Celebrating Dracula, Part Two

Here are a few more illustrations of the world's most famous vampire, in celebration of the month when Bram Stoker's "Dracula" was originally published in 1897.

By David Hoover

By Chris Samnee

By Tony Harris

By Dick Giordano

By Gene Colan

A Batman that I can't love

DC Showcase Presents: Batman, Volume One (DC Comics, 2007)
Writers: Ed Herron, Gardner Fox, John Broome, and Bill Finger
Artists: Carmine Infantino, Bob Kane, Murphy Anderson, and Various
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Batman and the characters of the Fantastic Four are my favorite superheroes. But the FF left me behind some time in the early 1990s--the issue with the image of the Wizard snatching Franklin from a sleeping Ben Grimm is the last FF story I acknowledge--and Batman moved beyond me around the time "Batman Year Two" saw print.

With the FF, I LOVE everything from the first issue (where they were Kirby's recasting of DC's Challengers of the Unknown with superpowers) through the above-mentioned issue, which was #302 or something like that. I like the FF as porrtrayed in the "Spider-Girl" M2 universe, but mainline Marvel is dead to me. (Okay... I could do wihtout most of the Inhumans, but Crystal and her romance with Johnny I liked.)

With Batman, I LOVE just about everything from the late 1970s through the early 1990s... "Detective Comics", "Batman", "Batman Family", "The Brave & the Bold", "Worlds Finest's Comics"... I love 'em all. The Doug Moench scripted, Don Newton/Gene Colan/Alfredo Alcala illustrated tales in "Detective" and "Batman" are the high points of my Batman experience, along with the Bob Haney-written, Jim Aparo illustrated tales from "The Brave and the Bold".

So, I figured I'd enjoy "Showcase Presents: Batman"--a massive, 500+ page book reprinting stories from "Detective Comics" #327-342 and "Batman" #164-174--because I love the FF from the same period, and I greatly enjoy the 1960s Batman TV show.

I was, however, wrong. While I detest the psychotic, grim-and-gritty Batman that came into fashion in the 1990s, I found myself equally turned off by the frivolous stories in this volume. They were virtually all forgettable, too cutesy and self-consciously camp, and downright embarrassing whenever they attempted to get "hip." Even the great artwork of Carmine Infantino can't dress up these turkeys... and the always mediocre Bob Kane only manages to drag down a few of the better tales. (Yes, he created Batman... and yes, I enjoy the early tales he produced. But there were far more talented creators working at the same time he was.)

There were a few memorable highlights--such as when the killed off Alfred to the point where his dead body is even shown on panel--and a handful of borderline film-noir crime tales and a couple of stories featuring Patricia Powell, a clever police woman and potential romantic interest for both Bruce Wayne and Batman. (The only two things I'm curious about in this book is how Alfred came back to life, and whatever happened to Powell. Maybe I'll have to pick up Volume 2 and find out.)

It's interesting to me that Batman is such a huge character, given that comics from the same period featuring Hawkman, Elongated Man, and the Flash were so vastly superior. The power of marketing and branding at work, I suppose. I can, however, easily see why Marvel Comics caught on the way they did. The quality of those early Marvel tales are heads and shoulders above those featuring the DC headliners of Superman and Batman.

Celebrating Dracula, Part One

In May of 1897, Bram Stoker's novel "Dracula" was first published. It went on to popularize vampires and become one of the most adapted books ever. Counting the numerous spin-offs, Dracula may well be the most written-about figure in all of pop culture.

This is the first in a series of posts presenting artist visions of the King of Vampires. This week's selection are all interpretations of Dracula as viewed through the editorial lens of Marvel Comics.

By Russ Heath

By Dick Giordano

By Gene Colan

By Bob Hall

Featuring the craziest pre-1960s femme fatale?

