Spider-Man 3

My friend Holly describes Spider-Man 3 thusly:

Watching Spiderman 3, one gets the impression that a good writer and a bad writer were duking it out over the pen until the bad writer finally punched the good writer in the nose and stole the last third of the script for himself.

Needless to say, she didn't enjoy it much. I didn't think it was that bad, but I did notice that the tone was much less even than in the first two movies, with lots of back-and-forth that may as well have been "he loves me, he loves me not" (though not all of the back-and-forth had to do with love).

The movie starts out with a perfect evening for Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson, so you know everything's about to go wrong -- and it does, in very short order. Sam Raimi, the director, commented that audiences seem to like watching Peter/Spider-Man get beat up, and he does! He also makes many romantic mistakes in dealing with his woman and a few bad decisions about seeking revenge. Meanwhile, Mary Jane is dealing with disappointment, Aunt May's getting old, Harry's going crazy and/or forgetful, and some upstart photographer is getting in everyone's way.

The villains (and this is no secret from the trailers) are Harry Osbourne, who's found his father's secret stash; the Sandman, who may or may not have been involved with the death of Peter's Uncle Ben; and Venom, the goo from outer space that transforms its host into a superpowered, viciously vengeful monster -- or, in Peter's case, into Jared Leto with a bad attitude, a big ego, and the ability to dance(?!). If you're thinking that three villains and a bunch of personal problems are a lot to shove into one movie, you're right. The movie felt crowded and heavy-handed. Even some of the generously distributed humor was misplaced or over-the-top.

However, it was a true summer blockbuster in that it provided something for everyone. For kids (I hope you don't take anyone younger than 10), there were truly spectacular gee-whiz moments of special effects. For adolescent males, there were lots of nods to the comic book (although why they bothered to have the astronaut in the second movie if the space goo didn't come from his ship is beyond me). For males of all ages, lots of stuff goes boom. And for females, there was James Franco and lots of emo. I cried like a baby, so at least the score is still doing its job (though in other places, it was amateurishly heavy-handed with the character-specific cues; for some reason, Danny Elfman was not asked to reprise his role from the first two movies, and it shows).

My girlfriends and I agreed that the best moment in the movie was actually a Peter and Harry moment. The whole movie is about restoring broken relationships and transcending (the sins in) your past. On that level, I think it was a success. Though Spider-Man 2 will remain the best of its franchise, you can say this about 3: any other superhero movie would be glad to have a thirdquel of this quality.

Trance-tastic

I was going to recommend a fantastic remix of "Dark Side of the Moon" (not a remake of the Pink Floyd song, though the lyrics do reference it), but apparently it's the original! It's off the album Ultra: iTrance 3 (yes, this is the stuff I listen to) and "by" Ernesto vs. Bastian, which is shorthand for saying someone mixed the vocals from Ernesto with another song by Bastian. The synth line practically defines "anthemic" and "wall of sound." If I knew what the Bastian song was, I'd tell you to go check that out, but like "Walking With a Ghost in Paris" (Tegan & Sara vs. Milo), they might be better together.

While we're on the subject of Trance, itself a genre that basically means "anthemic synth lines," anything by Armin van Buuren is probably awesome, but especially "Shivers" and "Wall of Sound" off his album Shivers (and their various remix (re?)incarnations). For a lighter but no less awesome sound, check out his "Love You More" with vocals from Raccoon.

Newsboys: "Go" and "Go: Remixed"

The Newsboys' latest album is a confection of every good thing they're known for. The songs are clever and ridiculously catchy. "Your Love Is Better Than Life" is a funky spoken-verse party, while "Wherever We Go" and "Secret Kingdom" (to an extent) hearken back to their punny, goofy "Reality" days. "I Am Free" is the requisite worship anthem, and "Gonna Be Alright" does all right for the standard downtempo meditation (though it's peppier than, say, "Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus"). Overall a solid entry and yet another gold record in their ouevre.

The remix album is a more hit-and-miss affair. Their last remixation, Newsboys Remixed, picked out songs from their entire prior effort (though it leaned heavily on the Thrive and Adoration), and I think had more success because they could choose only the most remixable songs. With Go: Remixed, they didn't try "The Letter" (a midtempo ballad), but all the others made the cut. "Wherever We Go" and "Go" fare well, but I didn't like "Something Beautiful"'s transformation from a joyous event to a melancholy extravaganza (despite my usual love of the latter). The rest are okay, but nothing stood out to me as fantastically remixed and essential to listen to.

