DC Rebooting Universe

I really want the old 52 back, but I don't want to give my hopes up, it would be too painful to give my hopes and have them dashed permanently.

For some reason I keep thinking DC is going to do a call in number again to figure out what to keep and what to lose.

edited 26th Sep '14 8:18:50 PM by Mullon

First of all, newsarama a couldn't theory craft if Newton and Liebniz were tied at the legs to the editors like a rat king.

Secondly, the unsourced misquote that started that page or so of self righteous indignation, what's in specific reference to Kate Kane, specially with her marriage and what a happy ending or catharsis means for a character like her. A Bat character. I personally wouldn't go for it, but its a legitimate creative voice, especially in ongoing serials. There is a reason why marriages and children are often left to Dreams Elseworlds and Imaginary Tales. A Bat settling down, isn't an inherent slam dunk, and to be honest, I was reading Batwoman back then, I don't think that creative team had the moxie to pull it off.

But even then, even though its a move I wouldnt make, I can see how it was a good idea. I don't make these images of 20 year old men in 50 year old bodies clapsing there hands evilly plotting to ruin the fans fun. This is a business of people who spent decades knowing how to make it work. Outside of outright general incompetence (like whatever the hell Countdown was) I don't demonize people for making justifiable choices.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4mHmhO1ZARc

He sat there made his case, and made his points, I don't have to agree with him, but I respect, myself, him and the industry to go beyond base emotions.

edited 27th Sep '14 5:37:10 AM by NotGrantMorrison

"In a surprise move, callers voted for the New 52 to beaten to death with a crowbar."

edited 27th Sep '14 11:34:28 AM by comicwriter

In other news, 9 out of 10 journalists do not know the meaning of the word surprise.

This is a business of people who spent decades knowing how to make it work

You mean the same people under which those decades saw the comic book market shrinking down from widely accepted entertainment for the whole youth to a 'nerd' niche, to the point one of today's best sellers sells as much as an average issue of Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen back in the day? Now that Harras is onboard, the same people who helped sinking Marvel into creative and financial bankruptcy, too?

edited 27th Sep '14 3:03:29 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

I'll give you creative (the man's an incompetent) but IIRC Harras was Mis-blamed for Marvel's financial troubles in the '90s. Those were, I believe, pretty much inevitable as of the tail end of Defalco's tenure. Jim Lee and the marketing department were probably more to blame there.

edited 27th Sep '14 3:11:15 PM by HamburgerTime

Fair enough, although I highly doubt Harras HELPED at all in the financial aspect either.

Lee and Harras are supposedly good friends, which is why they were both at Marvel in the '90s and are both at DC now. For an artist Lee had a ridiculous amount of power in the '90s; I believe this was because in addition to drawing comics himself he was also the owner of a whole comic art studio. They both apparently treated the writers at Marvel pretty badly; whenever they changed their minds, the writers had to change the stories.

The editorial department at DC approved Kate Kane's marriage. Then they reneged on it. The history of eleventh hour changes, causing creators to leave, is well documented. Also, DC's management and their "happy personal lives suck" mentality is bad for the books. It leads to Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy. And a happy personal life doesn't have to mean marriage, either.

Pretty much the exact same stuff happened at Marvel when Harras was at the helm, which makes me think he more than Didio is responsible for the stumblings in the New 52.

That was unacceptable. Although I still do not agree that it was a wrong decision, especially given the type of person Kate is, she was never destined for a romance not doomed. Shed like Constantine or Bruce herself that way. The characters, armatures and narrative dictates the books, not any arbitrary quotas on "darkness" or any other bs. Story first, and Kate's story isn't the type with a happy personal life.

Given that, I don't see why the marriage itself couldn't be used a vehicle for that armature, but I don't disagree with the very concept for no reason.

Basically my view as well. I've dropped so many DC books in the last two years precisely because the unending grimdark nonsense makes it impossible for me to get invested. Meanwhile I have stuff like Ms. Marvel and Superior Foes to look forward to.

Gotham Academy #1 was very good. This is what I wanna see more of.

MOTHERFUCKING MECHAPHANTS.

WITH MACHINE GUNS FOR TUSKS

AND FLAILS FOR TRUNKS

And this is why Wonder Woman is the best book of the New 52.

Not sold until we get Sky-Kangas.

Got to see the new Lobo today, so I have to ask - what do you think they're going for with the revamp anyway? Could it be permanent, is it meant as a parody of the Younger and Hipper anti-hero types of present day, or did someone seriously feel the last Czarnian needed such Twilight-izing in order to sell with the cool kids? I'm secretly hoping the hairy beast we know and love will quickly displace (and messily dispose of) the current pinup wannabe, since even Twilight parodies have gotten old by now. That, and the big-wheel General Grievous bike rip-off can't hold a candle to the Spaz-Frag. These are trying times we live in indeed.

"or did someone seriously feel the last Czarnian needed such Twilight-izing in order to sell with the cool kids?" yes. its not even ironic or parody its played straight

man bleediac looks sweet and we got the best incarnation of stormwatch in fe 22

edited 3rd Oct '14 10:17:28 PM by deadpoolrocks

It's completely played straight but I find it interesting to look at him as a counterpoint to the "men are sexualized just as much as women in comics!" argument. They made Lobo into an Edward Cullen-esque Bishōnen and everyone lost their shit.

Look to the skies! I think I can make out Pre-New 52 Cyborg, Wally West, Hawkman, and Donna Troy.

edited 4th Oct '14 9:26:59 AM by comicwriter

I dunno...I think it's more that they completely altered Lobo than specifically what they changed him into. They altered the character so much that there doesn't seem much point in still calling him "Lobo." There doesn't seem much benefit either, because it's a move that, while it may appeal to new readers, can't hope to do much more than piss off older fans. If you're gonna toss the older fans out the window, why not just create a whole new character.

Yeah, try telling fangirls that Edward Cullen is every bit as much an idealized sex object as all those hyper-endowed female characters they complain so much about and you will at best get a blank stare and at worst you will get your throat jumped down. It's great to call out objectification when it occurs, but it'd be nice if fangirls could realize that it does happen, to men, in some of their favorite stuff.

Besides, Lobo is sexy... though in a less traditional way than most. It's like turning Wonder Woman into a shrinking violet moeblob - still attractive, just not herself. I'm kinda hoping the writers are hedging their bets right now, with a backup storyline to return Lobo to his unglamorous old self should people want it.

Other than that, I like how Deathstroke is now on the Suicide Squad. Gives him something to do, y'know, instead of finding new ways of killing his own family again. A double act with Deadshot would be a lot more interesting, I think.

I've heard good things about SS Black Manta. I've always liked the character and thought he had lots of potential, so I'm almost kinda curious.

You've just summarized the New 52 in a nutshell. Every character has been treated this way. Some more than others of course.

Well that's just untrue.

Now that's really untrue.

Hal Jordon ?