The books I purchased were mostly catch ups on favorite titles with one new one added in. I found them to be mostly dark, noirish works as well. (Oh the holiday cheer!)

Here is the list:

• Incognito, the trade paperback by Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips
• Criminal: The Sinners, Issues 1 and 2 by Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips
• Detective Comics, #858-859 by Greg Rucka and JH Williams III
• Stumptown #1, Greg Rucka and Matthew Southworth
• Irredeemable #8, Mark Waid and Peter Krause

So, as you can see, none of these titles are full of holiday cheer, nor can I see a one of them retelling the touching Hallmark Hall of Fame movie “A Dog Named Christmas,” in their super holiday spectacular issues. Snort.

I can honestly say though that none of the books disappointed a lover of noir.

There were some odd parallels though in the readings. The use of “twins” as a story device in  Incognito, Detective, and the most recent issue of Irredeemable was sort of striking. I wonder if these guys read each other, or work through a collective hive mentality? I mean, don’t get me wrong, the use of the twin as a plot device was used admirably in all three works, it was just weird that three titles, released within a relatively close time frame would all take the same route with similar outcomes to our protagonists. (Think the Overkill Brothers power leeching/Scylla and Charybdis situation) And as far as Batwoman is concerned think of the Kane twins/Scylla and Charybdis feeding the rage of the living superhero sibling.  Hmmm. . . I think I have a bold, dark redux for the Wonder Twins to pitch.

And moving on from there, honestly, Rucka’s fascination with lesbian protagonists for both Detective and Stumptown was almost a little too much. I mean I see the allure of playing with gender and sexual idenity dynamics within a genre that is generally chauvinistic, but I don’t know, reading the titles back to back makes the thread seem to be a bit overdone, especially from the same author. Plus, well, even with female lesbian leads the genre is still pretty chauvinistic, so I’m not quite sure what is challenged or accomplished beyond novelty.

With that said though, Stumptown in particular read as a good genre piece along the lines of Chandler or Chinatown without the gender tweak. Additionally, Batwoman would be an awesome character read without ever knowing Catherine Kane’s sexual orientation. Just saying.

Jonathan A.’s story was sparse, simple, and expressive as he wrestled his own demons. There was an element, or two, that made the character’s life strikingly unique compared to the life of others. If you’ve read the book then you know what I mean. The loss in Jonathan A.’s life is incredible in its sorrow, along with the odd assortment of attachments he develops.  His drinking stories, though sometimes frightening and odd, were not necessarily monumentally tragic in the sense they were for Nicolas Cage’s character in Leaving Los Vegas. No, Jonathan A. appears to be a garden variety drunk well on his way to an even more pathetic existence without the stripper girlfriend or the tragic-romantic sheen of willfully drinking oneself to death.

Over-all this book lived up to its promise of being honest and a compelling read that showed some of what comics can be and how they have grown up in such lines as Vertigo. It is especially nice to see a slice of life title in the line that does not involve either fantasy or some sort of fantasy-crime genre. Jonathan story is a simple reflection the real world, with all of its real problems: just simple straight up human f–cked-uppedness is nice to see from a mainstream line of comics.

Unlike in years past Comic Con has broken down the four day pass into two categories for 2010. The first includes Preview night. The second does not.

The first option (with preview night) is already sold out. That’s not the part that bothers me. I understand the need to limit preview night in order to make sure it stays something sort-of-kind-of-special. In 2008 preview night was so crowded it really wasn’t worth anything other than a few more hours of being jostled around within a big crowd. Hopefully by limiting the number of attendees 2010 Preview Night will actually be a little more exclusive, and enjoyable, for those who attend. Unfortunately, the pricing doesn’t reflect this.

And this is what truly upsets me. Con officials have decided to charge the same price whether or not you are attending preview night.  This to me seems like robbery. I mean I’m paying $25 a day for attendance to the Con while  the lucky guy or gal with Preview Night tickets gets to attend 4.3 days or whatever for less on average. I’m saying this bullshit really was not well thought out. The lucky few get more for less, when it would only seem fair that if you want Preview Night to be special that organizers would charge, well, more for more.

I was almost mad enough not to purchase the pass, almost. But I wanted to go there at least one more time since 2008 was my first visit and I didn’t get to go because of work scares this year. So, being the smuck I’m sure Con planners were counting on, I swallowed my indignation and hit “purchase” against my better judgment for a single four day pass. This though may very well be my last for cons in general, especially with the New York organizers deciding to throw down with each other over their con dates in 2010 as well. Money and success truly does corrupt everything (and I know some may argue I am a late comer to this conclusion with cons).

