The New 52 general discussion

Captain Canuck said:
oh, did he write that? yeah, that was miserably bad.
Click to expand...

That was him with Mackie, yeah.

This was on Wikipedia. I didn't realize the chain of events with the planning of the Clone Saga and his firing as EIC:

Ex-editor-in-chief Tom DeFalco said that under him, the Clone Saga would have been resolved in a different way: "Our plan was to structure the clone saga like a three-act play. Act One would climax at or around Amazing #400 - when we revealed that Pete was the clone and Ben was the real guy. Act Two would last around three months and follow Ben's adventures. In Act Three, Peter would triumphantly return as the one, true Spider-Man. Mark and I was hoping the Spider-crew could make Ben a viable character during his turn in the spotlight, and we planned to star Ben in his own monthly title after Peter returned. It was kind of like what I had already done with Thor and Thunderstrike—two very different titles based on a single concept. Of course, our plan went into the trash the day I got fired."
Click to expand...

DeFalco also had a run on Fantastic Four which included Reed "dying", Sue changing her costume, and a bunch of other garbage. I think he also brought back the New Fantastic Four for one completely forgettable story. I was a die-hard FF fan back then, and I think the crapiness of hist stories played a major part in my becoming disillusioned with comics and walking away from them when I did.
 
That is common for most people. Tom DeFalco and Howard Mackie are why I get enraged by hacks. Hack writers who treat their job as some factory sluicing of hype aren't just professionally inept, but actually damaging to people as their awful writing, as you say, disillusions their audience into finding the whole concept of storytelling a waste of time.
 
I can't speak to anything except issue nine of Legion Somethingorother that ties in to the DC teenybop crossover, but the dialogue was the worst thing I may have ever read.
 
The Shazam back-up in the latest Justice League might have been the worst thing Geoff Johns has ever written. I lost count of the number of cliches.
 
So here's a question for everyone. Out of the current 52 books, what would you drop?

And if you're feeling ambitious, what would you replace them with, and what books would you change creative teams on?
 
Zombipanda said:
So here's a question for everyone. Out of the current 52 books, what would you drop?

And if you're feeling ambitious, what would you replace them with, and what books would you change creative teams on?
Click to expand...

Well we know my answer to drops.

As for what to bring in... I dunno. DC seems to be leveraging most of their properties that'd likely be able to sustain an ongoing. Most of what's left is a niche property in an already niche market.
 
Justice League Dark amped up it's game. It's introducing House of Mystery in the next issue, and is on the road to introduce the Books of Magic.

I'm excited.
 
That's because Jeff Lemire has taken over.
 
Zombipanda said:
So here's a question for everyone. Out of the current 52 books, what would you drop?

And if you're feeling ambitious, what would you replace them with, and what books would you change creative teams on?
Click to expand...

I don't know what I would drop as I've taken a break from buying comics but I'd love to see a "Flash Family" book written by Johns or Waid. Barry Allen could use a bit more exposure if DC is serious about him being the Flash and I'd love a speedster team up with him Wally and Bart. Seriously DC bring back Wally West. Also, where's that Multiversity book Morrison was supposed to do?
 
ProjectX2 said:
The Shazam back-up in the latest Justice League might have been the worst thing Geoff Johns has ever written. I lost count of the number of cliches.
Click to expand...

All of Shazam has been cliche after cliche. It's not interesting.
 
Ultimate Houde said:
Justice League Dark amped up it's game. It's introducing House of Mystery in the next issue, and is on the road to introduce the Books of Magic.

I'm excited.
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with he history of those things but yeah, this is pretty good under Jeff Lemiere. I like how he writes Constantine.
 
I just read Earth 2 #2 and with a clearer picture of what this is I'm a lot more interested in it.

I didn't know that the idea was to reverse the timeline of events from the DCU proper, killing the modern heroes and putting the silver age heroes in a modern setting. It's not groundbreakingly brilliant but it's interesting and I like the concept. So, I'll keep with it.

I haven't followed the news on this book too closely, and I would imagine that, publicly, gay rights groups applaud the use of a prominent gay character, but isn't it kind of offensive, even a little bit, that they (DC) use the sexual orientation of a character so sensationally? Maybe it's not a big deal, but it seems like it would be offensive on some level that they are trumpeting it like this and in the book it's not really significant to the story.
 
They also have said in the past they would never change the sexual orientation of a character for no reason.

I see this as no reason other than some press coverage about it.
 
Ultimate Houde said:
They also have said in the past they would never change the sexual orientation of a character for no reason.

I see this as no reason other than some press coverage about it.
Click to expand...

As soon as a comic company says there is something they will NEVER do you can pretty much guarantee that they will do it at some point. It's their pathetic version of sleight of hand. After they say it the execs look at each other and giggle and say "they will never expect it now!".
 
I'd heard that they switched the sexuality of someone from the JSA, but I didn't know who it was.

It doesn't seem like they changed his sexuality for no reason. They give the reason in that making him younger erased Jade and Obsidian from continuity. Obsidian was gay, and apparently gayness is like energy, it can't stop existing - it has to go somewhere.

I'm being facetious at this point, and I'm not trying to be offensive. I honestly can understand Robinson's reasoning. None of the big, or even sort of big superheroes for either of the big two companies are homosexual because it wouldn't have been acceptable when most of them were created. So instead of making up new characters that few people will care about*, why not make a reasonably well known super hero gay, since we're revamping him anyway. I don't think it's a publiscity stunt, I think DC is trying to diversify their characters. If they had made Superman gay, that would have been a stunt.

* (the one exception to this I can think about is Kate Kane/Batwoman)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top