Author |
Topic: DC Total Re-Launch? (Read 252 times) |
|
TheMidnighter
member is offline
 
Gender: 
Posts: 1094
|
 |
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #180 on: Feb 8th, 2012, 9:04pm » |
|
This is getting ridiculous, I don't care about the comic, the relaunch, these creators or their grudge. This is really becoming crazy. Flogging a dead horse.
|
"One among you will shortly perish."
My free music
|
|
|
Will
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 602
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #181 on: Feb 9th, 2012, 05:29am » |
|
Sure, and that's what's entertaining about it. I'd hazard that this has more passion than the issues they produced, and at least one of the two would seem to tacitly (or vociferously?) agree.
I don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes to writing+brevity, yet I can't help but note that McDaniel's post is ridiculous. It's a mixture of elongated tome with a narrative that takes forever to get to a rather simple point: rebuttal.
The opening takes forever -- and this is my estimation after skipping over 2-3 chapters of it -- while making a point that is little more than tangential to the argument: what a nice guy Scott McDaniel is.
His preface is some kind of condensed version of his life's story. Evidently he's also a psychologist (I might be shown as hypocritical while making the point, but whatev's), as he thinks that this will win the reader to his side.
I frankly don't know if he made many good arguments, or provided an answer that undermines Rozum. The post is not just too long, but it's instead simply too long getting there. He self-destructs with his per-pubescent opening, and I think he loses the reader by having it at all; it's like a guy in a diaper being self-righteous about the title for his new self-published hagiography.
If his point was to dissemble and distract, maybe he was successful. But Rozzum's point seems to be upheld even more strongly: McDaniel can't write.
Then again, I made it through probably 15 paragraphs. If someone finds the juicy cliff notes, assuming they're there, maybe the former point falls through.
But this is pretty entertaining. Especially since I don't give a shit about Static Shock -- perhaps that would qualify me for a position at DC?
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
TheMidnighter
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 1094
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #182 on: Feb 9th, 2012, 09:01am » |
|
on Feb 9th, 2012, 05:29am, Will wrote:| But Rozzum's point seems to be upheld even more strongly: McDaniel can't write. |
|
Ha, I actually wrote that as well but I edited my post from this morning. I agree, though.
I agree with your other points as well. He should be making a point and provide an opposite view than Rozzum's. McDaniel fails horribly. I read quite a lot of it but when I noticed I was almost halfway and when he started to use entire paragraphs to repeat previous paragraphs, I thought: fuck it, this isn't worth my time.
It still really isn't. I also don't care about Static Shock and I think that's where McDaniel has a point. He said, and I'm paraphrasing: 'Static Shock has some truly devoted fans but there's just not enough of them.' Of course! What do you expect with 52 titles?
|
|
Logged
|
"One among you will shortly perish."
My free music
|
|
|
TheMidnighter
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 1094
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #183 on: Apr 13th, 2012, 06:10am » |
|
Quote:http://blog.comixconnection.com/
Your opinion matters! At least DC COMICS thinks so!
I got this emailing from DC Comics today:
Thank you so much for your enthusiasm and support during the launch of DC COMICS %2D THE NEW 52. As we made clear from the beginning, our goal was to expand the market by appealing to new/lapsed readers, and our initial sales results would indicate that this has indeed happened. But we want to do more than just assume any results %2D we want to find ways to measure it accurately in partnership with you. And we need your help. DC has engaged Nielsen NRG, the world%2Dclass research company, to survey U.S. consumers and retailers (online and in person), to learn more about DC COMICS %2D THE NEW 52 and its readership. Your customers can complete a "Reader Survey" by going to http://www.nielsennrg.com/dcsurvey now through Friday, October 7.
Go ahead and let DC know what you think! |
|
on Sep 28th, 2011, 07:53am, Nick wrote:| Onwards Batsquad, tell DC Comics what you think. |
|
Results can be read on Newsarama.
Page 11 of 38:
More than half of the just over 6000 respondents have been reading comics for more than 20 years. Jesus Christ, I never knew comic book fans averaged this age. It's not just the industry that is dying, it's its fanbase as well.
Page 18 of 38:
This is confusing. Most respondents collected comics for over 20 years but the reasons for buying the New 52 is predominantly to "check them out" and to "start at the beginning." So even the people reading comics for 20 years did not read these comics to begin with or is that not the primary reason for continuing to buy the titles?