Travis Cottrell

Who wouldn't love Josh Groban? (Supposing you're female, of course.) The rich tenor... the puppy-dog eyes... the intensely emotional songs... But the songs are all about sappy love. Wouldn't it be nice if there were a Christian artist, of upstanding character, with a good family life and a healthy ministry, releasing albums of the same quality?

Ladies, meet Travis Cottrell. His voice lacks nothing in comparison to Groban's talent, the production values are second to none, and his lyrics are inspirational in the best sense of the word. I discovered him leading worship at a Beth Moore Living Proof Live event, which he's apparently been doing since 1998. How fortunate for me!

Cottrell's 2006 album Found is a fantastic listen. There is surprising stylistic variation within the Groban-esque classical-pop style -- tribal drums, classical guitar, full orchestra. "Sanctus" uses part of a Latin mass, "Forevermore" is an overwhelming, soul-stirring rendition of Psalm 145, "We Long For You" is a heartfelt cry for Jesus' return, and the cover of John Denver's "Annie's Song (You Fill Up My Senses)" is not to be believed (and, when addressed to God, actually true!). Don't wait! Go forth and find this album!

Armin Van Buuren - "10 Years"

I didn't know I loved trance music until I came to Seattle and heard about C89.5. Then I discovered that I like all kinds of dance music! My preference, as I think has already been demonstrated on this blog, is for divalicious dance-pop, but trance -- musical, atmospheric club-dance -- has many of the same admirable qualities (if a little more ambient result). And if you're thinking "trance," you'd better be thinking "Armin van Buuren." In the past ten years, he's established himself as one of the world's foremost trance DJs, and his mixes, live and otherwise, are magnificent to behold (beheard?).

In a random and unusual (for me) stroke of good luck, I won a radio contest and got a copy of his first collection/best-of album, un-coincidentally titled 10 Years. It's everything you could wish for and more, provided you already have his album Shivers. It's also one of those CDs that's nice to actually own, because the liner notes provide interesting tidbits about each of the songs from Armin himself.

I do find that I prefer his vocal collaborations, my favorites of which in this collection are "Love You More" (which is really just a trance song with a few reverberating lines) f. Racoon, "Sound of Goodbye" (vocals uncredited in this album, but the liner notes say the original mix was released as "Perpetuous Dreamer" [is perpetuous a word?], for which Elles de Graaf purportedly did the vocals), "Touch Me" (again barely vocal but with a fun melody), "Shivers" f. Susana (although I like the original album version too -- moodier), and "Burned With Desire," "Simple Things" and "Wall of Sound" f. Justine Suissa.

"The Fountain"

Darren Aronofsky's movie The Fountain is one of those rare but pleasant surprises in which a movie you go see is exactly as advertised. If you've watched the trailer, the movie will feel and sound familiar to you, but you the story hasn't been ruined.

The Fountain is Aronofsky's meditation on love, death, birth, immortality and the meaning of life, which he conceived, if I'm remembering aright, after turning 30, while his partner (Rachel Weisz, also the lead actress in the film) was pregnant. In fact, it was hearing the story of his efforts to make the film that made me want to see it (which story you can read at Entertainment Weekly). Like the other movies he's made (pi and Requiem for a Dream), it's non-linear and highly atmospheric -- I would call the whole thing more of a feeling than a story. But it's quite the ride.

Though it's three parallel stories, the primary story is set in the present day (the director wisely, in my opinion, chooses something familiar in which to ground his metaphysical musings), where Tommy Creo (Spanish for "I create") is a doctor working on a cure for the disease that's killing his wife, Izzy. The other stories take place in Spain and South America, during the Inquisition and the reign of a much-fictionalized Queen Isabel, where Tomas is a conquistador; and in space, in the future (2500 AD, according to the trailer), where Tom is ... floating. All three Tommys are played by Hugh Jackman, with variations of hair to tell them apart, as the Izzys are played by Weisz.

