The Batgirl On The Shelf

One Year Later...

   Pictured: Leslie Grace, Michael Keaton.

 I was looking forward to seeing this Batgirl film and see if it's good on it's own terms, for multiple reasons. 

First of all, it's Barbara Gordon. Barbara Gordon is the real Batgirl. Accept no substitutes. 

 And, yes, that is the Batgirl costume Barbara Gordon wore during the "Batgirl of Burnside" era, designed by artist & writer Cameron Stewart.

 We were also going to get a 3rd appearance of Michael Keaton as Batman/Bruce Wayne, in a supporting role, on the heels of his "comeback" appearance in The Flash, as part of an ongoing plot thread that would link these upcoming films. From what little we've been told, this is an older, veteran Batman, wearing an updated version of his costume from the 2 Tim Burton films; it's possible this characterization is somewhat inspired by high-concept takes on the character in spinoffs like Batman Beyond, Kingdom Come or The Dark Knight Returns, while still offering something different. There were clues about the events taking place within an altered reality that was held in place as an amalgamation of different timelines:

     From a yellow belt to a black belt..I just realized that as I was sorting through these pictures that this could be the gag behind the change in utility belt color.

    I miss the yellow belt, anyway.

I found all of this stuff intriguing; they were clearly fast-tracking a deep dive into history and retroactively using the concept of a multiverse to insert a continuity and bring back whoever wants to jump in. Of course, this doesn't sit well with people who wanted a simpler, direct continuation of stories featuring characters and cast members from Zack Snyder's Justice League, but that's a reflection of the paroxysms in leadership at Warner Brothers effecting the content that gets created. To this date, anything we think we know about the future is coming from people on the internet who have the option of denying everything they said - it all has to be taken with a grain of salt. There were a lot of people rooting for the film to fail, without really knowing much about it, beyond what they're told by people claiming to have "sources". Why were they rooting for it to fail? Fidelity to Zack Snyder? Fidelity to Ben Affleck? Fidelity to Henry Cavill? Fidelity to Ray Fisher? Unfortunately, it's not clear if any of them are coming back, yet there were a lot of ugly campaigns employing gaslighting tactics to try to control/derail/influence executive decisions on what gets made and what shouldn't. 

 Everything I'm sure is true can be taken for granted by photographs taken of the cast and film locations in Scotland, both by amateur bystanders, posts on Twitter by the "Batgirl Movie News" fan account and by the crew, as well as any statements or posts made on social media by the film's star, Leslie Grace, co-directors Bilall Fallah & Adil el Arbi and statements made by the studio. 

  

   The casting of Leslie Grace was a surprise and recieved a mixed reaction; a relative newcomer, this was her first starring role in only her 2nd film (she had appeared in In The Heights the previous year), so it appeared she was popular enough with the studio executives, rather than cast a more-experienced actress, who might have a larger following. Nevertheless, in the months that followed, it's clear she always regarded her casting with appreciation, class, charm, dedication & enthusiasm.

    Stop the press...who's that?

     That's Emely Cartagena - Leslie Grace's stunt double as Batgirl.

       Yep, that's Emely up there..

          She's great, isn't she?

                     Exquisite...

    This message she posted was sweet of her.

The reveal of the name and identity of the sexy stuntwoman is bittersweet; this happened a week after the news unfolded that post-production on the film had been shut down by an executive decision to shelve the film.

 

As part of a new corporate merger between Discovery Networks and Warner Brothers, a massive restructuring of the corporate hierarchy took place, and the new boss, David Zaslav, decided that Batgirl wasn't up to a new standard going forward with the films; the implication is that he would rather greenlight  fewer movies than push ahead with content he found mediocre.

  Is Batgirl a bad movie? We don't know. There are people claiming to have seen it, via private focus group "test" screenings of a "rough cut", and their opinions are questionable; these people are anonymous and have no names; the people reporting these accounts will deny accountability for reporting fake news by blaming the anonymous source - that's always their loophole. 

       Written-off...by "Top Men"

   ...representation of Warner Brothers Archive

 What we do know, is that unless Zaslav reconsiders his decision, the footage from Batgirl will be locked away in an archive as proof of a "lost movie" the studio can't do anything with, applicable for a tax credit, reportedly worth 50 million dollars...for a film that cost 90 million to make...