Night Editor (1946)
Starring: William Gargan, Paul E. Burns, Janis Carter, Frank Wilcox, and Jeff Donnell
Director: Henry Levin
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

A homicide detective (Gargan) having an affair with a thrill-seeking married wealthy woman (Carter) witnesses a murder during one of their trysts. Even though he can identify and arrest the killer (Wilcox), he can't do so without causing a scandal, destroying his family and ruining his career. Will a good cop who made a bad call do the right thing, or go further down the path of corruption?

This is the stuff good 1940s film noirs and crime dramas are made of, and this is pretty good crime drama. Part proto-police procedural, part film noir, part melodrama, this film is fun! It gets really exciting when classism enters the picture, and the psycho dame the cop is fooling around with decides to choose between "her kind" and doing the right thing when the cop's conscience really starts bothering him. It's a nice twist that comes at just the right moment to kick the film's suspense level up even higher.

While the high quality of the film--with its perfect pacing, appropriately moody lighting, superior cinematography, and a cast that gives excellent performances all around--is to be expected from a major studio like Columbia, the film offers the surprise of what is perhaps the most sociopathic/borderline psychopathic femme fatale I recall seeing in a Hollywood movie made before the 1960s. From her demand to see the body of the murder victim to the icepick action late in the film, I was surprised by just how nasty she was. She makes the crazy scheming women of "Strange Woman" and "Lady From Shanghai" look like they should be selling Girl Scout cookies. While Janis Carter made a career out of playing characters like this, this is the most twisted character I've ever seen her play, and I wonder if this extreme character could be a reason the film sank from view after its initial release.

The only serious complaint I have with "Night Editor" is that they filmmakers, aside from the cars being driven, didn't make even a halfhearted attempt to match the look of the characters to the late 1920s time-frame the bulk of it takes place in. Would it really have been that hard for a major operation like Columbia to adjust the hairstyles of the women and get proper wardrobe for the entire cast instead of having everyone in contemporary mid-1940s styles?

A smaller complaint is that the film's resolution is ultimately predictable (doubly-so if you pay close attention to the exchanges that take place in the newsroom as the story unfolds). However, getting there is so much fun that it doesn't really matter.

Fans of film noir pictures, classic mysteries, and the type of crime dramas where the hero has to work backwards to prove the guilt of a murderer he has already identified will find plenty of entertainment here. This is one of the many movies that could do with a little more recognition from us film-fans.




Trivia: "Night Editor" was a popular radio anthology series where the editor of title would relate the "unreported facts" of some news item. It later became a television series.

Picture Perfect Special: Princesses of Mars, Part Eight

Dejah Thoris and other Martian Princesses are hanging out at my house, celebrating my birthday! (Okay, so it's just my cats and I. But a guy can dream, can't he?)

By Bruce Timm

By Randy Green

By Mitch Foust

By Paul Renauld

In all seriousness, I'm getting together with friends. But Martian Princesses would be welcomed at the table if they chose to show up!

'The Capture' fails because it is well done

The Capture (1950)
Starring: Lew Ayres, Teresa Wright, Victor Jory, Jimmy Hunt, and Barry Kelley
Director: John Sturges
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Oil-man Lin Vanner (Ayres), haunted by guilt after killing a suspected murderer and payroll thief, seeks out the dead man's family (Hunt and Wright) to make amends. He soon discovers that he may have killed an innocent and sets his mind to finding the real thief.

In concept, "The Capture" is interesting enough. It is a modern-day (well... 1930s, which is more modern than the 1870s) Western that deals with the emotional impact killing another human being has on an Everyday Joe who isn't a trained soldier or police officer, as well as the void that person's death leaves for those who love him. The tale is spiced up with some romance, intrigue, drama, and true crime-style action, but it ultimately comes off as less than interesting.

The biggest problem with the film is that its central character, Lin, is just a little too much of an Everyday Joe. Lew Ayres does a fine job of portraying this character... a hard working, honest man who is concerned with all the usual things--earning a living, impressing his boss, looking good to his girlfriend--when his life is thrown into turmoil because of a single snap decision. But Lin is such an Everyday Joe, both because of the way the script is written and Ayers performance, that he is boring. There's a reason they don't make movies and write adventure stories about people like you and me, Dear Reader, it's because we're boring. And Lin is like us, just an Everyday Working Stiff. Lin's ordinariness also makes it very hard to suspend disbelief during the film's third act when he turns hardcore amateur investigator/tough guy in his search for the real thief and peace of mind. In other words, the filmmakers and Ayres do such a good job of portraying Lin as just a normal guy that it ends up working against the entertainment value of the film.