Page 26 of 38:
"Likelihood of continuing purchase." Justice League has two titles?
|
"One among you will shortly perish."
My free music
|
|
|
Nick
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 550
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #184 on: Apr 13th, 2012, 12:23pm » |
|
on Apr 13th, 2012, 06:10am, TheMidnighter wrote:Page 26 of 38:
"Likelihood of continuing purchase." Justice League has two titles? |
|
I think one is Justice League International. Please don't mistake my knowledge of DC's Boo 52 books for actual interest in the travesties.
on Apr 13th, 2012, 06:10am, TheMidnighter wrote:Page 18 of 38:
This is confusing. Most respondents collected comics for over 20 years but the reasons for buying the New 52 is predominantly to "check them out" and to "start at the beginning." So even the people reading comics for 20 years did not read these comics to begin with or is that not the primary reason for continuing to buy the titles?
|
|
I interpreted the "start at the beginning" to be the collectors saying that they wanted complete runs. Obviously for most of us a complete run of the real Detective Comics or Batman volumes etc would be nigh on impossible. However, any person or goat can get a complete run of the Boo 52.
I defintely answered "to check them out" because I had very low expectations going in due to the rushed and creatively void nature of the Reboot. The reason I was checking them out is because I was convinced that quality would have declined massively and so I had no confidence to just blindly say I wanted to keep subscribing. And despite the fact that my expectations were in the gutter, the Reboot still managed to be disappointing.
---
I noticed that DC made no comment on any of the free text essay opinions. Obviously they wanted to skew the publicity into nothing but positive results for their 'successful' and 'industry defining' Reboot.
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 13th, 2012, 12:28pm by Nick » |
Logged
|
|
|
|
snipe
Administrator
member is offline
Master Dick
Gender:
Posts: 1695
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #185 on: Apr 13th, 2012, 9:18pm » |
|
on Apr 13th, 2012, 06:10am, TheMidnighter wrote:| Justice League has two titles? |
|
Three actually: Justice League, Justice League International, and Justice League Dark.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TheMidnighter
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 1094
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #186 on: May 22nd, 2012, 2:01pm » |
|
"A character will be revealed as gay."
This is just distasteful. Creating buzz about comics is one thing but using sexual orientation to create it is f'ing stupid. Especially since it's supposed to be an "established heterosexual character." Why would you retcon someone's sexual orientation?
|
|
Logged
|
"One among you will shortly perish."
My free music
|
|
|
snipe
Administrator
member is offline
Master Dick
Gender:
Posts: 1695
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #187 on: May 22nd, 2012, 3:55pm » |
|
^ after previously saying this would never happen - that only new characters would be built from the ground-up this way.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 550
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #188 on: May 23rd, 2012, 11:31am » |
|
*sigh* Here we go again. It's logic along the lines of:
DC Editor: "Errrrr, guys, Marvel just made Spiderman black..."
DiDio: "I know, we shall make Superman gay!"
It is lazy and it is offensive. You can't just retcon a character's sexuality like that, it's irrational even within the confines of superheroes! Either:
1) Create a homosexual character like Batwoman, it works provided her sexuality isn't the sole selling point. Make it an aspect or the character, not the only reason they exist!
2) Intend the character to be homosexual from the start and lay the seeds with mature storytelling to reveal this in time.
Real people don't wake up one morning and switch their entire sexuality. The only people this will please are the mindless unthinking idiots who bleat on incessantly about 'diversity' and 'race' and 'sexuality' etc without ever understanding the thing they preach. To any rational free thinking person who couldn't care less about the sexuality or race of the characters, to the open minded person who just wants good well written characters; to these people such a lazy, ignorant stunt is just plain offensive.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Will
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 602
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #189 on: May 24th, 2012, 2:27pm » |
|
Gay Black Hispanic Transgendered Native American Batman is inevitable. And the nukes can't start flying fast enough.
Funny thing about "diversity" is how monotone it is.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TheMidnighter
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 1094
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #191 on: Jun 1st, 2012, 03:58am » |
|
The New 52's The New Gay is Alan Scott. I have never had an interest in Green Lanterns nor earth 2 but I'll buy it now.
|
"One among you will shortly perish."