    Locked deep in the Bat-archive

  Honestly, my take on this is Zaslav is going to run the studio like a military operation; he's making an example of this film, as his own message that from here on, he wants the studio to offer nothing but the best content, no compromises. No lazy pandering to demographics inferred by cynical & manipulative marketing research; no room for hustling, uncreative people using Conditioning tactics under the guise of "Social Justice Warrior" psuedo-activism and faux-hip subversion-of-expectations. Or so we think.. 

 Will he reconsider? If the film has been written off already, it can still be released anyway - the studio would have to pay back the credit received, but that's if they did the filing...

 One thing I'm certain of...this move by Zaslav got a whole lot more people talking about this film than at any time beforehand and, perhaps unwittingly created a movement to release it and give it a chance.

#ReleaseBatgirl / #ReleaseTheBatgirlMovie 

 And one other thing for sure...this is the first time I had a crush on a stunt double!

        Lovely view...and I'm sure that window has a nice view of Glasgow, too.

Until next time...same Bat-time, same Blog-channel..

Goodnight, "Lily Collins As Batgirl", GoodKnight, #LilyCollinsBatgirl..

So...this girl...

                    Lily Collins 

...apparently didn't even make the "short list" of actresses whom Warner Brothers eyed with casting for the role of this girl..

                Barbara Gordon 

...the eponymous self-titled hero of her first live-action film, premiering exclusively on HBOMax. Instead, they chose this girl..

             No! Not "That Girl"..

This girl:

                   Leslie Grace 

As the quintessential Batgirl, Barbara Gordon,

  The End of The Beginning Is The    End...

For me, this means I am done suggesting Lily Collins as Batgirl, so this post is a farewell to me suggesting for 3 years, not so subtly, but hopefully not irritatingly, my thoughts that Lily Collins is the best actress for the part; I went far enough to reimagine a popular dream sequence from Twin Peaks as a premonition, farcically, but still, hopefully willing this casting pick into reality..

    "We are like the dreamer who         dreams and lives inside the           dream..but who is the dreamer?"

 I still believe she should've been in contention at least, or in that so-called "short list"

; Leslie Grace is a relatively newcomer, so she has the opportunity to surprise everyone (we hope she does), but to me, Lily would've simply been Batgirl. She is Barbara Gordon.

In the same tradition of that Wonder Woman sequel I imagined that will not happen..

              Ragnarok & Roll

GoodKnight, Lily Collins as Batgirl:

I also have to say "Goodnight" to the possibilities..

   Appearing in "The Flash" as a          late addition to the cast..I'm 80%    certain Leslie is heading to     England to join the crew..

      Playing off Michael Keaton 

           Playing off Ezra Miller

        Playing off Sasha Calle 

     Just looking hot & cool AF...

        Goodnight, GoodKnight..

How To Read Donald Duck: Imperialist Ideology In The Disney Comic by Ariel Dorfman and Armand Mattelart, Translated by David Kunzle

This is a review of the 4th Edition, published in 2018 by OR Books.

 How To Read Donald Duck is one of those books that seems ridiculous at first, but then offers a couple of convincing passages of rhetoric that make you say, "Maybe these guys are right about something...about what I have no idea.." 

    They like Jiminy Cricket; they really don't explain why this scene is included, unless it's implied and the implication went over my head; I prefer to think it's because they like Jiminy Cricket.

    They also like Moby Duck, although in this case, sampling from his comic book is actually clear..I used to have this comic; if you're actually appalled, send all your complaints to Mark Evanier; maybe he knows who wrote it. Including Moby Duck in a treatise on Disney is probably the most flattering thing to say about this obscure character, even if it's meant to be part of something negative.

 The book, first published in 1971, is built around a false premise: they want to regard Disney comic books with contempt because the Disney brand itself is associated with heavy merchandising, so any entertainment offered to foreign countries by the company must be a propaganda tool, right? No, not when the "evidence" offered is from the peripheral corners of Disney company; essentially, they point out what they believe is a poor effort at convincing the audience they could achieving anything by following the comics as a model of a domesticated, American-flavored utopia, with a sexually marginalized consumer culture and capitalist economy; the main text is under 120 pages.

         "Sufferin' Suffrenture!"

