The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
[DC Comics Thread]: Superman vs. Wizards! Taking all bets!
Atomika
Live fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered User regular
Live fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered User regular
We're all familiar with DC's latest complete overhaul of continuity, yes? The Event known as "52," wherein all 52 of their flagship monthlies were totally rebooted from scratch and all old continuities were thrown out of the window? Not to be confused by any of DC's other continuity reboots, like Crisis on Infinite Earths, Infinite Crisis, or Final Crisis; nor let it be confused with any major character re-writes that were silently nudged into canon without wholesale reboot, like "Man of Steel," "Birthright," or any of the umpteen Supergirl/Powergirl retcons; nor let it be confused with any of the All-Star titles, like "Superman" or "Batman & Robin," which occur outside of continuity; nor let it be confused with the massive crossover event of just 5 years ago, also called *sigh*, "52."
Well, if you're not, here's the TL;DR - It sucks.
Here's the lowdown on the many things that suck about it:
- Actually, a lot of old continuity was kept, selectively. No real explanation or reason as to why, but certain aspects of the old continuity were dragged into the new universe, and fairly specific bits, too. Such as, Jason Todd is still the Red Hood, which was a fairly new development in the old continuity.
- The timeline is already fucked. The JLA book runs concurrently to all the other titles, but exists five years in the future in that continuity, mostly because the new Superman book is basically Smallville/Superboy.
- The costumes. Everyone got a new costume. I think Rob Leifield was involved, because now everyone is wearing skin-tight military gear with tons of pockets and pouches. Oh, and everyone's costume has a high collar for some ridiculous reason. Except in the teenage Superman book, where he just wears a blue t-shirt, jeans, and a fucking cape.
- The biggest gripe: everything is terrible. Batman is fucking Catwoman. Storylines don't make any sense. The art is terrible and exploitative. Everything looks like Jim Lee drawing softcore porn.
Engage!
Well, if you're not, here's the TL;DR - It sucks.
Here's the lowdown on the many things that suck about it:
- Actually, a lot of old continuity was kept, selectively. No real explanation or reason as to why, but certain aspects of the old continuity were dragged into the new universe, and fairly specific bits, too. Such as, Jason Todd is still the Red Hood, which was a fairly new development in the old continuity.
- The timeline is already fucked. The JLA book runs concurrently to all the other titles, but exists five years in the future in that continuity, mostly because the new Superman book is basically Smallville/Superboy.
- The costumes. Everyone got a new costume. I think Rob Leifield was involved, because now everyone is wearing skin-tight military gear with tons of pockets and pouches. Oh, and everyone's costume has a high collar for some ridiculous reason. Except in the teenage Superman book, where he just wears a blue t-shirt, jeans, and a fucking cape.
Engage!
Atomika on
0
Posts
The event is called New 52, not "52;" neither Infinite Crisis nor Final Crisis were reboots (a couple writers individually took the opportunity to use the Infinite Crisis event to do some retconning, but some of that, like Jason Todd coming back to life, was already in the works to begin with), "Man of Steel" was not a silent reboot as it directly followed Crisis on Infinite Earths and literally existed to go "Hey! Here's the new Superman!" and I guess I have no idea why you are bringing up the All-Star books unless there's something about the concept of out-of-continuity stories that you find inherently offensive, in which case why not bring up the fact that DC has spent twenty years publishing stories about, like, Batman in the 1800s versus Jack the Ripper under the "Elseworlds" imprint, and Marvel has been doing the same with stuff like the Ultimate U and Manga Spider-Man and so on?
Fans - especially comic fans - love to complain, especially about continuity. And like elementary particles, every gripe has its mirror-image counterpart somewhere. Continuity is too restrictive and insulating!, one guy says. I can't read a book where I'm expected to know what happened twenty years ago!, someone else says. Hawkman's origin makes no sense!, one guy says. Goddamn it, why are they explaining Hawkman's origin again?!, some other guy says. But everyone agrees that "reboots" are bad, except apparently for the people who have sent Justice League #1 back for its fourth reprint, which is basically unheard-of in this business in this day and age.
