Will Bryan Singer Return to X-Men?

Finally, some good prequel news. Director Bryan Singer—who helmed the first two X-Men films—told Total Film (as reported by the Coventry Telegraph) that he’s interested in returning to the series with X-Men Origins: Magneto. Singer left the franchise to direct 2006’s Superman Returns, leaving X-Men: The Last Stand in the hands of Brett Ratner. As we all know, that third installment in the series received mixed reviews from fans and critics, as did Gavin Hood’s mediocre X-Men Origins: Wolverine, which opened this year.

When asked if he would return for another X-Men film, Singer said in the interview that he “would love to return to that universe.” He later added, “The only thing that concerns me about Magneto is that if the prequel were to follow the track I used in X-Men, which is Magneto's history in the concentration camp, then I've lived in that world.”

"Apt Pupil, X-Men and now Valkyrie...I've lived in that Nazi universe for quite a while. I just might need to take a little break before I do something like that."

In other words, a Singer-directed Magneto film might happen, but not just yet. The Coventry Telegraph notes that the Magneto project has yet to move forward officially.

While some may disagree, I rank Singer’s X-Men films among the best comic book film adaptations, and I would love to see him tackle Magneto’s backstory. Singer already gave us a glimpse of a young Magneto (then Erik Lehnsherr) as he was torn away from his parents in a Nazi concentration camp at the beginning of the first film. Why not let him expand on that?

Or, we could always go the Wolverine route and throw in Dazzler as the USO girl who rescues Magneto—played by Zac Efron—from the gas chamber through the power of dance. You could even cast Lady Gaga and include her sure-to-be hit single “Magnetic” on the soundtrack.

Damn, I just gave Fox an idea, didn’t I?

Snikt! X-Men Origins: Wolverine – The Video Game Wows Fans at NYCC

He’s the best there is at what he does. But what he does best isn’t very nice.

At New York Comic Con, Activision and Raven Software invited fans to a sneak peek at their upcoming adaptation of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, a title that already looks far superior to most movie-to-game translations and seems to do a great deal of justice to the iconic X-Man.

First off, this game is violent. Very violent. Whenever Wolverine is translated to a medium outside of comic books—be it animation, feature films or video games—the character is typically never able to fully let loose with his claws. Sure, there may have been some bloodless takedowns in the X-Men film series courtesy of our favorite clawed Canuck, but the character's trademark ferocity always seems restrained by the need to keep him kid-friendly. It’s pretty difficult to sell plastic Wolverine claws in toy stores when they spend most of their screen time covered in viscera. Raven, however, doesn’t seem all that concerned with making Wolverine fun for the whole family. In this game, he kills people and holds nothing back.

Based on the 15-minute demo I saw at NYCC, it seems as though Wolverine spends the majority of the game impaling, decapitating and even cutting in half any enemy that stands in his path. While graphic content is in no way a substitute for solid gameplay, it certainly doesn't hurt in this case. Like God of War and other similar brawlers, Wolverine allows players to upgrade their attacks and chain combos together to dispatch their enemies in the most satisfying—and gory—ways possible. Also, the game showcases Wolverine’s healing abilities amazingly through real-time regeneration on his character model whenever he sustains heavy damage.

A visually stunning game, this may turn out to be one of the few video games based on a film to transcend expectations. It looks phenomenal, and seems to both follow the film’s storyline as well as provide its own unique thrills.

Look for X-Men Origins: Wolverine – The Video Game on store shelves May 1. Visit the game’s official site at uncaged.com for more details.

Oh, and as for the demonstration itself, Activision easily had the coolest giveaway at NYCC: Giant foam Wolverine claws. Awesome.

Comic Books: Not Just Kids' Stuff

I’m not easily offended, but when I came across one particular blurb titled “Comics and Combovers” on The New York Times’ City Room Blog, I couldn’t help but shake my shiny head in disgust. As many comic book fans know, New York Comic Con opens on February 6 and is the premier geek gathering outside of San Diego where the main event, Comic-Con International, opens in July. Of course, both events—and all comic book conventions—have grown beyond a sole focus on comic books to include programming to drum up awareness of new films, books, television series and video games.