I didn't have trouble keeping track of the story, as I'd originally feared. At the beginning not everything made sense, but all important loose ends were tied up by the end, while still leaving room for viewer interpretation. It was cinematically just what a mood piece should be -- filled with shots and camera angles that are meant to draw our attention, music that is itself moody but enhances rather than overwhelms the story (from Clint Mansell, who also composed the similar but more repetitive score for Requiem), repetition of story elements for emphasis and explanation -- and yes, it was occasionally heavy-handed. There isn't much character development. Everyone is who they appear to be (as far as personality and values), and the past and future stories feel even flatter. There are few sets and few extras -- I felt eventually claustrophobic with the tunnel vision focus of the story.

Tom/Tommy/Tomas does come to some sort of resolution in the end, which I hope reflects Aronofsky's, though I could write an essay about what it says of his world view (I'll put some of my thoughts in a comment so that you can read it once you've seen the movie). Don't go in looking for spiritual advice; it's not that specific a movie. Don't go in looking for something generally uplifting, either; it's not that sentimental. But Hugh Jackman can make me believe anything, and I believed in his Tommy.

Overall, I think I have to agree with the EW reviewer's take: "...it's an entirely mood-dependent experience enhanced by identification with romantic/spiritual/kabbalistic/journal-or-blog-keeping tendencies of one's own, and ruined by impatience... but I'm perfectly content to float with him even if he doesn't solve the riddles of the universe."

"My Super Ex-Girlfriend"

This comedy, starring Uma Thurman and Luke Wilson, received very mediocre reviews. I think they were a tad undeserved, because it was almost good, for what it was. The premise is that a shy, insecure woman has superpowers, and her well-meaning boyfriend finds her too crazy to handle. She reacts with petty vengefulness until all is made right in the end. It was actually a pretty insightful look at what would happen if someone with a heart in the right place (she *does* help people) but less-than-stellar character were suddenly given superpowers. The light tone (still grounded in reality: death isn't funny) is maintained throughout, absurd situations arise, the characters are true to themselves and everyone learns a valuable lesson in the end. Pure sedative brain-candy with some good moments and good lines (many from Rainn Wilson, playing a PG-13-rated version of his character on The Office).

The only thing is, I don't find jokes about and/or involving sex to be funny, so a small but appreciable fraction of the jokes in the movie were more embarrassing to me than funny. Does the world really think you have to be sleeping together to be in a relationship? *sigh* I suppose it does.

Sarah McLachlan's "Wintersong"

Wintersong sounds just like one would expect a Christmas album from Sarah McLachlan to sound: spare instrumentation, ethereal atmosphere, and haunting vocals. Plenty of holiday wistfulness. It makes great background music, but there is one standout track. "The First Noel/Mary Mary," in which she combines reverberating vocals in her famous style, several holiday classics, beautiful pop, some folk, a little bit of eastern instrumentation and an unexpected drum break, lifts the heart in the best way.

Snow Patrol - "Chasing Cars"

"Chasing Cars" (off the album Eyes Open) is a great guitar-driven Brit-rock song. But you know the only thing I like more than guitar-driven Brit-rock is a synth-washed techno beat... and so I present you with the House Remix of Chasing Cars. So great that I actually listened to it multiple times in a row.



Edit: the same site also calls this the Topher Jones & Blake Jarrell Remix.

"O2/Avalon Remixed"

A wise man once said that remixing is like admitting you were wrong. Sometimes I disagree, but in general I think he's right. That said, if you're going to admit you're wrong, at least make it right! With O2/Avalon Remixed, Avalon have taken their frustratingly poppy, stereotypical CCM and made it into trip-hoppy/downtempo dance beats! w00t! Songs that I already liked ("Testify To Love" and "Can't Live A Day") weren't made worse, and some songs that really annoyed me ("Wonder Why") have been made listenable! "The Best Thing" and "My Oxygen" were standouts.

"Superman Returns" (movie and soundtrack)

I'm critical by nature and a movie critic by presumption, but it surprised me this summer that I didn't often agree with my friends about movies. Some of them liked X3 "just fine," for example. (Ha! See my previous review...) Some of them didn't like Pirates 2 (see my next review). Everyone I know but me hated Elektra. And most of them didn't like Superman Returns, the Project That Stole Bryan Singer Away From X-Men (Oh Yeah, And Cyclops, Too). (Sorry -- still working through some residual bitterness there.) Or they liked it "okay, but..." Some said it was a chick flick. Others said it wasn't emotionally engaging. I say -- to heck with them! I loved it!

I'm a certified (or is that certifiable?) X-geek, but everything I know about Superman I learned from Lois & Clark, the TV series. I watched a little Smallville before it became a smutfest, but I've never seen the original Christopher Reeve movies. (There were four, and Superman Returns, in the kind of retconning only possible in comicdom, is a sequel to the second, kind-of like that offshoot of the periodic table of elements.)

When I saw SR the first time, I think I was subconsciously expecting Lois & Clark, because I remember thinking, "What gives? He's always Superman!" Then I paused for a moment to remember the title of the movie and got over that. Obviously, the plot is about Superman's return (from a five-year journey to find the remains of Krypton). One thread of the plot is its effect on Lois Lane, whose son is five... but who has also been dating Richard "Perry's Nephew" White (James Marsden) for five years. The other thread is unrelated to his return, specifically, but does involve the Fortress of Solitude: Lex Luthor's latest dastardly plan to conquer the world, this time with capitalism (and some alien technology). As played by Kevin Spacey (who also starred in Singer's breakthrough The Usual Suspects), Lex is a surprisingly believable guy -- for being completely cruel and heartless. He also has, strangely, a sense of humor: he's evil and proud of it!

All the ingredients for your typical summer fare were present -- huge action sequences, special effects, stuff going boom and a hot man in tights (maybe that last one is optional) -- but the movie also bothered to give its characters personality and depth, and to give the plot personal as well as global relevance -- not unlike Singer's X-men movies. Sometimes I felt the characters (or perhaps the actors) didn't show enough emotion, because I did agree with the critics who didn't feel completely emotionally engaged (I didn't cry until the end, and crying is typically a good barometer for me of whether I'm feeling the movie or not). On the other hand, it's been a while since I was as enraptured by action sequences as I was in these. I really wanted Superman to save the day! Something about putting very human faces on an overwhelming, tragic situation and then -- boom! You see Superman's boots. Truly thrilling. Some days, a girl just wants to root for a guy who's good through and through.

My guy friends who called it a chick flick might have been noticing strong female characters and a love story, but I think they were mostly thinking, "You know, 'man in spandex' just doesn't do it for me, and Lois Lane's pretty buttoned up." At the very least it's a great date movie, because she'll want to hold your hand for about half the movie and cry on your shoulder for some more.

Speaking of Lois, I felt Kate Bosworth did a very credible job. She wasn't as sassy as Teri Hatcher was, nor as the character is usally portrayed, but then, Lois has never been a mother before. Her care and fear for her son felt believable to me, and I appreciated that she wasn't completely helpless.

John Ottman did a fantastic job with the score. For continuity's sake, Singer wanted to use the original Superman theme (composed, like most iconic theme music these days, by John Williams), but Ottman also adds a few cues of his own that add touching depth to the characters' suffering. He uses choral wash judiciously and manages to make the same cue adapt to several different flavors of sadness (which is, in this case, a good thing, because it makes the melody more memorable). His action sequences aren't terribly unique, but neither are they drab-sounding. The best part is that I can listen to the soundtrack (even in its unsatisfying out-of-movie-order) and feel as heroic or sad or excited as I felt when watching the movie.

I think I'll just leave Singer to describe his own work, and compliment him by saying this: he achieved what he was going for, and the movie will play just as well on the small screen as the IMAX.

"On an external level, the movie's about how an idealistic superhero functions in the modern world," Singer says.... "But it ultimately becomes a story about what happens when an old boyfriend comes back into your life, and about Superman trying to find a place in Lois Lane's world. I'm attempting to make a very emotional film. This is certainly the most romantic, and the funniest, movie I've made, and toward the end it gets a bit intense."
source

Third Day - "Wherever You Are"

With a band as big as Third Day, you either already like them or already don't. I happen to like them, because the "Southern Rock" sound is full of electric guitar and strings(!). Plus, of course, Mac Powell's voice is amazing. The lyrics aren't dippy and some of them are downright deep. Where You Are, the latest album, is nothing new or surprising (if you're already used to Third Day, anyway), but it showcases a great band at the epitome of their greatness. There's not a weak track on the album. Standouts include "Cry Out To Jesus," as close as Third Day gets to a ballad, which offers deep, heartfelt comfort; "I Can Feel It," which has such a driving drum and guitar line that if you don't feel inspired by it, you might be dead; and "Carry My Cross," a stirring song from Jesus' point of view about why he's carrying the cross. Did I mention the string section? [happy shiver] Way to go, TD!

Why you should work with DreamHost

DreamHost (through which I have my e-mail and website) is a techy place. Sometimes their site goes down. But they're all techy people who are actually eager to help you. If you sign read their announcements blog, they'll tell you what went wrong and why and why it won't or might happen again. Most importantly, they're not evil!

Herewith I present to you two blog entries describing other hosting companies' Dirty Laundry and other, Quasi-Dirty Laundry explained.

X-Men: The Last Stand (DANGER! Spoilers!)

The author wishes to thank her kind and tolerant friends for letting her vent/detox after the movie, especially Dan, who reminded her to get her car, and DJ, who reminded her to fill it with gas. Without them, she literally wouldn't have made it home.

Okay. I -- No. Where do I start? I thought Goblet of Fire was fast-paced. That only crammed an 800-page novel into two and a half hours. Last Stand tries to cram several years' worth of comic books into 104 minutes. You're barely given time to breathe, let alone grieve -- and enough people die in this movie that you'd have plenty to grieve about if you could.

I knew we were in trouble from the start. The style of the first two movies' gradual openings was gone, replaced by inappropriately heroic music and flashbacks far less effective than the first movie's. The most exciting four or five minutes occurs in the first quarter of the movie, in which Logan is appropriately witty and we see the introduction of the Fastball Special. (No mention of how Rogue, Colossus, Shadowcat and Iceman suddenly got qualified to join the team, but fine, time has passed.)

When the movie first ended, I thought my problem was with the plot. But as we talked it over, I realized that it wasn't that. Sure, there were plot holes, but in general I was willing to buy whatever explanations they offered. No, I realized that my problem was with Brett Ratner, and anyone else responsible for directing, scripting or producing this movie. In an effort to get as many faces onscreen as possible, they let all depth of character, intellect or emotion fall by the wayside. But hey, stuff blows up!

Yep. Stuff blows up. Houses, islands, people -- disintegrated, obliterated, annihilated. Lots of people die, and a few come back to life, depending on how you define die. Your typical summer blockbuster. One reviewer described it as Michael Bay's Schindler's List. (If you didn't get the joke, think "Schindler's List with lots of explosions.") More accurately it was X-Men: Rush Hour! Cramasmanyscenestogetherasyoucanbecauseourmindnumbedaudiencedhasnoattentionspan.

Bryan Singer, I'm very disappointed in you. I hope you're sorry for what you've done. Your presence as director lured some fine actors into the franchise, and you made two good movies -- exciting, emotional, intellectually challenging. And you just had to go after Superman, didn't you? They dangle a lot of money and the greatest comic book property in history in front of you, and you just abandon your baby. Who are you, Magneto?

Seriously, this story had a lot of potential. The "cure" that incites Magneto's war was a great narrative device (the announcement of and reaction to which felt completely cribbed from Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-Men, but hey): it's the crux of the mutant issue. We knew Jean Grey would be back -- or at least, fans of the comic who noticed the fire in the water at the end of X2 knew she would be back -- and I was satisfied with the explanation they used here.

But she, like every other mutant in the story, has been reduced to her most cardboard cutout: she stands around looking menacing and the universe disintegrates around her. Magneto is the bad guy, Callisto is his new flunky, Storm is responsible, Xavier is an idealist, Cyclops is heartbroken, Wolverine is heartbroken and angry (making him the deepest character in the film), Mystique is clever (she actually has another trait as well, suggesting that perhaps she and Logan were meant for each other after all), Rogue is lovesick, Iceman is the nice guy, Pyro is a hothead, Juggernaut's a meathead (totally misused as the comic relief), Colossus doesn't even have a personality trait, he's just steel. You see? The fact that I can even write this list is a problem.

Sure, I'm glad Storm has better lines than "okay" and "let's go," but they waste a whole minute of the movie walking around in the fog, only to have Logan finally complain that he can't see, and another thirty seconds while the special effects guys clear away the fog. I mean, at the time, it seemed like it was setting a mood and I appreciated the pacing, but in retrospect it was a terrible waste. Porcupine-face got more screentime than Cyclops, and Pf doesn't even have powers, just bad fashion sense! It's not like scenes with real emotion are expensive! No F/X there, guys! Just people acting! You know, like films used to have! The strength of Lord of the Rings, Spiderman, and, heck, the first two X-movies, was the fact that they put real people into the situation. They hired good actors to exist in a deep story. Ratner just blows stuff up.

There is no ending. Almost like Phoenix - Endsong (reviewed previously), by the end of the credits (for which you should stick around), they've narratively undone almost everything they accomplished in the story. What little emotion I was able to work up at the end was betrayed. Ha! You shouldn't have grieved or felt sorry for any of them! Gotcha! (Which, ironically, is a totally Singerian, Usual Suspects feeling...) But Endsong had beauty to make up for its deficiencies, and Last Stand has...um... well, the women are beautiful, except for Phoenix (not the same as Jean), who's insanely creepy. The Jean Grey/Phoenix music is cool, but the moments are uneven. The script doctoring (he wanted out, she wanted a bigger role) is too obvious.

I mean, I liked the movie. It was entertaining. I'll buy it on DVD. I'd listen to the soundtrack. But it could've been great, and it was barely good! If you're gonna be a movie franchise, be Harry Potter or Spiderman, where each entry gets better, even if you change directors. Don't be The Matrix.

X-Men: Phoenix - Endsong

There are few invariants in this life. It rains in Seattle. All governments waste money. Everybody dies (at least once). And Jean Grey loves Scott Summers. This is how it has always been! To watch the Grey-Summers marriage unravel under the authorship of Grant Morrison in New X-Men violates the existence of the known universe and all principles of being a good writer and a good person.* Therefore, my enjoyment of Endsong is unfairly diminshed before the story even begins. However, if you suspend your disbelief enough not to retch at their attempts to make Emma Frost into a kind, caring enough person that Scott might fall for her (and, to be fair, I have not actually read the issues wherein that happened), you might actually enjoy the story.

The story of the Phoenix Force and its effect on Jean, Scott and the rest of the X-men has turned out to be the quintessential X-men storyline. Sure, human-mutant tension, Magneto's army, the Age of Apocalypse, etc., were interesting and meaningful. But a cosmic life-force and an alien galaxy ended up providing the most human emotions of all -- so much so that the story just won't die. (Haha. Pun intended.)

It's been covered so many times, in fact, that most of Endsong feels recycled. The symbolism is heavy-handed ("Scott, I want to see your eyes!" And what was with the ridiculous Shi'ar language?). Beast's and Jean's abilities, among others, strain credulity almost to the breaking point, even within the Marvelverse. They squeeze in recent additions to the Marvel canon (Quentin Quire and the Stepford Cuckoos). It's like a terrible soap opera with lots of beautiful fire. But there are some excellent tender moments (including Wolverine being forced to relive his experience killing Phoenix, and the amazing climax, which actually made me cry), and if you discount the last page (which undercuts everything the rest of the climax achieved), the ending is great.

The primary and basically only reason to buy or even read Endsong is the utterly magnificent art by Greg Land. It's like reading a series of paintings. (The inker and colorist deserve their share of the credit.) Truly, I question whether the human form has ever been so beautifully captured. Even the stereotypically superheroic implausibilities, such as every woman being overflowingly well-endowed, look as realistically as possible like implausibly ample bosoms would look if they were squished into Superbras and spandex costumes. Land's art is so beautiful that it even makes up for its own deficiencies, which are small but evident. (The women are often undistinguishable except for their coloring and occasionally don't look the same from one frame to the next.) I'd accuse him of tracing photographs if not for the latter fault (because if he were tracing photos, surely he'd trace the same one for each person...? But I'm not the only one to say he does too much "photo-referencing").

It's only a middling story, but Land has made a lifelong fan out of me.


*Seriously, we all know he's doing it just because he can, just to do something different. Mike and I were recently discussing who was the loveliest of the X-Men -- they're all beautiful, but who has a good soul, too? -- and we determined it was pretty much Jean Grey, with barely a second place. All Morrison has done is try to make Emma more like Jean and vice versa. Not to mention he could hardly have picked a less likely candidate to suddenly become nice, both from a Marvel history standpoint (though, conveniently, Emma has rarely been linked with any other men) and from a storywriting standpoint (because she was such a freaking awesome villain. Her name's Frost, for Pete's sake!). So although their personalities remain relatively unchanged, their characters -- the beauty of their souls -- has been perverted. But enough with the ragging on Morrison.