Is the new 52 good or bad? I think that's a fairly meaningless question. Some of the new books, like Action Comics and Animal Man, are terrific. Others are pretty good but are still totally mired in ongoing continuity, as if the writer hadn't gotten the memo. Others are being made by decent creators who are just totally bizarre for the property - don't ask me why Brian Azzarello, who made his name doing gritty urban crime sagas, is writing Wonder Woman. Others are awful poop made by awful people. I think to some extent this reboot has been a waste of a golden opportunity to pair characters with the creators who were born to write and draw them, but on the other hand it has been a very surprising financial success for DC and has gotten their company name in the headlines in a way they haven't been since the Death of Superman, and some good books are coming out of it.
Batman and Catwoman have done it before (although not on panel like in Catwoman #1. That was terrible. As is the Starfire stuff in Red Hood for similar reasons).
Some books are really bad (Hawk & Dove: "Oh no, this plane we are on is out of control and going to crash into a tall, thin structure [Washington Monument]. We only have a minute or so to lazily drift out of the way... PULL UP!").
Some are mediocre. And some are really, really good. I have read every book released to date and I think the spread is a lot more on the good half of the curve than the bad. And that is from the exact audience I think they are looking for - a comic fan, but not a big DC reader (I have never been able to get into DC outside of Batman). It's not completely stripped of continuity (which is good) but most of the books have been pretty accessible to someone who is not up to date.
this is so truth
Red Hood's Starfire couldn't be engineered to more put-off existing Starfire fans.
Like most things it's not the content it's the presentation.
Overall, I can appreciate having a big media-intensive event to spur sales. I can. But DC has pulled the Reboot Card (or Retcon Card) a few too many times this decade to suit me, and the New 52 looks to be very uneven and random in its execution. Likewise, as some here have already said, the good books that have come from it are probably nullified by the bad books that ruin perfectly good characters.
The onus is on novelty, above all else, and that's not interesting. As the muppets put it once so eloquently, if you're just so bent on doing something different, go put some Jell-O down your pants. Here, however, there is nothing informing these changes other than change for its own sake. It's gimmicky, and it's banal, and it's not the way to create a lasting readership. Sure, you can make a big fuss in the papers and sell a lot of books for a month or two because you riled everyone up with the switch-up, but that shit doesn't last. It's just people rubbernecking at Superman not having red underpants anymore.
On your other topic, I agree that DC has failed soundly on using creative talent or pairings to drive this reboot. It's not about art, it's about making a quick buck, and I don't know if their total inability to pay even lip service to the creative divisions is damning or refreshingly honest. I'm leaning toward the former.
However, the actual quality of the new lineup is very good on average. The large majority of the new titles so far have ranged from good to great, with only a select few stinkers among them.
I hate Jim Lee's art. Have I said before how much I hate Jim Lee's art? Because I really hate Jim Lee's art. Really.
It's like every character is a clone of the same one male or female porn star with huge, feminine cheekbones and they're all angry all the time.
Bats was pretty jolly in ASBAR.
Yeah, I haven't steadily read comics in years and I've picked up 8 so far (2 next week) and I'll be following at least 7 of them into next month. Including Catwoman, which was just a really emotionally naked, well done introduction.
I appreciate the continuity reboot, since it means I can jump on to everything at the same time without having to worry about tracking anything down to get started. (Except Batwoman, which still needs some other reading apparently. ~_~)
You know, in situations where it fits.
I'm optimistic though.
I never follwed DC growing up being a Marvel lover, so this re-launch that most folks said was a horrible idea (and it did sound like a huge mess trying to cover over another huge mess to be honest) was my chance to give a few books a shot that I've always been curious about but never felt strongly enough to do anything about previously. Checking them out at the start of a grand new clusterfuck seemed a suitiable jumping on point.
Out of seven books how many do I plan to keep picking up? Around four(ish), but there are still a few more first issues I want that come out in a couple days so who knows.