However, whenever a comic book convention starts grabbing headlines, the geek culture—and I use the term affectionately—is approached with a disheartening ethnographic detachment, as it is in the City Room Blog piece. Posted by Alan Feuer, it reads, “The culture is strewn with examples of grown men in their 40s — some in their 50s — unabashedly proclaiming love for comic books, an obsession that hints at lingering boyhood hungers and ranks up there with coin collecting as something to be given up by age 13. Maybe the security of affluence has permitted men to remain adolescents at heart well after middle age has taken their bodies.” It then directs readers to New York Comic Con's website for ticket information so they can observe these sad, strange people in person.

What’s being said here perhaps isn’t all that bad. Comic books, since their inception, have always been viewed as a childish diversion. However, not only is the NY Times blogger ignoring the fact that the majority of comic book readers are adults these days—and not all of us are the basement-dwelling introverts that stereotypes would suggest—and that the subject matter of most books is geared toward a mature audience and has been since the mid-1980s or so. I would hardly call Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ Watchmen or Neil Gaiman’s Sandman “adolescent” in nature. But what do I know? I have “lingering boyhood hungers.”

The New York Times Building is located just seconds away from Midtown Comics’ Times Square location. Perhaps staffers should plan a visit and get educated before marginalizing a legitimate art form.

Are Your Presidential Senses Tingling?

In one of the more unexpected superhero team-ups, it seems like our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man will be joining forces with President-elect Barack Obama in the pages of The Amazing Spider-Man #583, which hits comic book shops nationwide on Wednesday, January 14.

The issue’s five-page bonus story, written by Zeb Wells, Todd Nauck and Frank D’Armata, pits the wallcrawler against the Chameleon, who is attempting to spoil Obama’s inauguration. If that’s not enough to pique your interest, the story even features an Obama-Spidey celebratory fist bump.

USA Today reports that Obama had collected Spider-Man comic books as a child, and remains a fan of the character due to his “inner turmoil.” Marvel editor-in-chief Joe Quesada explains that Obama’s admiration for the webslinger was the primary inspiration for this special issue.

"It was a natural after we learned the new president is a Spider-Man fan," says Quesada. "We thought, 'Fantastic! We have a comic book geek in the White House.'"

An Obama variant cover by artist Phil Jimenez is limited to half the run and is expected to sell out quickly.

Visit comicshoplocator.com to find a comic book retailer near you.

Watchmen Movie Faces Legal Trouble

A Los Angeles judge ruled on December 24 that 20th Century Fox owns the distribution rights to Warner Bros.' adaptation of acclaimed graphic novel Watchmen, which could put the film’s March 6, 2009 release date in jeopardy, Variety reports.

“Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture,” the ruling said.

According to the article, Fox filed a suit against Warner Bros. in February claiming that they retain the rights to distribute the film under a 1994 turnaround agreement, having originally acquired the rights to Watchmen in the late 1980s. Warner Bros., however, has denied claims that Fox has any remaining stake in the film.

Judge Gary Allen Feess said he would elaborate on this ruling in the near future, and has set a January 20 trial date for Fox’s suit.

I’m no legal expert, but this all seems to indicate that the Watchmen film—directed by Zack Snyder—may run into some major problems leading up to its release. In a worst-case scenario, the film could be shelved until the suit reaches some sort of resolution. From what we’ve seen so far, Snyder looks to have done justice to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ masterpiece, which was long thought to be unfilmable due to its epic scope and bleak, deconstructionist themes. It would be a shame if Watchmen's arduous journey to the silver screen is halted by legal complications this close to its release date.

“Next Time, Baby?” Not for Terrence Howard.

While summer 2008 blockbuster Iron Man all-but-promised that Tony Stark’s best friend Jim Rhodes (Terrence Howard) would make an appearance as armor-clad hero War Machine in the next installment, the Academy Award-nominated actor will not be returning for the 2010 Marvel Studios sequel, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Instead, “Rhodey” will be played by fellow Academy Award nominee Don Cheadle (Hotel Rwanda, Crash), who was approached by Marvel Studios after negotiations with Howard fell through.

Iron Man 2 reunites director Jon Favreau with Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow, who will reprise their roles as Stark/Iron Man and his assistant Pepper Potts. Justin Theroux (Tropic Thunder) is writing the screenplay.

McCain and Obama Square Off on Comic Book Shelves

As of this writing, Senators John McCain and Barack Obama are embroiled in a critical town hall debate at Nashville, Tennessee’s Belmont University. While both presidential candidates are touching on some key policy issues, the dorky part of my brain is left wondering why no one's asking the important questions. They may both have plans to remedy the United States’ ailing economy, but how would each of them fare against a Skrull invasion? Could McCain kick Batman's ass?

