As a Poison Ivy enthusiast and cosplayer, I’ve been getting asked more and more about what Poison Ivy actually eats. (Yes, we nerds still question and debate these sorts of topics.) I have to admit, the question has been rolling around in the back of my mind for a while now and I felt it was time to present my position.

To my knowledge, we haven’t really seen Poison Ivy eat in the comics. I know in an episode of “Batman: The Animated Series”, Ivy (as Pamela) goes on a dinner date with Harvey Dent (pre-Two Face), but I don’t recall her actually eating anything. Not to mention that in this particular season of the series she’s seen as being human rather than a plant hybrid.

I also know that in some of her portrayals, where she’s become more plant than human, that sun deprivation weakens her and has occasionally brought her to the brink of death. I would assume being cut off from water would have a similar effect. However, while sun and water are a part of what would be considered eating for plants (in addition to taking nutrients from the ground), neither of these things is really considered “eating” by human standards. And, as noted before, Poison Ivy is not always portrayed as being entirely plant or human and could possibly have the needs of both.

My gut answer to the above question of what she eats is that Poison Ivy would be a vegan for a number of reasons. For one, while plants are her priority, I can’t imagine her willingness to eat slaughtered animals, or even any byproducts such as eggs or milk. Second, as an eco-terrorist, I would think she’d be aware of how much land is taken up for animal farming and grazing and that swaths of rainforest have been chopped down for that very same purpose.

A point often brought up when I’ve leaned towards this reasoning, is whether or not her veganism would be considered cannibalism. It’s a valid argument, and I can see the logic in that, but I don’t think it works with the realities of the plant world. Plants can often steal what they need from other plants. Anyone who has watched the “Planet Earth” documentary should remember how the plants in the rainforest are in a constant battle for resources and work to reach skyward in search of vital sunlight. Plants can also benefit from the death of their fellows by absorbing them as they decay. It’s really a basic matter of the circle of life. (Cue singing animals.) I should think Ivy, who was a botanist/botanical biochemist prior to her transformation, would understand these realities better than anyone. There is a balance and a cycle to nature that she respects, and her anger and criminal activities are largely due to her perception that this balance is being tipped unfairly by human interference.

I think it could also be argued that in many instances eating plant-based items doesn’t actually result in the death of the plant. As an example, let’s look at apples. They grow from the trees, picking them doesn’t kill the actual tree, and they were destined to fall off at some point anyway. Even if they do fall off from natural causes and their seeds are properly fertilized, you are left with another tree vying for resources that will possibly steal them from its own parent.

With all this in mind, I’d like to know what others think. It’s possible that I’ve overlooked something in the many comics I’ve read over the years, but I don’t think they’ve ever given a firm answer. Then, once we have this settled, I suppose we can move on to whether or not she breathes oxygen solely or also takes in carbon dioxide.

Just kidding.

(Not really.)

For those interested, you can read more of my ramblings on Poison Ivy here and here at ComicAttack.net.

-

While I visited last week’s Geek Down show on cosplaying, I was treated to a mini-interview session with the guys. Check it out!



Be sure to visit their site to catch up on past episodes, as well as everything upcoming!

-

First off, let me just say how sad I am to have neglected the site for so long. Life can be a crazy bitch sometimes.

In any case, I’m back, and I thought I’d give a little bit of feedback on the New 52 issues from DC that I’ve had a chance to read. For those who have somehow missed it: DC decided to pseudo-reboot their comic universe. All of the titles released over the past month have been #1s. While the supposed intention was to help bring new people to reading comics and make it more accessible for those just jumping in, that’s not how all of them ended up.

Overall, I’ve found the reboot to be a mix of the good, the bad and the mediocre.

Birds of Prey: I’ve decided to list this one first as it is my clear favourite of the new comics. It has a good set up, compelling characters, action and excellent art. I’m looking forward to the next issues of what seems to be a wonderful girls kicking ass comic.

Swamp Thing: This one came out of left field for me. Swamp Thing is a character I know very little about, but I found the initial story intriguing. I’ve heard a few people say that they’re a bit confused by what is going on and that they needed more back story, but it’s my hope that all is explained in the subsequent issues.

Batgirl: Another one of my top picks. Overall, I found this to be a strong title, and I have faith in Gail Simone to really take this story in the right direction. My only quibble is that we don’t know how Barbara has regained the ability to use her legs beyond the vague description of it being a miracle. It’s my hope that it’s further explored in upcoming issues.