I'm still wondering why they were comparing this reboot to the Silver Age one though. As if there was ever a chance they'd replace Hal Jordan, Barry Allen or any of the other silver age heroes.
I'd give it a few issues before you should seriously look badly on the book. Or the new Starfire. I don't think any of the characters really got enough screen time to define them past a few highly visible traits. And it's pretty obvious that it isn't just Starfire that has some serious flaws, it's all of them.
I mean, I think the point is that each of these characters are massive dicks in each of their own ways (Though, Starfire is arguably the least guilty of this. Ironically, you don't see people bitching that a former junkie and sociopathic, manipulative, vigilante are blowing away people en-masse in the opening. All she does is nuke some tanks, after it's implied Jason
Though I do hope they tie the whole amnesia thing into Flashpoint or something, because I don't see how they'd work that in otherwise without it seeming a bit exploitative at the conclusion of things.
All that being said. I think I liked the old continuity more. Also, Superman's shirt and pants look is not at all as awesome and iconic as his old look. And while the Supergirl previews someone showed me are interesting in terms of character development, her costume is ten kinds of screwed up. I'm not even sure how parts of it stay on.
Another big problem people are having with the relaunch I've seen is the change made to Amanda Waller in issue #1 of the new Suicide Squad. While it is a highly noticable change (making her thin and younger) the fact that it is only an aesthetic change really doesn't come off as a dealbreaker to me.
I don't know whether the rush to copy his style hurt comics, and it's definitely the case that his popularity shifted the balance of power away from the writer to the superstar artist to the detriment of comics, and ye gods Image put out some utter tripe, but that's aside from his own art. He isn't Liefeld, who simply can't draw. Lee's style has its limitations, sure, and comics art has moved past him, as it should have done. Still done some great work, though.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
On the other hand the Superman family, and Wonder Women are starting fresh and I feel compelled to try both. WW and Action Comics are well written and offer both a new beginning and the possibility of fixing the problems that kept me away in the first place(Stagnancy and Inconsistent/confusing mythos respectively)
https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
Also Azzarello is writing Wonder Woman because he is writing it incredibly well.
A quick look at wikipedia tells me that that was her original history, actually. Though she was apparently never as promiscuous as she was in this book.
My bet's on them writing it off as the amnesia, or some result of Flashpoint screwing things up. Or maybe the writer just sucks. Who knows. It's far too early to tell given what little we've seen so far.
It does tick me off that some feminists are using it as a strawman to attack the comic industry, though. Mostly because I know that given how well some bloggers have "marketed" the outrage, I know that it's going to effect the development of the comic/s in the future. I've seen one or two blog posts that are pants on head retarded in how they approach the issue, and basically state that "FEMINISM CAN ONLY BE THIS WAY! ANY OTHER WAY THAT ISN'T MINE IS SEXIST!". That's where i've seen alot of the outrage come from so far. Which is surprising, because Starfire dressing like an alien stripper is not something new, nor is it something that, according to wikipedia, is an exploitative excuse to show some T&A.
Hell, you'd think that her choosing what to do (Pun not intended.), and when, and deliberately getting pissed off when another main character implies certain impressions of ownership as an indication that what she's doing might be "wrong", would be a good thing. If only because it implies that she has a choice in how to live her life.
The Waller thing just reeks of trying to draw in a younger crowd, however. She went from looking rather obese, to being a generic super-model. Then again, if you've been following the redesign of all the characters in Suicide Squad (Harley Quinn looks like a Juggalo now. KING MOTHERFUCKING SHARK isn't awesome anymore.), you should already have expected that particular series to blow ass.
