Single
favorite title (so far): Action Comics (with
honorable mention given to newbies Worlds' Finest
and Earth 2 – in
fact sometimes I wonder if I'm really liking that little corner of
the DCnU better even than Action)
Most
gratifying to me personally: Aquaman.
Nuff said. My first favorite superhero.
Biggest
surprise: Batwing. I
didn't even consider buying it at the beginning, figuring it would be
the first to go. The name sounds a bit stupid and frankly the idea
of a “Batman for Africa” didn't sound appealing. I quickly heard
such good things about it on the Internet that I tried it out
digitally – a convenience for which I thank DC, but the fact is
they themselves benefited from it, at least in my case – and was
preordering the print copies by issue 4 or 5 – and have picked up
the print copies back to #1 to boot!
Most
relief I felt at how a title developed as opposed to my fears based
on the original solicits: Supergirl
– and while the solicits continue to present it as if she's the
angry super-brat that we first feared, that ain't the way Green and
Johnson are writing what we're actually getting. Usually I don't
like such a degree of dissonance between solicit and product, but in
this case, Thank God!
Another
major relief – that we didn't lose the recently “retrobooted”
“original” Legion of Super-Heroes
so soon after recovering them, and that Levitz is still at their
helm.
Biggest
disappointment: Justice League
– I think everyone
had huge, high hopes for this, but it's been a train-wreck on
virtually every level, albeit a good-looking train-wreck. Not really
gee-hawing with other titles featuring the same characters, not
making a whole lot of logical sense – as currently portrayed,
supposedly in the present now, there is no damn way those heroes have
been working together as a team for five years!
Biggest
disappointment – runner up: Their decision to renumber even
Detective Comics and
Action Comics. I've
read and understand their reasons. I do not agree with them.
Biggest
frustration: Increasing evidence they didn't have this thought
through very thoroughly – Teen Titans (how many such teams have there been?, or is this the first?), Robins (how many have there been? - in five years?!, was Tim Drake one of them?); Also, the radically
different presentations of characters from one book to the other,
especially the Justice
League characters between their own books and the team book. Now
that as of issue #7 JL
is ostensibly present-day, there's no excuse for the radically
different flavor to Wonder Woman between her own book and JL
– and even more so, Green Lantern,
which is written in both places by the same individual.
Is Geoff Johns himself schizophrenic? Does he
know how they connect?
I'm
currently reading my way through the titles DC published in August –
by and large the #12's – and in a one-off appearance of Kid Flash
Bart Allen in DC Universe Presents
#12 (which I'll be reviewing later as part of my monthly round-up),
on the first page, Bart's typically hilarious recap of events leading
up to those depicted here end with what I think is pretty much dead
on regarding DC's attitude toward “continuity”: “Continuity
doesn't really matter! Clarity is overrated!”
In the context of the story it comes off as something typically
“Bart.” Unfortunately, I get the feeling that's really DC
Editorial's position!
Character(s)
I miss most from before Flashpoint:
Stephanie Brown Batgirl,
Supergirl by Sterling
Gates and Jamal Igle, Conner Kent Superboy,
the “guardian of time” Booster Gold, the marriage of Superman and Lois, Oracle.
Favorite
New 52 character(s): Starling in Birds of Prey
– the girl next door as a badass fighter and secret agent. Don't
change a thing!
Favorite
New 52 version of an old character: Vandal Savage in Demon
Knights – Paul Cornell has
made me like a character I couldn't stand before
Worst
New 52 version of an old character: Billy Batson Shazam
… but there's a lot of competition. There are opposing views, among them Paul C.: "Why The Curse of Shazam is the right move for Captain Marvel"
Most consistently laughably stupid – and worst – title I get: Detective Comics – which has converted me from wondering why there were so many “Tony Daniel haters” to joining their ranks. Not really true. I don't hate him – but I now have no use for his writing, and frankly have become embittered toward what objectively is generally pretty good, if chaotic and lacking in story-sense, art. In fact, his name has become a disincentive for me to buy something, much as Azarello's work on Wonder Woman has. That latter is a funny case – I didn't initially plan to get it, decided to just because she's “the third person of the trinity” (dodging lightning now), and really liked the first issue. Or, on reflection, the ideas put forth in the first issue. But it dropped like a rock in my estimation after that. And I finally dropped it like a hot potato. In any case, Tony Daniel is leaving Detective fairly soon, but not soon enough, and hopefully things will pick up for DC's eponymous title.
Philosophical
aspect of the DCnU that I like the best: Superman was the first
public super-hero … “public” has to be included as a qualifier
because it's apparent that Batman must
have been active if only in secret before five years ago … but I
like at least some primacy being given to Superman
– Yes,
I know those two things are mutually exclusive, but they didn't have
to be. Return to the Multiverse with the Golden Age Super-heroes on
an older Earth would have been a better way to go, regardless of the
fact that I'm really digging James Robinson's Earth 2.