Batwoman: I would have read this to look at the art alone. It is absolutely stunning! The good news is that the story also seems to be moving along nicely. I think there’s some serious potential here as a unique and compelling series.

The Flash: Another surprise hit for me. I wasn’t planning on reading it until my husband insisted. I’m glad he did. Great set up and I am in love with the art.

Wonder Woman: Another really strong first issue, and it appears to be quite the fan favourite for a reason. There’s definitely a big arc coming our way with this story, and I love seeing our amazon in action!

Supergirl: I enjoyed this story enough that I want to see where it goes. It’s really a fresh start and it’s another comic with strong art backing it.

Grifter: Yet another character I am entirely unfamiliar with, but I’m hoping to change that. I think this could be another surprise win in the New 52 lineup.

Nightwing: This was a fun read. It’s nice to see Dick back in his Nightwing costume (though I prefer the old colours better). Definitely worth reading.

Superboy: I know some people who are really in love with this title, but I thought it was just alright. The first issue is really all about setting the stage for what’s to come next, so I’ll see what issue two brings.

Red Lanterns: Well…it had lanterns in it…and they were red. So, at least they have that going for them. I really wanted to like this book, but I just found myself yawning.

OMAC: Talk about old school! This comic feels like a complete throwback to comics past. Definitely some potential.

Demon Knights: I kept hearing how wonderful this book was, so I gave it a chance. It wasn’t really bad per se, but I keep forgetting I read it. The pacing seemed weird and it simply didn’t grab me.

Okay, now for the ugly. I won’t rehash the things that have been said, better than I could say them, about these titles, but I’ll give you a taste of my reactions.

Catwoman: I so wanted to like this book, but I just couldn’t. Yes, there are some good things about it, but I felt like they were drowned out by splashy images of Selina in her bra and doing the nasty with Batman. I don’t care that she’s doing it with Bruce, but the way in which it was presented was a real turn-off for me. I expected this to be one of the titles female fans could really feel was theirs, and I hope they can turn the book around in following issues, but I’ll be hard-pressed to grab the next issue right away.

Suicide Squad: I refused to purchase this title from the outset, and only read it because someone else offered to loan me their copy and curiousity won out. I felt like there were two big fails. One, in the redesign of Harley Quinn (costume and personality), and the second with the redesign of Amanda Waller. But, you say, appearances aren’t everything. Okay, let’s go with that for a second. I’ll imagine the Harley and Amanda problems are gone. Nope, still wasn’t a compelling book. I know some people really loved this title, but it’s just not for me.

Red Hood and the Outlaws: I could go on and on about this one title, but I won’t. It was quite obviously not a book for women, and for the men, it was something to read with one hand. I’ve heard all of the arguments on both sides, but I’m not changing my stance on this: what was done to the character of Starfire is just plain wrong and insulting. I also highly recommend reading this article about it. The writer could have been channeling precisely what I felt when reading it.

There you have it. My new review of the New 52, goo goo a-joob.

-

As you may have surmised from the title, this is my review of “Thor”, the latest in a series of films centering around the members Marvel’s Avengers. I’m going to try and avoid spoilers in this review, so I won’t delve too much into the plot. Suffice to say, Thor is a being of god-like power that ends up trapped powerless on Earth until he can earn back what was taken from him. Romance, epic battles, loss, redemption. All the things that make a good superhero movie.

Overall, I was highly impressed with the film. So far, none of the recent Marvel Studio’s films have managed to disappoint me, but “Thor” can truly be judged on it’s own merits and needn’t be held up for comparison to “Iron Man” or “Hulk”. While it exists in the same universe, it is a movie that can stand on its own two, heavily armoured feet.

I have to admit, of the four lead Avengers (Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America), Thor is the one I knew the least about. I knew he carried a kick ass hammer and that he was from Asgard, but that was about it. For this reason, I’m glad the film spends quite a bit of time giving us the back story on where he came from and how the realms outside of Earth are laid out.

I could see this film coming off as a bit daunting to those also unfamiliar with the comics as it has a lot of elements and can be complex at times. However, it manages to keep from being confusing or disengaging. This is thanks in part to some very wonderful performances, especially from Chris Hemsworth as the title character. Prior to this, I’d only seen him briefly in “Star Trek” and worried about his ability to carry a film. My fears were unwarranted. He manages to achieve the kind of humour you’d expect from someone who is essentially a god that is now stuck in the mortal realm. There is also a depth to his performance that makes the character very likable and believable.