Another problem rests with Teresa Wright's character. Wright struggles mightily to give texture to her, but she can't overcome the fact that the character is written to be a dishrag who can't even pull of a revenge scheme properly when she discovers Lin killed her husband. Then, to make her character even lamer, she becomes the subject of another movie Insta-Romance when she marries Lin is what seems like an overnight conversion from resentment to true love.

Despite the good acting on the part of both Ayres and Wright, the film becomes almost unbearably boring in the middle when it's mostly about them--two characters that are written to be uninteresting. However, viewers who stick with the film are rewarded when things pick up toward the end, even if Lin's transformation into a sort-of tough guy is unbelievable.

"The Capture" isn't a film that's worth seeking out on a stand-alone DVD, but it's harmless filler if you see it in one of those big 20 or more movie multi-packs.

Picture Perfect Wednesday: Happy Almost-Cinco de Mayo!

May your celebrations tomorrow be filled with beverages and bull fights!

Mohammed Monday:Remembering Osama bin Laden

By now you've probably heard that Osama bin Laden is dead. If you haven't, click here for that important news.

Today, we pay homage to Bin Laden and his love for the Prophet Mohammed (may peas be upon him) as well as the male prostitute Mohammed with whom Osama shared his bed these past six years (when he wasn't taking it up the ass from Mullah Omar or Aymen Al Zahrawi).

Osama did truly loom large among those who idolize the Prophet Mohammed (may pecans be upon him). Never before has a mere mortal so embodied the values of Jihad, with a life so full of murder, mayhem, misogyny, homosexual escapades, and sex with little girls.

Sherlock Holmes vs. the Nazis!

In 1942, Universal Pictures retooled Sherlock Holmes. They opened their first movie featuring Arthur Conan Doyle's great detective with a title card that described the character as a timeless figure that works equally well in his "native world" of late 19th century London or the "modern day" of the 1940s. This film, and the sequels that followed--several of which saw Holmes cross wits with Nazis and their agents--show this to be true. (And the recent BBC series "Sherlock" reminded us of the fact, when Holmes and Watson were effectively transported to 21st century London with smart phones, and blogs, and everything.)

The initial Universal Holmes films pitted him against the great evil of the 1930s and 1940s, Nazi Germany and their sympathizers around the world. They are the sort of films I wish Hollywood would make today, instead of churning out crap that portrays those who fight and die for our freedoms--the American military and its allies--as the villains.

This article presents reviews of all the "Holmes vs. the Nazis" pictures in observance of the day Hitler killed himself and thus cemented his reputation as a pathetic little coward.


Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror (1942)
Starring: Basil Rathbone, Nigel Bruce, Henry Daniell, Thomas Gomez, and Reginald Denny
Director: John Rawlins
Rating: Six of Ten Stars

As Hitler's armies devour mainland Europe, Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson (Rathbone and Bruce) are retained by British Intelligence to stop the activities of Nazi saboteurs being coordinated by the mysterious Voice of Terror in radio broadcasts that hijack the British airwaves once a week. Holmes soon comes to suspect that the broadcasts portent something far more sinister and dangerous than the horrific acts of terrorist... and that the enemy within England itself is more powerful than dreamed of in the worst nightmares.



Loosely based on Conan Doyle's "His Final Bow" (where Holmes came out of retirement to catch a German spy at the beginning of WW1) and the real-life Nazi propaganda broadcasts that overrode BBC signals during the early 1940s, "Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror" is the first of a dozen Holmes movies starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce that transports the Great Detective and his loyal sidekick to modern day England. (Modern-day being the 1940s.)