Edit: And as an example to show what was lost during the SS reboot. Check some King Shark pages out. Every other line that comes out of his mouth is hilarious. He's basically what happens if you put a monster shark from a B Movie, into a comic book, gave him a massive ego, and need to tell everyone how much of a goddamn shark he is.
http://geekdraw.com/picture/secret-six-32-king-shark.jpg?pictureId=9283944&asGalleryImage=true
http://geekdraw.com/picture/geekdraw-secret-six-33-shark-2011.jpg?pictureId=9598727&asGalleryImage=true
And yeah, Starfire has never really dressed conservatively, but there's a big difference between having a revealing costume and drawing the character wearing in obviously posed and droolingly voyeuristic panels of the kind in the Red Hood comic.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I don't think anyone would disagree that the comics industry has...issues, when it comes to female characters. I barely read the things, on account of getting mine as hand-me-downs from friends, and I can tell that fairly easily.
I just don't get the sudden outrage at Starfire of all people being depicted in an overtly sexual manner. That was like half of her "hat", even prior to the reboot. And they at least tried to justify it with her having a fairly interesting backstory, one in the prior continuity, and one in the current one, that is obviously a hook for a major story arc and a bit of character development.
It's like getting pissed off over someone spoiling the ending to King Kong. Yeah, the ending might be a surprise to you, but it's been out for decades now. You're a bit late to the party, if you're wanting to capitalize on a character design to create outrage.
Now, if three to five issues from now, Starfire is still posing herself over barrels or whatever, while the heroes and heroines are debating what to do. And the issue of it isn't addressed, or at least explained away in a way that isn't involved with one of the more sociopathic heroes (Jason Todd, of all people, was probably not the person they wanted to write in character exposition on her for. He's a canonical prick. Which I think made it seem worse then it was.), then yeah, there's a pretty big problem.
The new Starfire wears even less, and now seems like a hollowed out version of her former self! Please buy the next issue!
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I thought she wore a bit more, or about equal. Though maybe i'm mistaken. I don't really feel like having that sort of thing logged into this computer's history to check.
I'm assuming, for the moment, that the "hollowed out" thing, is going to be played off as amnesia (I can't think of a single comic that has done an actual mental illness/disability/injury properly. And that fits the cliche.), and will be a major plot point, given the generic ominous reference to that blood stained building that took up almost a whole page.
Also, Todd did more derogatory exposition about her then she did talking, which didn't help skew things. Also, you should note that he never did it in hearing distance of Starfire herself, and the one time someone did talk to her in a way that was "talking down" to her, she got fairly pissed off. He probably refrained from doing that because she could burn his face off with minimal effort.
That being said, I can see where the complaints come from. I'm just saying that, since it's a reboot, i'm giving it a few more issues before I hop on the proverbial bandwagon.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
My first reaction was "I have to wait a month in between each of these? No thanks I am good".
This was so good.
I wonder, would the mini-Lion go for the ankles, or knees, though?
Edit: The new Suicide Squad probably won't last a few months without severe changes.
The fact that the reboot of it is pretty much a laundry list of stupid choices (Turn a fan favorite female character (Harley Quinn, who exists solely because of a certain rabid core of fans, from her time in TAS. This was remarkably stupid by the way, and just asking for a backlash, even without a comic being released yet.), into a skanky, psychotic looking Juggalette? Check. Remove the awesomeness of KING SHARK and other similar characters? Check. Turn one of the few examples of an overweight female main character into a super-model? Check.) means that it's doomed to failure/has an uphill battle in alot of folks eyes, no matter what they do, anyways.
From scouring the review sites, this is what the consensus seems to be on DC's new female-driven books:
Wonder Woman - Weird, but Azzarello is kicking ass. Good art, as well. Good book.
Birds of Prey - Decent, but nothing great. No Barbara Gordon, which kinda sucks.
Supergirl - Good art, but uninteresting story. Kind of sexist.
Catwoman - Awful. Exploitative, empty, vapid. Softcore superhero porn. Undoes everything good Brubaker and Cooke did ten years ago.
Red Hood & The Outlaws - Maybe the worst book of the New 52.
I just miss the super marriage, it was such a good thing.
What was sexist about Supergirl? All she does is wake up in Russia and toast a few mechs with heat vision until Superman shows up to sort out the confusion.
You also forgot to mention Batgirl, which is decent enough if you weren't too attached to the Oracle character.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation