Category: Q & A

Questions, and Answers, from the man himself

Deano’s answer to: “If you agree that Superman, Batman & Wonder Woman are the DC big 3, who’s #4?”

Posted on by Deano in Q & A

If you go by power level, Green Lantern

If you go by mainstream recognition, The Flash

If you go by “cool factor” for the few people who ever notice him, Martian Manhunter

If you go by Hughesian Debating Skills, I’m totally won over on Aquaman 🙂

Personally, I use the “Dan Brereton Coolest Art/Pose” factor, which again I would argue gives a pretty solid win to Aquaman:


(Also, look at the panels – clearly Aquaman is standing/floating IN FRONT OF the other three “JLA Core Members”, more prominently so in the bottom panels)

This answer originally appeared on Quora: If you agree that Superman, Batman & Wonder Woman are the DC big 3, who’s #4?

Deano’s answer to: “Why is Internet Explorer always behind in its support of the latest technical innovations?”

Posted on by Deano in Q & A

It isn’t behind on technical innovations. Merely behind on non-Microsoft-created technical innovations.

Because Microsoft spends a significant amount of time creating alternatives to standards-based protocols, platforms, languages, etc, they feel the need to “prove out” same by providing a reference implementation that can gain public traction, and hopefully subvert the alternatives.

Historically, with things like ActiveX, this was actually a fairly effective strategy. It was even touch and go there for a bit with Silverlight (no, really!). Because IE was also historically the default browser installed with Windows, there was a natural symbiosis – the vast installed base of IE users was so large, that accommodating the Microsoft technology (especially when it ran faster/better within IE, or on the server end under NT/2000/2003 Server), and even ignoring cross-platform compatible solutions was often the answer that drove higher profits for small and medium businesses with a web presence.

A few factors negated this effect in more recent years: Adobe Flash (which gained enough Windows-side performance, cross-platform marketshare, and overall functionality, to make Microsoft web technologies basically moot), and the FireFox cross-platform browser (which, with its initial tiny footprint, lightning-fast performance, and better security, gave it a leg up on every other platform, and eventually even Windows, at a time when Microsoft had “declared victory”, and basically ceased IE development).

This more or less brings us to today: Microsoft, which is still trying to foist Microsoft-created or licensed web technologies on the public, doesn’t prioritize support for Internet standards, and is instead trying various ways to innovate through differentiation and integration with the greater Windows/Office platforms. As this tactic seems to be unsuccessful, the only remaining question is, will Microsoft cede the desktop browser victory to Google/Mozilla/Apple while pursuing alternate platforms (mobile and gaming OSes, giant touch-table furniture, and ergonomic mice), or finally catch up on the standards with IE 10, and only then try to push ahead with IE 11 once some form of leadership in the browser has been restored.

Due to the inherent inefficiencies of a mature organization like Microsoft, it is unlikely that the latter option will come to pass.

This answer originally appeared on Quora: Why is Internet Explorer always behind in its support of the latest technical innovations?

Deano’s answer to: “Why aren’t more superhero movies better?”

Posted on by Deano in Q & A

Showing us how someone got super powers? Boring.

Showing us what they do with those powers, and showing (not telling) us why? THE HOTNESS.

In short, all Superhero movies need to do to dramatically improve in quality and performance is pretty simple: stop treating the superpower as the main character.

They don’t need to explode bigger stuff. They don’t even need to win. Just present us with a damn good explanation for why Sue Storm isn’t the world’s richest paparazzi(*), and we’ll be happy.

M. Night Shyamalan gets a bad rap, because, er, most of his movies are terrible. But, he actually made a really great superhero epic no one really thinks about anymore, Unbreakable. All he did was make a superhero movie about real people, where the powers were very much secondary to the story. We need more movies like that.

Superhero movies are still movies. Powers are props and plot points, you still need an actual story, and identifiable characters. Even in cases where the overall story is very well known (Superman), there’s a ton of room for insights that delight and surprise twists that keep us wondering…

(* Despite the extensive grassroots petitioning, however, we really don’t need an explanation why her boyfriend doesn’t work in porn.)

This answer originally appeared on Quora: Why aren’t more superhero movies better?

Deano’s answer to: “In what situations is it OK for a man watching a movie to cry “manly tears” and not look like a big baby?”

Posted on by Deano in Q & A

Empirically, the only time man-tears are allowed at the movies:

  • When Kirk Douglas gives the order to attack the Japanese fleet approaching Pearl Harbor in The Final Countdown (1 manly tear from each eye)
  • When Chewbacca screams at the end of Star Wars IV: A New Hope, because he’s the only one who doesn’t get a medal (2 manly tears from each eye)
  • Whenever Tom Cruise is in an F-14 that blows something up in Top Gun (1 manly tear per eye per instance, no more than 3 tear-pairs per viewing unless advised by a physician)
  • Steel Magnolias, Opening credits until fade out (sometimes, the manliest thing is not to count the tears at all)
  • The scene where Rell allows himself to be crushed to death by stone doors in order to allow comrades Colwyn, Kegan, Titch, Ergo, Torquil and Oswyn entry to the Black Fortress, wherein they can use the magical Glaive to confront The Beast, and rescue Lyssa, the woman foretold to someday bear the child of destiny in a film that, of course, need not even be named* (a single tear from one eye, with the other held closed, in honor of the valiant cyclops)

(* Seriously, you wouldn’t believe how many people I run into who can’t remember this movie, or claim never to have seen it. I mean, really, you know, like I’m supposed to believe that?)

This answer originally appeared on Quora: In what situations is it OK for a man watching a movie to cry “manly tears” and not look like a big baby?

Deano’s answer to: “Do people still want to read ongoing soap opera-like comic books or only self contained stories?”

Posted on by Deano in Q & A

This is, to me, more an issue of economics than anything else – as the cost of production, printing, and distribution of paper comic books continues to rise, it’s harder and harder to profit from a “B-tier serial”, or to expand the audience for any comic outside of hardcore fandom (though it does happen).

“Self-contained stories”, or at least “digestible compilations” such as graphic novels of serializations, however, have taken off in the last decade for a few simple reasons:

  • economies of scale allow for a much cheaper $/page ratio for the reader ($3/32 pp for comics vs. $10/200 pp for GNs)
  • the larger format GNs look a LOT like “regular paperback books”, which is a product that all kinds of retailers, not just bookstores, already know how to shelve and sell.
  • Comics, on the other hand, typically require specifically constructed wall displays, or space-inefficient and clumsily-operated spinner racks… They are smaller and more fragile than other magazines, and while their content should be more evergreen (a big problem with selling older/out of date print mags like Time, say), there are so damn MANY of them, it’s just too hard to keep track of inventory/stage them nicely/etc.
  • For non-serialized single volume work of appropriate length (150-300 pp), it’s also now possible to make a profit with the more friendly book/box store/discounter/toy and game channels to exploit on top of the dedicated comic book market.

Simply put, it’s easier to display, sell, and manage inventory of graphic novels/longer form comics, and theoretically no less so for a single volume work (especially at book retailers – keeping all 42 volumes of Dragonball in stock at a given Barnes location, for example, is a complete NIGHTMARE).

But, you say, this has not answered the question “do people still WANT to read…”, and you’re right: what people want is not the same as what the publishers want, which also differs from what the retailers want. It’s a game of finding equilibrium between all three, and a messy game at that. Perhaps I could simplify it further: what people want in comics, and how much they are willing to pay for that stated want, are often out of alignment.

This is one of the reasons why digital and online publishing hold so much promise (outside of, er, monetization) – they are FAR more closely linked between creator and reader, with fewer middlemen taking a cut, or enforcing limitations over content or frequency.

Do people want daily/weekly/monthly “chunkable” serials? YES. Do they want nice, tightly wrapped stories/arcs, even if that means a year between releases? YES. Are you more likely to find the latter at Target, or even Amazon.com? Most certainly!

This answer originally appeared on Quora: Do people still want to read ongoing soap opera-like comic books or only self contained stories?