 What makes the book interesting to read is when their observations are genuinely interesting - where it becomes clear that they have read the comics and observed recurring themes in the stories that hint that they're onto something, but it veers more toward profiles of the various Disney comic book protagonists and a tangent from their big picture thesis, so they don't develop it any further; it wouldn't draw attention like associations with Colonialism, Freudian stereotypes, cultural/ethnic caricatures or abnormalities with anthropological animals; the passages dwelling on those subjects are flooded with tangled jargon - they're the most boring parts of the book.

 The most intriguing part of the book is Chapter 5: "The Ideas Machine". Dorfman & Mattelart are still trying to suggest this material is flawed propaganda, so they argue in this chapter that Donald, Mickey & Scrooge are terrible as aspirational characters because they each live a charmed existence with contradictory drawbacks: they argue Mickey doesn't suffer bad karma because he uses his intelligence to solve mysteries and outwit criminals; his altruism is rewarded with a nice life, though he has to live like a perfect Boy Scout and his life is very bland; Scrooge is wealthy and poor at the same time: he's wealthy, but he is stuck - he enjoys his fortune the way a hoarder enjoys their collections of junk, but it just lays there in his money bin, yet because his hoard has value, it is vulnerable to theft, with the hint that the loss of his fortune is the death of him; his money is his life, but he lives by keeping as much of it as possible. They conclude he's a tragic figure, which ironically makes him sympathetic, because he forever remains a rich tycoon.

 Donald Duck - or, to be specific,  the comic book Donald, who is a more deeper character than the cartoon Donald, yet was so sharply modified by cartoonist Carl Barks in his stories, he became complex enough to have subsumed the animated cartoon version of Donald and is essentially considered the same character appearing in all media - from their socioeconomic perspective, is the strangest character of all. At one point in this chapter, they conclude that Donald pretends to work. In all of his stories, Donald is never in danger of losing parental guardianship of his nephews, Huey, Dewey & Louie; he is never in danger of losing his home or car; he is almost always unemployed, in a sitcom fantasy world where jobs are always available and never scarce. He is totally incompetent, often fired for his bungling, but finds another job anyway. His usual motivation for working is he wants to earn money to buy gifts for his girlfriend, Daisy, or toys for the nephews, or complete down payments on luxury items for himself, like a TV set. Many of the jobs he works in are at factories, which have become a scarce source of employment in the United States with each decade, as manufacturers found outsourcing from other countries a cheaper option. When Donald is depicted as being particularly good at a job, or accomplishing tasks all too easily without going through a daily grind, it's argued that he's trying not to be bored; his efforts at entertaining himself lead to making greater mistakes resulting in his termination. If he's successful at a job, like, for example, a janitor or museum guard, this is usually established at the beginning of a longer adventure tale that begins with him quitting this job so that he can take off on some far-flung quest. This behavior is defined in the book as freedom from labor; Donald only works when he's bored, is useless at a job that requires focus and attention because of his incompetence, but quits any job he's successful at because he's bored by the daily grind - he hates it when he succeeds at a job, because it will be dull, but would be awful at a job that demands him to be more active and lacks initiative to break from this. It's possible that this might be why the Disney comics from Europe had long established that Donald is subletting his home from Scrooge, who is presented as the true owner of the property, and, most-likely, the one who pays Donald's Bill's and makes sure his nephews are not living in poverty. So, in Italian comics in particular, there exists dialogue where Scrooge gets away with regarding Donald as an irresponsible parasite. In American comic book reprints of those original stories, this behavior always seems out of character for Scrooge, but is understandable when this overseas perspective of Donald & Scrooge's personalities is explained.

  Donald's cousin, Gladstone Gander, is considered a more aspirational figure than Donald, because his good luck allows instant success with no effort or gratification necessary, but there is no discernible career path for the reader to follow if they want to have a life like Gladstone, so he exists to make Donald look more sympathetic, because it's more possible to aspire to be like Donald and follow a path, even though it's been concluded that Donald is terrible at the follow-through.

 They postulate the only time Donald appears to truly be working are when he goes on adventures with his nephews and Uncle Scrooge, or when his sitcom life depicts him going to outrageous lengths to achieve mundane goals, like obtain a signature from an authority figure, feuding with his neighbor or nephews, or the act of falling in and out of a job itself. This is the first time I've heard of the term suffrenture - suffering coated with adventure. He goes through conflicts that are not exciting at heart, but have the capacity to be entertaining - the realm of freedom vs. the realm of necessity. When Hercules was tasked of cleaning the Augean stables of massive piles of horsepoop, this was not depicted as an ordinary farm chore, but one of The Twelve Labors, as important as chopping the heads off the giant Hydra or capturing Hades' dog, Cerberus.

So, that's the only thing I enjoyed about the book - one chapter, in which the authors were paying attention to what they read, but in support of their contempt. The rest of this book was a slog - a suffrenture that argues the Disney Company is doing a terrible job at manufacturing subliminal capitalist propaganda; you can read Donald, Mickey and Scrooge stories, but they're not helping you learn to live like them...we don't learn how to live right from them...and in that sense, those guys are right...? 

 It's not as though this book is the definitive guide to Disney Comics, anyway..there's still plenty of unanswered questions..

Bedrock

 Ever since the original series ended in 1966, new episodes of The Flintstones were produced or exist in concept form on-and-off through the decades, usually with a different title and characters as the main focus - beginning with The Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm Show.

Over the decades, a timeline was implied; subsequent episodes/series/TV specials would sometimes be noncommittal, either depicting the kids as babies again, or as adolescents/pre-teenagers, or their respective parents as children (The Flintstone Kids), but the farthest Hanna-Barbera went was a trio of TV specials in the 1990's: I Yabba Dabba Doo!, Hollyrock-A-Bye Baby and A Flintstone Family Christmas - depicting the engagement & marriage of Pebbles & Bamm-Bamm, birth of their fraternal twins - Chip & Roxie - plus the arrival of Stoney, a foster child who may or may not have been adopted by Fred at the end of that Christmas special; the details on if Fred became legal guardian of Stoney by the end are fuzzy; even the accompanying storybook published didn't clear this up..maybe the kid took off for Hollyrock.

According to what is, essentially, a press release, Bedrock is hinting that it might eschew all that continuity created by the spinoffs and take an alternate route, as it appears the new focus will be on Pebbles Flintstone as an adult in her 20's (voiced by actress & executive producer Elizabeth Banks) living in a Bedrock on the verge of entering The Bronze Age while her father, Fred Flintstone, is adjusting to retirement; this is a retcon from the spinoffs, which depicted Fred continuing to work at Slate Rock & Gravel Company long after Pebbles started her own family; Wilma & Betty had become partners in a catering business, while Barney (who had last been established working as an insurance agent in the original series, albeit for an unseen "Mr. Pebble") was now co-workers with Fred at Slate Rock & Gravel, later renamed Slatecorp. It's unclear if Pebbles & Bamm-Bamm will remain a double act, like they did in the spinoffs, or if this series will be an opportunity to flesh out Pebbles' personality more, possibly give her a redesign, since she's the star; I always thought the reason why the old spinoffs were intriguing as a curiosity, but not particularly successful/entertaining/inspiring and faded into obscurity, is because the writers never really fleshed out the personality of the 2nd/3rd generation Flintstones characters to fuel interesting stories..

 I'm actually hoping there's some distinction to noting the Bronze era beyond a satirical parallel of "woke" activism. That era is significant for the creation of clothing woven from man-made material, replacing animal-skin pelts/togas, along with innovations in craftsmanship, construction, economics and materials with the use of precious metals. If I was writing episodes for this series, I would suggest Pebbles get a job working at a factory that crafts products out of bronze metal, so her path as an adult has a stronger connection to the series' past..That would be more interesting than wondering if maybe we'll see characters use coins instead of clams! The invention of Paper is also on the horizon; It shouldn't look like The Roman Holidays just yet - they'll still be using Smartrock phones..the Flintmobile's GPS will probably be a miniature pterodactyl with Gilbert Gottfried's voice...

At the end of the day, I'm looking forward to seeing if Bedrock will look like The Flintstones, in terms of aesthetic fidelity. The background art for that teaser image looks nice, but offers no clue what the characters will look like...I am convinced the reason why Seth Mcfarlane's attempt at a reboot of the series went nowhere because the show would've resembled a copy of Family Guy, in look & story-style..and the franchise really dodged a bullet, there.

 We'll soon see if we'll Yabba Dabba Doo or Yabba Dabba Don't have a gay old time...