have been cast better with Alec Baldwin (I'm talking the 1989 model of Alec Baldwin) as Batman and Michael Keaton as the Joker, with Geena Davis as Vicki Vale to complete the BEETLEJUICE cast. Winona Ryder (at the time, guys, at the time!)could have even played a version of Carrie Kelly/Robin.

"What's this movie about, Buzz?"

"What's it about? I'll tell you what it's about. Take our your paycheck and look at the net figure. That's what it's about! Any other special questions?"

Crispin Forge.

The TRIraqui.

Sienna Popeneaux and her Thunder Horde...

Of course, these are just the ones that I've personally encountered.

Anakin was the hero to the PT STAR WARS movies, which was the problem. George Lucas and his fans (of which I am one) have always had this uneasy balance of the pulp and the profound with STAR WARS. I maintain that the only way for it to be profound is to embrace the pulp. Therefore, as with good comics, in a later installation, it's easy to forget that Luke's smiling, pasty faced Daddy essentially committed genocide by participating in the destruction of an inhabited planet. Or slaughtering the younglings.

If the prequels would have worked better, things would have really been a mess. I mean, it's hard not to root for a little kid who races pods and kind of tries to hit on a queen and blows up spaceships. And the fact that little Anakin missed his mother and adult Anakin grieved for her were the two most likable qualities in the character for me. If he'd come across as swashbuckling as I think he was probably intended to be, we'd have all been rooting for Vader. I know I didn't much like the Jedi when they told this little kid he couldn't join their club even though his Midimaguffin levels were off the scale.(Brilliant guys, those Jedi. "Hey, Yoda, we've just discovered that our greatest enemies, who also use the Force, are back. Let's cut loose the kid who is eerily strong in the Force. The Sith would never recruit him, right? Right!").

It's the same thing with, say, Hannibal Lecter, who more and more is becoming the hero of those books and movies...as their quality declines. They even sort of made Freddy Krueger the hero of his movies. And Marvel Comics is the worst about this. Sales go up in books where Venom, Sabretooth and Magneto are the villains and suddenly they're heroes...although Marvel rectified that.

A list of iconic villains, huh? Well, bad portrayals do not destroy their iconic status. So, for me, in no specific order:

Darth Vader; Dr. Fu Manchu; Professor Moriarity; the Joker; Lex Luthor; Dr. Doom; Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Dr. No/Auric Goldfinger/Rosa Klebb; Hannibal Lecter; Lord Voldemort; Sauron; Freddy/Jason/Leatherface/Micha el; Dick Cheney; Magneto; Bluto/Brutus; Nedermeyer/Marmalarde/Dean Wormer.