You could have eventually even brought in a third
“Middle Age” Earth based on the Silver-Bronze Age conceptions.
Imagine that!
Stupidest
constraint on the creators: The Five Year Timeline.
Stupidest
way to effect a Reboot: The way they did it, as a partial
Reboot, trying to have their cake and eat it too, keep a couple of
franchises virtually unchanged while so radically changing everything
else. Also, beginning in media res
as they did, making the creators beholden to a continuity that hasn't
been established yet. Even worse, as much as I like Action
Comics, which is set in the
past, to then make Superman
in the present beholden to stories that are being concurrently told
in the past, so that the creators here
have no real idea what might be published next month there
in Action
that will invalidate what they created this
month in Superman.
And this is made worse by Grant Morrison's notorious reticence what
he's up to, and editorial's hands-off attitude toward him – which
led to their being forced to continually tamper with the product of
one of the industry giants in George Perez on Superman
because of Morrison's whims. I like much of what Morrison does ... when I can get my mind around it! (I find him one of the most "rereadable" writers out there) ... and really like what he's done in Action. But it is a position that Perez never
should have been in, especially if he was not informed from the
beginning what the situation was. Rob Liefeld's experience seems to
corroborate the feeling that it's pure chaos there, but then
continued developments give me the impression the latter must be really hard
to get along with in any case.
Better
way to effect a Reboot: A clean slate. All in. Oh, but that would
alienate some existing readers who like what was being published
before? Duh – that happened.
Better-still
way to effect a Revival:
Good stories respectful of the past but not chained by specific
timeline. Be vague as to the passage of time. Don't pin yourself
down. That's how comics were written for decades, and it worked for
the most part. The artificial adherence to some kind of seamless
continuity is never going to work – especially when not everyone
agrees from one day to the next what the continuity actually is. See
the first part of my “Biggest frustration” above.
Most
consistent irritant: The design esthetic (or lack thereof), both in
the heroes' uniforms – way too busy and complicated – and in the
villains' – among whom it seems quasi-zombies in bad makeup
predominate, along with quasi-Lovecraftian horror-movie
Cthulhu-wannabe rejects. As far as heroes' uniforms, Superman's gets
special mention. In and of itself, it isn't bad although it could
(a) lose some of the extraneous lines, and (b) tone down the overly
complicated belt, which could also be helped with an accent of gold,
but try as I might a year into the New 52, I don't see this as
Superman. Make fun of it as much as we might, the red trunks are,
after seventy years, an intrinsic part of his image. It would be
easier for me, I think, to accept some modification to the S-shield
than it has been to accept ditching the speedos. Ditch every other
hero's briefs, but not Superman's. If they've gotta go, see the much
better design over in Smallville Season 11.
Most
disconcerting (? word choice? ) development: Removing some bits of
diversity in physical type for certain characters – the most
notable example of course being the “healing” of Barbara Gordon,
removing her as a shining example of a character heroically dealing
with and overcoming a disability every single day of her life, but
also the “fashion modelization” of former obese characters Amanda
Waller and Etta Candy. DC's trumpetted its new diversity in such
areas as Cyborg now being a founding member of the Justice League,
which I have no problem with, but also by reimagining certain other
established characters in “sexy,” trendy, politically-correct
ways as “race-bending” Morgan Edge from white to black (also Etta
Candy, so she's a twofer, I guess) and recreating Alan Scott, the
Green Lantern of Earth 2 (originally the Golden Age Green Lantern),
as homosexual. You want more minority characters, create more
minority characters, don't fundamentally change previously existing
characters. (Note: As far as race goes, I personally think you've
got a bit more latitude when it comes to casting a live action movie,
e.g. Laurence Fishbourne for Perry White in Man of Steel,
as Pete Ross in Smallville,
for supporting characters.
Main characters, it's a bit more iffy, since that is
a fundamental change to the very nature of the central character.
Like it or not, we are not and will not be for some generations, I
believe, a totally color-blind society. But when you change the race
of even a secondary character – or the sexual orientation of a main
character – the change itself makes that character into a statement
rather than a person.
Aren't we supposed to see people as individuals, without these
qualities becoming their definition? That is, a person should
described as white or
black (adjectives) rather than identified as
a white or a black (nouns) (ditto regarding sexual orientation). To
do otherwise is to implicitly dehumanize them.)
I
could add in here what I call the “Marvelization” of the DC
nUniverse – the idea that the super-heroes are feared and hated
rather than looked up to by society, the general darkening of the
stories and overall atmosphere – but that had really been happening
for some time before so I don't necessarily identify it just with the
DCnU.