The rendering of locals was superb. The controls were simple enough. Gamers forgive me, but I was happy it wasn’t a first person shooter.(I find most first person games too hectic, with exceptions like Elder Scrolls and a few other Bethesda productions like Fall Out 3 that break the action up with story). Re-spawning in the game wasn’t too bad and play on “normal” wasn’t necessarily so tough that it felt like impossible play for someone like me. Plus, I liked the mish-mash of story genres: A little Romancing of the Stone, Indiana Jones, and some crazy horror movie set in a U-boat.

Basically it showed some originality and was easy entry level stuff for me. And it fit into the basic matrix of sandbox/shooter that I find appealing compared to most of the first person games out there.

So far, about 6 hours of game play in, Uncharted 2 hasn’t disappointed either. If anything the game seems to expand on all the elements that worked so well in the first with an exception of the set up of the story. The cuts back and forth between past and present were a little to long, at least that is how it felt to me. I imagine there is a pay off in the structure of the games narrative, but when I popped the game in I wanted to jump into some action NOW.

Anyway, as I was saying, Uncharted 2 offers some highly entertaining new environments for Mr. Drake to do his jumping, running, and gunning. We meet some new characters and are reintroduced to some familiar ones as well. As the pacing of the story picks up the action pushing everything forward becomes very fluid. The dialog and humor between characters work. I also like the fact that for the most part Drake is never alone. He always has a partner with him, which fits nicely in terms of story telling and other other plot/action devices.

As far as graphics go, I have very few complaints. The worst, I think, is the tear effects for the eyes on the characters. The very shiny gloss irritates and distracts me, especially in the cinematic cuts. The best though is the blending between cuts and game play. it all views seamlessly, which is nice.

Over-all I am impressed with the game and look forward to digging into the online part of the game, which I really have not touched as of yet.  It was well worth the breaking of my saving some cash rule to play a game that works well for story telling and as a distraction.

Recently, I read his Sept. 29 interview in Mother Jones. I may not always agree with Alexie’s politics, nor can I fain the slightest understanding of his background, but I do appreciate his bluntness. The following quote from the interview is a prime example:

MJ: The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian was banned in some school districts. How did that feel?

SA: It means I did something right. The book has never been banned or challenged in a poor community, because the crap they’re dealing with makes the stuff in my book look like nothing. I just know there are kids who need books like this.

I’d definitely recommend the rest of the interview. And I often wonder what a Vertigo title written by Alexie would read like.

I need something truly unhealthy and a couple of assistants on this not-so-fine Monday.

That said, I do find the Conservative Bible Project to be both laughable and heinous. I mean who gave these assclowns the power and authority to re-write the Bible to basically conform to their world view? With the red-white-and-blue pigment on their page, the self-identifying “Conservative” name, and the liberal bashing, I’ll assume its the same authority some whacked out fringe Conservatives claim to have when it comes to everything else they back up with very little evidence or fact. Basically, because they say so. Their gross attempt to re-write also erases any interpretation that progressive or liberal impulses such as inclusion, forgiveness, and tolerance can be grounded in the teaching of Christ (something I think is all to often overlooked in the greater social debate).

Beyond that, this also smacks in the face an often taken position when it comes to the Bible, that being the Word was divinely inspired by God who guided the hand of men in its creation. Within what specific edition of the Bible, I wonder, did God stop inspiring its translators and authors and bestowed this authority upon these folks?

Hell, perhaps I should just re-write the Bible myself because I hear God calling too.

ves·ti·bule

ves·ti·bule

Pronunciation: \ˈves-tə-ˌbyül\

Function: noun

Etymology: Latin vestibulum forecourt

Date: 1726

1 a : a passage, hall, or room between the outer door and the interior of a building : lobby b : an enclosed entrance at the end of a railway passenger car

2 : any of various bodily cavities especially when serving as or resembling an entrance to some other cavity or space: as a : the central cavity of the bony labyrinth of the inner ear or the parts (as the saccule and utricle) of the membranous labyrinth that it contains b : the part of the left ventricle below the aortic orifice c : the space between the labia minora containing the orifice of the urethra d : the part of the mouth cavity outside the teeth and gums

3 : a course that offers access (as to something new)

(Thank you Merriam-Webster.com for the cut-and-paste)