I also really enjoyed the performances of Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Kat Dennings and a host of other actors. (I could have done with seeing more of Sif and the warriors three.) Hopkins has been accused a lot lately of phoning in his roles, but I think he was an excellent choice for Odin. He brings a weight and wisdom that the role required. On the flip side, my personal pick for weakest link would have been Natalie Portman. However, I’m admittedly not her biggest fan.

The other thing that makes this movie a little weaker than I’d like were some elements of the character development. As the movie already weights in at two hours, I’m sure sacrifices had to be made. A smoother romantic buildup would have been appreciated though. Also, Thor’s character arc seemed a little stilted. It makes me wonder just how much might have ended up on the cutting room floor.

I must say, one of the things that really sold this movie for me were the effects. As much as I am into strong character development and a stable plot (both of which this film has), the overall look and feel really blew me away. The first time we see Asgard amounts to a truly stunning sequence. (Warner Brothers better make damn sure they do at least as good of a job with Oa in “Green Lantern”.) The film is also careful to seamlessly mix in practical and special effects so that there is a tangibility to everything. The movie really captures the beautiful and mythical feel it needed to do the story justice; all the way from the tops of the towers of Asgard, down to the beautiful costume designs.

While I did mention that this film can stand alone, it is still a part of the Avenger’s buildup and has references built in accordingly. (It may even take a few viewings to catch them all.) Also, there is a particularly funny cameo from Stan “The Man” Lee. They were even so bold as to give him a line this time.

I’ve heard a lot of positive and negative murmurings about this film, but honestly, many Marvel films haven’t been to everyone’s liking. For what it’s worth, I think “Thor” is a fun and exciting movie worthy of the Marvel label. In fact, I’m going to celebrate Thor’s Day tomorrow with my third viewing.

-

Oh the madness that is casting a comic book based film! Recently, we had two uproars from fans. The first was the announcement that Anne Hathaway was cast as Selina Kyle (mind you, the press release said nothing about Catwoman) in the next Batman film. The second is Henry Cavill as Superman.

It seems we go through this every time. It’s so rare that a casting decision is embraced by the fans when it comes to their beloved comic heroes. My question is, is it that Hollywood really casts the wrong people so frequently? Or is it that comic book fans are too choosy.

I think it goes without saying that no one actor is going to satisfy everyone. There will always be a group that complains. However, I think there should be more of a willingness to let physical appearances slide a little in comparison to acting prowess. Sure, Hugh Jackman isn’t as short and burly as Wolverine appears in the comics. But, who is? Danny DeVito? What Jackman lacks in mirroring the physical appearance of Wolverine, he makes up for with his performance. I really can’t imagine anyone else in that role now.

When I heard Edward Norton was going to be cast in “The Hulk”, I thought there was no way it was going to work. I just didn’t see him as Bruce Banner. I was wrong, and he was amazing. A lot of people whined about Heath Ledger as the Joker, and we’ve all seen how that turned out.

The bottom line is that there should be allowances by the fans when it comes to casting. Should someone who’s three feet tall play Beast? No. However, have some small measure of flexibility. I know we all want our fantasy dream team to grace the screen and fill the shoes of the characters we love, but until we’re all Hollywood movie makers, it’s not going to happen. You can scream and complain until you’re blue in the face. It’s not going to change things.

Let’s also look at the reality of the movie business. It’s precisely that: a business. The studios are out to make a commercially viable film, and with luck, turn it into a franchise. You may know the ins and outs of the characters, but the movie going public at large may not be that familiar. Studios have to make films accessible to the widest group of moviegoers they can. Without that income, they won’t be able to make any films in the first place.

Also, let’s not forget that even in the comic book world, origin stories and characters evolve and change. It’s a fluid world where very few things are locked in forever. Characters die, come back, become younger or older, change to villains, etc. Even a film that is true to a comic to a fault is going to catch flack from those who wanted to see the alternate story told.

It’s okay to not like a movie. It’s fine if you think it’s drivel or screws everything up. The brilliant part is that it doesn’t change a damn thing about the story you adore. You can still go back and read what you fell in love with in the first place. Plus, chances are, there’ll be another reboot in a few years you can complain about, too.

-