Crazier crossovers have happened. On sale Wednesday, October 8, the illustrated life stories of Obama and McCain hit comic book stores courtesy of IDW Comics. Reuters reports that each issue runs 28 pages, with a bound edition combining both biographies available in bookstores.

"It really is a kick to do something that is something so out of the norm for comic books," Scott Dunbier, special projects editor with IDW told Reuters. "I think that people who normally don't go to comic shops are really going to be part of the audience that pick this up."

With comic book film adaptations all the rage these days, get Christopher Nolan on the phone. You know you’d pay ten bucks to see Obama Begins. On the other hand, Iron Maverick is probably more of a rental.

Robert Downey Jr. Owes His Life to the Burger King

Remember that scene in Iron Man when, after narrowly escaping a terrorist hideout in his brand-new set of iron overalls, Tony Stark immediately asks for an American cheeseburger? Remember when everyone in the theater groaned when Tony was handed a Burger King bag—logo prominently displayed—in a flagrant showcase of product placement? Well, the appearance of the scene-stealing Whopper may not have been as commercially-driven as we all thought it was.

One-time drug addict and Iron Man star Robert Downey Jr. told Britain's Empire magazine that in 2003, while driving down the Pacific Coast Highway in a car filled with "tons of f--king dope," a visit to the fast food chain resulted in a life-changing decision to abandon his addiction, rethink his life and toss his drugs into the ocean.

"I have to thank Burger King," the star told Empire. "It was such a disgusting burger I ordered. I had that, and this big soda, and I thought something really bad was going to happen." It's not the most glowing endorsement, but hey, that "disgusting burger" may have saved Downey Jr.'s life.

And with the success of Iron Man, which has rocketed past the $500 million mark worldwide—things are indeed looking up for the once-troubled star. Look for his highly-publicized cameo in Marvel Studios' The Incredible Hulk on June 13.

Source

Okay, I Think I'm Back

Hey there Wortmaniacs. I suppose we all burn out every once in a while. Last week, I was pushing myself to finish a piece for my local newspaper, the Westmore News, and after its completion I decided that I needed to take a bit of a breather from any and all side projects to collect myself. The fact that Grand Theft Auto IV came out last week might also have had something to do with my absence from the Report.

Now, I know that it's a tad after the fact, so I'll spare you a long-winded review of the game. Chances are, you already ran out, bought it and have caused enough digital mayhem in Liberty City to give gaming villain Jack Thompson carpal tunnel syndrome from all the hand-wringing. In short, it's an amazing piece of video game that I look forward to playing each and every day after work.

If you weren't too busy stealing cars, blowing up helicopters and engaging in other unsavory shenanigans, you might have noticed that a little film called Iron Man hit theaters this weekend. Did I see it? Do you even know me? I was there Saturday with a packed theater enjoying the hell out of ol' shellhead. For my full review, head on over to Broken Frontier.

Since we're on the topic of Iron Man, which pulled in nearly $100 million this past weekend, the good people at Marvel Entertainment announced earlier today that a sequel is definitely in the works. Reuters reports that an Iron Man sequel will hit theaters in April 2010 followed by a Thor adaptation the following June. Captain America and The Avengers are each scheduled to hit theaters in 2011. If the phenomenal Iron Man is any indication, comic book fans have plenty to look forward to for the next few summers. Excelsior!

Iron Man Versus "Iron Man"

Chances are, you’re completely aware that Iron Man hits theaters on May 2. The iconic character is currently plastered on the sides of buses, staring out at us from massive billboards and starring in a steady stream of television spots showcasing Tony Stark’s (Robert Downey Jr.) affinity for red and gold bionic body armor. In a smart—albeit obvious—marketing move, Black Sabbath’s “Iron Man” is blasting in just about every one of the film’s commercials begging the question: does the heavy metal classic have anything to do with the Marvel Comics character created in 1963 by the team of Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Larry Lieber and Don Heck? Not at all.

Naturally, you’re surprised. Sabbath’s “Iron Man”—released on their 1970 album Paranoid—is about a man who travels to the future and witnesses the apocalypse (not the big blue fellow, you nerd). When heading back to the present he is caught in a magnetic field and turned to iron, which renders him unable to warn mankind of its impending fall. Silenced and shunned by his peers, the “Iron Man” takes revenge on all humans and ends up causing the very apocalypse he had previously seen.