Holmes' methods receive a slight upgrade--the key to unlocking the mystery behind how the Voice of Terror is able to coordinate the broadcasts and the sabotage involves analyzing different types of broadcast with cutting edge audio equipment--he trades in his deerstalking cap and tweed cape for an fedora and overcoat, and the speed of modern travel and communication also impacts the story, but overall the character of Holmes is as it's found in the pages of Doyle.

Although partly a war-time propaganda movie--the kind that I've lamented aren't made anymore, what with American filmmakers preferring to glorify those who would take away their freedom rather than those who defend it--with the patriotic speeches and dastardly Nazi villains that encompasses, the film sets the tone for most of the Universal efforts that will follow. Holmes is a renegade genius, Watson is a doddering moron that seems like he is going senile (even if he isn't quite as dimwitted here as he seems in later pictures), and the villains are of a stripe that would make even the worst of the worst that inhabited the pages of pulp fiction magazines in the 1930s give them a wide berth. But the stories are exciting and fun, so the bad treatment of Watson can be overlooked... as well as the absolutely rediculous hair style that Holmes sports in these early Universal films. (Transporting Holmes to modern-day was the idea of Basil Rathbone who felt the Victorian era was too old fashioned, so I wonder if he was also the genius behind that awful hair.)

While Watson as a ninny didn't originate with the Rathbone/Bruce pictures--there were hints of it as far back as the Arthur Wontner pictures--but it was these pictures that solidified the approach as "standard." The same is true of Holmes as nearly 100% hands-off as far as physical altercations go; when a brawl breaks out between Nazi agents and Limehouse ruffians hired by Holmes as muscle, you almost get the sense that Holmes is afraid to get in the middle of the fight. The Rathbone Holmes seems like he would never throw a punch but would instead leave it to others even in the most dire of situations, so it is with these films that the idea that a "action-oriented" Holmes isn't truthful to Doyle began.

The strong presence of these somewhat legacies aside in this film doesn't really harm the entertainment value, however. The story is too fast paced for anything but Holmes bad hair to distract from the fun, and excellent performances by the stars and supporting cast only made it that much better.


Basil Rathbone is excellent as always as Sherlock Holmes (even if I will always prefer Peter Cushing's portrayal) and Nigel Bruce is solid as the comic relief, perhaps even moreso than in future sequels as less of the humor is at the expense of his character than will become the norm. Other standout performances are delivered by Henry Daniell (who will return to the series again and again, as a different villainous character almost every time) and Reginald Denny as power-brokers in British Intelligence, either of which could be a double-agent and the Voice of Terror himself. Finally, Evelyn Ankers has a small but important part as a Limehouse bar girl who helps Holmes track the Voice of Terror's main operative for deeply personal reasons.


Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon (1943)
Starring: Basil Rathbone, Nigel Bruce, Lionel Atwill, William Post Jr, Kaaren Verne and Dennis Hoey
Director: Roy William Neill
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars

Sherlock Holmes (Rathbone) is charged with rescuing a Swiss scientist (Post) and his revolutionary new bomb-sighting system from the Nazis and bringing him safely to England. However, when the scientist turns out to have too high an opinion of himself and his intelligence, and he falls into the hands of British Nazi agents, Holmes finds himself in race against his old nemesis Professor Moriarty (Atwill) to unlock a coded message that reveals where the prototype of the bomb-sight is hidden.


"Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" is the second of Universal's "Holmes vs. the Nazis" flick, and it is not only a fun Holmes adventure but a passable espionage thriller. The opening sequence where Holmes outsmarts the Gestapo agents who have crossed into Switzerland to kidnap genius inventor Franz Tobel is a great bit of filmmaker--and the only part of the film that stuck with me from the first time I saw this film at some point in the distant past. (I have no memory of watching this film before, but that opening bit, the revelation of Holmes, and the get-away was all very familiar to me.)

Like many movies of this type, the villains initially benefit from the fact that Holmes' charge may be a genius when it comes to inventing military hardware, but he's otherwise an idiot who ends up in Professor Moriarty's clutches because he had sneak out for a clandestine booty call and because of irrational demands placed on the British security forces regarding the production of his bomb sights. This is what leads to the race to decrypt the code. Apparently, Dr. Tobel is SUCH a genius that he knew the clandestine booty call was a bad idea, so he wrote a code he thought only Holmes would be able to help build his bomb sight should he come to a bad end. Too bad for Tobel that a man almost as part as Holmes is the one who grabbed him.


Speaking of Moriarity, Lionel Atwill gives an excellent performance as Holmes' evil opposite. The script writers also do a nice job of demonstrating his sinister genius by having him and Holmes discover the key to unlocking a particular complicated part of the code only by accident. (I suppose this means that neither are as smart as Tobel gave them credit for... but at least neither Holmes nor Moriarty would sneak out for booty calls while Nazi agents are prowling the streets looking for them.)

In some ways, actually, the film makes Moriarty out to be a bit smarter than Holmes in some ways, but ultimately too crazy to be as effective an evil genius as he might be. Twice during this picture, Holmes places himself completely at Moriarty's mercy, presumably assuming that the evil professor won't just kill him. A pretty stupid thing to do, and one that almost backfires at one point and leads to a more chilling portrayal of Moriarity than I've ever seen. Still, if he had just killed Holmes instead of being duped into killing him slowly (by Holmes playing off Moriarty's ego and sadism), he would have won the day AND the war for his Nazi paymasters.

Then again, if Moriarty had been as smart as Holmes, he wouldn't have teamed up with Nazi losers to begin with... and there wouldn't have been a movie.

"Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" is a film that you'll enjoy if you get a kick out of old-time thrillers and pulp-fiction style detective tales. Hardcore Holmes fans will probably mostly enjoy the film for it being a sequel of sorts to Doyle's "The Dancing Men" short story, but only if they aren't too annoyed by Holmes and Watson being transplanted to 1940s London instead of 1880s London. (And all of us will have to ignore the goofy looking hair-do on Holmes. I will have to get around to researching that. It is so stupid looking there HAS to be story behind it.)


Sherlock Holmes in Washington (1943)
Starring: Basil Rathbone, Nigel Bruce, Marjorie Lord, Henry Daniell and George Zucco
Director: Roy William Neill
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

When a British secret agent vanishes while on a mission to Washington, D.C., the British government sends Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson (Rathbone and Bruce) to the United States to uncover what happened to him and to learn if valuable secrets have fallen into the hands of the Nazis.


"Sherlock Holmes in Washington" is the final and best of the Universal "Holmes vs. the Nazis" trilogy of films. It features a well-crafted and suspenseful plot that takes full advantage both of Holmes' legendary deductive powers as well as the modern (early 1940s) setting, with the mystery revolving around missing documents that unbeknownst to heroes and villains alike have been duplicated on microfilm and hidden inside a matchbook that is then passed from character to character and almost lost for good on more than one occassion. The fact that the audience knows exactly where the documents everyone is looking for adds greatly to the suspense (and fun) of the film as it unfolds.

In addition to its expertly constructed plot, the film also features well-written dialogue that is delivered by a cast that are all at the top of their game. Rathbone's Holmes is the best I've ever seen itm Bruce's Watson is comedic but not annoyingly dimwitted, and Daniell and Zucco are excellent as the Nazi secret agents. From the film's opening scenes to the closing anti-fascism remarks from Holmes, this is a film that provides top-notch and classy entertainment. It's a move that fans of Sherlock Holmes and classic crime dramas will enjoy equally. (Heck, even if you're some sort of misguided moron who admires Nazis, you'll enjoy this flick. The ones in this story are smarter than the average bunch, be they fictional or real.)

Not So Picture Perfect Wednesday: Even on Mars, there's 'That Not So Fresh Feeling'

An illustration for an Edgar Rice Burroughs' Martian Tale, or advertising art for Barsoomian feminine hygiene products?

(For the background of this joke, click here, here, and here.)