I take your point: the story doesn't deal with contemporary social issues. Thor is used to pay lip service to the anti-globalisation movement, but I don't see that as drawing attention to it, but rather, diversifying the cast.
I think having starlets etc. does assist the story somewhat. To reiterate, if you had superpowers, you'd be famous. Famous people hang out together.
quote:
Originally posted by DuplicateMan:
Obviously, you and I see very difference things in Ultimates. You see Freedy Prinze Jr as making this dreg "relevant". I see it as a frantic, failed attempt to be "kewl". You apparently like "Hollyword glitz". I absolutely can't stand it! Sorry, but I find absolutely NOTHING good about Ultimates!
Well, you've said that you don't like the references to existing famous people, but that's hardly where the story begins and ends, is it? What else don't you like about it?
I think "Hollywood glitz" has a marketing role and a role in the story, the latter of which I've dealt with above.
To go further into the marketing role....I think Millar has done something which no one else has thought to do before. When Michael Jordan advertises Oakley sun glasses, no one seriously thinks that he prefers them to, say, Ray-Bans. People know he gets paid a lot of money to endorse them. But people nonetheless buy Oakleys because Jordan is associated with them. Millar has adopted the same approach in Ultimates, but he doesn't have to pay millions of dollars for Shannon Elizabeth to appear in the comic. Nonetheless, people will buy the comic because of the perception that the actress endorses the comic. I think its a great move.
I can see it going further, too: what's the bet that within the next 10 years there will be a superhero team with the likes of Bruce Willis or some other action movie actor as a permanent member?
On a slight tangent, I daresay the idea of having Princess Diana as a member of X-statix (aside from being in extremely poor taste) was an effort to do exactly that, without the expense of paying for a celebrity to appear, and guessing that the traditionally litigation shy Windsors would not sue. Marvel misunderstood the nature of personality rights badly though, as well as public reaction. In the US, personality rights are something which can continue after a famous person's death. This is why Elvis Presley's estate still brings people to court for commercially exploiting his image.
Marc makes an interesting point about it being deconstructionist. I don't think its necessarily deconstructionist: I think its just a revision. There aren't too many deconstructionist elements to it. I do like the "funhouse mirror" label though.