My free music
|
|
|
snipe
Administrator
member is offline
Master Dick
Gender:
Posts: 1695
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #192 on: Jun 1st, 2012, 05:39am » |
|
I guess E-2 won't have a Jade or Obsidian.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Will
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 602
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #193 on: Jun 2nd, 2012, 12:37pm » |
|
I suppose we should have seen this *ahem* coming. After all, isn't Alan Scott's fatal weakness...wood?!
As far as offense. Meh. I'm really offended over the return of this multiverse crap. But we've been over that, ad infinitum at this point.
"Let's bring back all that stuff we loved as kids. Like giant typewriters, fuchsia alternate costumes and inexplicable multiverse 'continuity'. And let's match that to edgy ideas like making iconic golden age characters gay!" Sounds pretty redundant, actually.
It feels politically correct, creatively bankrupt and intentionally subversive all at once. But it doesn't seem all that interesting or honest.
The issue of sexuality? Sure. But it's being used as a political statement and headline grabber, while retaining (anal retenti...no!) a backdoor (sorry) out (fuck!) of it being alternative (ugh) continuity. It is and isn't DC's Miles Morales.
The key question remains, why is a previously straight character (yes, I know: he was never straight in THIS universe, which is its own point on convenience and cowardice) gay? Is this going to be explored at all in a psychological, sociological (not after-school diversity "drama", please) or anthropological level? I doubt it.
it's a political statement that's almost politburo-level in it's state media narrative convictions and contrivance. The President is for gay marriage, so DC has to rush a "major" character into print as gay.
It's also good business. Attention! that's probably it's best argument, though I would bet it flames out (low) rather than lighting up the sales charts.
Point remains that it is a lockstep statement, meaning it's nothing more than media inertia and aggregation rather than an interesting concept in and of itself. I twill be both beside the point and the entire point for this guy to be gay. But real exploration of it is doubtful. And even if it comes , I would expect it to be superficial in its treatment rather than trenchant.
I could be completely wrong. But at some point an open-mind is simply another way of saying "ignorance is bliss". It all seems so obvious, both as far as history in the manufacturing and the crap that has preceded it as semi-recent Official Text.
The best question is, I suppose, where art begins and commerce ends, or where art ends and propaganda begins.
And as semi-reticent answer, the best idea present here on an artistic scale is metatextual: a character who is corporate in-narrative being retrofitted and confused in his identity by corporate politics from a supra-narrative context. That's not bad, as a start. But just because there's irony -- a spine, really -- doesn't mean there's a soul.
Funny thing though, through sexual confusion and a new universe, Alan Scott very well might be the most representative character of the New 52.
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 2nd, 2012, 12:57pm by Will » |
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 550
|
|
Re: DC Total Re-Launch?
« Reply #194 on: Jun 14th, 2012, 09:37am » |
|
on Dec 19th, 2011, 06:56am, Nick wrote:Hey guys! Look, look! In the NEW 52 we have a story that is suggesting that some secret organisation hired Joe Chill to have the Wayne's murdered and now they're coming after Bruce because he survived!
At least this brand NEW story was never done in the old Continuity, and certainly proves just how Batman's history hasn't changed at all!
Oh...  |
|
[Assuming the following article is accurate]
Seriously, I don't understand why Scott Snyder is rewriting Batman RIP just four years later (Spoilers of course, who cares):
http://www.gothamspoilers.com/2012/06/spoilers%2Dbatman%2D10.html#more
So The Court Of Owls is lead by Thomas Wayne Jr and has nothing to do with The Black Glove. Pre%2DReboot Thomas Wayne Jr, as we all know, used the alias Dr Hurt. We know how he became immortal, we know Bruce's father put him in the asylum, and we know he wished revenge on the Wayne family, and to our knowledge he is still buried alive.
In the Reboot we have the exact same story retold.
Court Of Owls = The Black Glove
Lincoln March = Dr Hurt
I loved Snyder's Black Mirror, I truly did. But to retell Morrison's complex and fascinating story in a dumbed down fashion to make it more accessible to a wider audience and to pass it off as original is... not something I agree with.
Morrison was very vocal at every stage where he took every idea from, and he formed these classic homages into this complex and fascinating thinking man's Ultimate Batman story. Four years later DC give us the exact same story again, but without all the depth and intelligence that made Morrison's epic vastly superior to this poor quality photocopy.
No matter how you look at this, it is practically the same story, but without that Morrison wit, intelligence, and charm.
Fuck off DC.
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 14th, 2012, 09:46am by Nick » |
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