Tony Stark may not be a model citizen—particularly after his fascist turn during Marvel’s Civil War event—but Sabbath’s murderous “Iron Man” clearly isn’t referring to ol’ Shellhead. Still, it’s got one of the most badass riffs in rock music, so we’ll let these inconsistencies slide just a tad.

Interesting note: While the song and the superhero were not initially related, Marvel retconned Iron Man’s origins to include the song as Tony Stark’s inspiration in naming his alter-ego. Thanks to revisionist history, it was the Marvel character that was influenced by the song, even though he was created seven years before Sabbath released it.

Smeared Ink: When Comics Get Real

"I bury my face in comic books, cause I don't want to look at nothin', this world's too much, I've swallowed all I could."-Eminem

Seemingly, the above quotation is a throwaway line from "Say Goodbye to Hollywood," a track off of Eminem's 2002 album The Eminem Show. However, it also draws attention to the notion of comic books as an escape from reality: a black-and-white world painted in vivid color. Where heroes and villains are easily identifiable, and problems are wrapped up conveniently over a half-dozen 32-page issues. This is the comic book as it has been known for most of the twentieth century.

Today, the comic book acts as a social mirror; slightly distorting issues ripped from the headlines and packaging them with flashy, iconic imagery. But when do comic writers venture too far into the realm of the realistic, discarding the escapism that makes comic books so appealing in the first place?

Case in point: Marvel's Civil War miniseries. On the surface, it featured Marvel characters attempting to establish order through government intervention and superhero registration. Led by Tony Stark (Iron Man), these registered heroes would be employees of the United States government and would be required to reveal their identities to an ever-skeptical populace. Of course, this idea did not gel with all of Marvel's heroes. Captain America led a group opposing superhero registration, thus beginning Marvel's latest "event" story arc.

The parallels are obvious here. Superhero registration, an allegory of the Bush administration's Patriot Act, which, in the storyline, is not in line with (Captain) America's best interests. We get it. Of course, this doesn't mean we have to like it. Marvel's sweeping story arc left most fans cold, with its free and loose characterization and storyline decisions that would create gaping holes in other titles that will take months to fix.

If the Civil War wasn't enough to drill political and social commentary into fans' heads, the conflict was ended when a sniper shot a handcuffed Captain America through the chest, killing him. It may have caused a spike in sales, but it also left fans wondering if comic books will ever again remember that they're comic books and have fun again. The death of American idealism: on sale, with variant covers no less.

This year also marked the return of Spider-Man's black costume, an obvious marketing tie-in with Spider-Man 3. Once again, characterization of a beloved character went right out the figurative window...but didn't the black costume make him look dark and brooding again? Wait, this is Spider-Man we're talking about. Why do we want dark and brooding again?


The "Back in Black" storyline featured Peter Parker out for revenge, after a sniper (another one?) critically wounds his Aunt May. We've seen Peter angry before, and it's understandable here. But at times during this arc he's downright selfish. His aunt is dying, yet here he is whining about all the lines that he's crossed to keep her alive. Hey buddy, we know the title of the book is The Amazing Spider-Man, but in this case, it ain't all about you.

But, this was all an intent to humanize the character. And for that, I applaud the writers for adding some depth to Peter in a time of crisis and exposing his faults. But is that what comic book readers really want? Shouldn't comics be a chance to escape worldly worries for a few minutes at a time for a few bucks a pop? If I want commentary on the human condition, I'll read Ayn Rand. When I want guys with spider powers fighting monster lizards or mad scientists with octopus arms grafted to their bodies, well, make mine Marvel.


While it may seem like I'm bashing the very medium that I claim to love, I'm merely pointing out that the growth of comic books as an art form has resulted in an overall inability for it to embrace its own roots. Good versus evil. Making the impossible possible. The kind of stuff that Jack Kirby and Stan Lee dreamed of in the 60s. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster's simple belief that a man could fly decades before that. It's all in there still, lost in the shuffle. Cast aside due to the pressure to remain relevant. To be important. Well, for a lot of people, comics have always been important. But if I want reality, I'll put down my issue of Astonishing X-Men and pick up a New York Times. We've got enough reality. Do we really need it in our comic books?

See you in the funny pages.

Does Frank Miller Hate Batman?

After reading through the fifth issue of All-Star Batman & Robin:The Boy Wonder it becomes readily apparent that Frank Miller, who reignited interest in the character in the mid-80s, really hates Batman. Despises him, even.

His past takes on the character, including The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One were gritty and necessarily bleak: this is Batman after all. Miller's Batman was a far cry from that of the campy 1960s television version, and proved to the world that the Caped Crusader could be taken seriously when handled by the right people.

Here we are in 2007 and Miller is once again penning a Batman tale, with famed comic artist Jim Lee providing the visuals. With an unpredictable release schedule (it's been hitting stands sporadically for nearly two years now), Boy Wonder is an out-of-continuity retelling of Robin's origins.

From its beginnings, the characterization of Batman in this series has been a bit off. Batman refers to himself as "the goddamn Batman," kills cops and generally comes off as a psychopath (for a guy that dresses up like a bat). He's less a hero and more of a deviant that gets off from beating the snot out of purse-snatchers. It just doesn't add up.

In this issue, Miller gives us some insight into Wonder Woman's psyche. Namely, the fact that she despises men. "Men always lie about everything. Men always make a mess out of everything." She then makes out with Superman, only after he knocks her ass down with his superbreath. She's got issues. But then again, this is Frank Miller. Everyone's got 'em.

And that's the problem. Miller injects so much of this "gritty realism" into these iconic characters that they fail to be icons at this point. They're just whackos in costumes, wearing masks and harboring secret identities to conceal their inner torment.

Perhaps Miller needs to take a break from the superhero game and focus on his original material, such as Sin City. While his previous work succeeded at subverting the superhero genre and made it relevant again, his current Batman effort borders on self-parody.

"Spider-Man 3" And the Box Office

Well, it's official: Spider-Man 3 is a bonafide hit. It scored the biggest opening weekend of all time and has banked over $400 million worldwide. That's a lot of people turning out for a movie that includes about 10 minutes of James Franco and Kirsten Dunst making an omelet. Scratch that. They don't even succeed at making said omelet. When Harry tries to show off his omelet flipping skills (which suck compared to his armblade skills, flying snowboarding skills and pumpkin-bomb throwing skills) it falls on the floor, which is exactly where my jaw was when director Sam Raimi decided that the best way to convey Peter Parker turning "evil" was to have him comb his hair forward and wear eyeliner. Let me repeat that: Spider-Man wears eyeliner. In short, he turns emo. I'm surprised he didn't go shopping at Hot Topic while listening to My Chemical Romance before updating his Myspace page with pictures of himself looking artsy and sad. Ugh. Emo kids.

You'll recall that I already talked a bit about this movie in an earlier post. In fact, it's the one directly below this one. The reason why it's still on my mind is that I really still don't know where to place this film. It's such a hodge podge of "wow, that scene was pretty cool" mixed with "is this the same movie?" It was like a roller coaster ride of suck. The movie brings you way up before plummeting headfirst into mediocrity. I know that I'm mixing up metaphors in ways that would make most English professors furrow their brows, but screw it, it's my blog and I'll rant if I want to.

I wanted to like this movie. I really did. But there really was something that was off. Really off. Like the studio told director Sam Raimi, who I've trusted for years, that his little story about forgiveness wasn't enough to sell action figures and video games so they added a third MAJOR comic book villain, fan-favorite Venom, in the third act. Blink and you'll miss him.

I'm not stupid, and I know that movies are a business. And I also know that these movies in particular are made for mass consumption and aren't necessarily directed at the obsessive comic book nerds, like myself. But for Spider-Man 3, I just couldn't figure out the audience they were going for. They threw in stuff to please the fans, yet did none of it justice due to time constraints, while certain plot aspects like the whole black costume nonsense (it needed its own film) totally alienate everyone in the audience that isn't up on 1970's comic book storylines. It's so tacked on, knowledge of how the story was SUPPOSED to be told is almost a prerequisite to begin to fathom this Cliff's Notes version we actually get.

But all in all, I'm blowing off steam. It's pretty entertaining if you approach it as a Sam Raimi movie first and a Spider-Man film second. For example, I love Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness, but high cinema they AIN'T. They're cheesy, on purpose of course, and that might be what Sam was doing here. But then again, that subverts all of the work he did in the first two movies getting us to care about these characters, doesn't it?

Whatever, you're gonna see it, or have seen it, no matter what I say. You might have some fun, and I honestly hope that you do. Because there is fun to be had during the film's 2+ hours. But you probably won't leave satisfied.

Wow, did I just write all that? Christ, I need a girlfriend.

The Summer of Geek

It's just occurred to me how damned lucky geeks have been for the past few summers. Rewind to 2005. We were all prepped for the penultimate Star Wars film to grace movie screens everywhere. It was bittersweet, as "I can't believe this is the last one" intermingled with "I can't wait to see the Anakin/Obi-Wan" duel, with just a smidge of "I hope Lucas gets this one right." In the end, it was the last one, the duel was great and as for getting it right...well, it was pretty close...Well, much closer than the last two.

Shortly following Revenge of the Sith came Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins, a film that was ten times better than it had any right to be. The casting was great, the story was great, and there were absolutely no nipples on the bat-suit (for the uninitiated, Joel Schumacher thought it'd be a great idea to make Batman a little bit more...flamboyant in the final two films of the original series). Thankfully, with a competent director behind the wheel of the project (and a kick-ass Batman behind the wheel of the Batmobile), Batman Begins turned out to be the surprise hit of the summer. Of course, not all of the summer blockbusters blew our collective minds that fateful summer. Fantastic Four was average at best and War of the Worlds was Spielberg's lamest film since AI. They might not have been great, but they were there. We had Jedi, Human Torches and tormented costumed billionaires all in the same summer. Could have done without Tom Cruise and his foreboding Thetan levels, but what are you gonna do?

Move ahead to 2006. X-Men: The Last Stand kicked things off early and, while infuriating the purists out there, turned out to be some entertaining popcorn fare. Juggernaut, bitch indeed. It was followed closely by Superman Returns which, while disappointing a large contingent of the comic book community (that seems to be growing larger on the Internet with each passing day), was the first time The Man of Steel had been on-screen in decades. I'll admit, it hasn't aged well in the last year and it's pacing is downright painful at times, but it got people talking about Superman again.

Then came Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. The first Pirates film, released three years prior, was a pleasant surprise but this...this thing was an EVENT. And I honestly think it delivered. In a post-Star Wars and Lord of the Rings world, it gave movie nerds another trilogy to dissect while we all wait for the final installment this summer.

Ah yes, this summer. Already, we've been spoiled with 300 and TMNT (no, I haven't seen it yet. But I hear nothing but good things from the old-school fans), and with Grindhouse right around the corner, followed by Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Transformers, Fantastic Four 2 and The Simpsons Movie, there will be many a geekgasm in the next few months.

But James, what's your point? My point is this: for better or worse, this stuff's getting made. Did you ever think we'd ever see an idea like Grindhouse fully realized? Or that Spider-Man would actually be done right? Hell, did we expect them to start work on another Indiana Jones flick? The niche film has become the event picture, and in a post-Star Wars landscape, movie geeks have plenty to look forward to each and every summer. Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to go analyze the Spider-Man 3 trailer for the 149th time...

When Heroes Fall

As many of you may now know, Marvel Comics superhero Captain America was gunned down by a sniper earlier today at the ripe old age of 66. The eyes of geeks worldwide were misty behind horn-rimmed glasses, but I can honestly say that I was not among them...because I wear contacts.

Following a brutal (and, in many ways anticlimactic) civil war between Marvel heroes, Cap, real name Steve Rogers, was taken out not by a supervillian but by a sniper, who downed the one-time World War II hero in front of a courthouse.

The death of this iconic character has stirred up a frenzy of media attention as fans clamor to get their hands on as many copies of Captain America # 25 as possible, which became available with two variant covers today.

But in the end, what does it really mean? Is Marvel symbolizing the death of the American "dream?" The name of the story arc (of which this issue is just the first part) is even entitled "Death of a Dream." Or is it merely a ploy to boost sales of a hero whose sales have not ascended to the ranks of the Spider-Man and X-Men titles? This remains to be seen.

Undoubtedly, Marvel has big plans following this shocking turn of events and may even be looking for a new character to don the stars and stripes and carry his iconic shield on their back, better reflecting modern times. Or, they could just resurrect him and pretend this never happened, much like Superman's "death" in the early 90s.

Keep reading true believers. 'Til next time, make mine Marvel.