Overall
assessment. Although I am reading and enjoying much of what I'm
seeing in the New 52, I miss many elements of the old DCU and
question whether such a radical reimagining as so many characters
received was really necessary. One thing goes without question.
Overall, from a financial standpoint, at this juncture it must be
judged a success, with ramifications that extend beyond DC Comics
itself. The overall comics industry got a much needed shot in the
arm, and the effects have endured. Perhaps the same effect could not
have been achieved without such a radical shift. That's a
hypothetical question that can never really be answered definitively
one way or another. But one thing goes without saying. For all my
ranting, I am a fan of DC Comics, and I likely always will be, to one
degree or another. I will be with them until the bitter end, which
now seems slightly less likely to occur within my lifetime than I
feared before. As long as I live and breathe – and have the
financial wherewithal, of course – I do not see myself ever giving
up comic books completely. I derive too much enjoyment from them,
even if I do not agree with certain directions they have taken
through the years and most recently in the DCnU Reboot. As with
everything, there is good to be found with the bad.
There
have been too many other such reflections and ruminations on the
success or not of the DC Relaunch of 2011 for me the list here. A
few noteworthy ones are, however:
The Comic Geek Speakers look back on the year in their podcase: "DC's New 52: One Year Later."
Newsarama's
series: “One Year of DC's New 52: The 10 Best Things” and “The 10 Worst Things” as well as “The New 52 One Year Later: Title-to-Title Winners and Losers” and
others, including their article on unresolved questions after one year.
Siskoid's
Blog of Geekery:
“The New 52 and DC's Communications Failure” including the comments
which are similarly excellent.
Paul
C, the Last of the
Famous International Fanboys
– always thought-provoking and worth reading even if I often
disagree with him – mounts a defense: “The New 52 Continuity: It Ain't So Bad!”
And
for laughs, something I've not seen any of the many other such
reflections on the past year do:
Title
that I'm most anxious to see introduced: DCnU:
The Lost Generation
– the adventures of Stephanie Brown, Donna Troy, Wally West, Garth
– suddenly appearing in this new world and wondering what the hell
happened. With the thematic substitution of Steph for the original
Teen Titan Dick Grayson Robin, you could even call it Titans
Lost. This could be the cover:
Think about it – their double-take on meeting the now red Beast Boy; Starfire sexually mauling Wally as Donna stands there shocked and speechless at the change in her old roommate. Those two scenes could be worth the whole New 52! [I unfortunately did not note where I first came across this image – I think it was shared by someone on Facebook, but I can't be sure. Whoever it was, Thanks!]
Think about it – their double-take on meeting the now red Beast Boy; Starfire sexually mauling Wally as Donna stands there shocked and speechless at the change in her old roommate. Those two scenes could be worth the whole New 52! [I unfortunately did not note where I first came across this image – I think it was shared by someone on Facebook, but I can't be sure. Whoever it was, Thanks!]
*
* *
Just for
comparison's sake, here are side-by-side comparisons of what I was/am
buying from DC before and after Flashpoint ushered in the New 52 last August-September 2011:
January 2011
– a few months
before
|
January 2012
– a few months in
|
October 2012
– about a year in
|
|
Digital
|
Digital
Digital
Weeklies
|
So,
although I started out about at parity in number of titles I was
getting before and after the “Relaunch” (especially if you
discount the “First Wave” fiasco titles First Wave,
Doc Savage, and The
Spirit, which were tanking in
early 2011 and clearly weren't long for publication anyway), by about a year
in I have increased the number of titles I'm getting from DC
somewhat. Not by a huge amount – about 20% – but somewhat. And
they've managed to keep me with most
of the titles that I jumped on at the beginning. In that sense, even
with me the New 52 is a success.
Cheers!
– and Thanks for reading!
Great blog as always Kent plenty of food for thought.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you on the disappointment of JLA, and what was a surprise hit of the new 52 for me Aquaman. I haven't read Batwing mainly because there are so many bat books out there some of them have to fall by the wayside, also the Batman continuity is something that bugs me also. How can we have had so many Robins and still had Dick Grayson as Batman in a 5 year spell, but at the end of the day Batman and Green Lantern story's were fairly planed out for the coming years so they couldn't be changed. The comic numbering was also a disappointment for me as I wanted to see a Detective Comics 900, but its not going to happen in my life time.
It was an interesting point about the changes to some of the characters both physical and sexually in some cases, the one that I actually took offence to was the slimming down of Amanda Waller why was that necessary. What is that saying in a world that is already bombarding youngsters with images of the so called beautiful people, you only get on if your slim and good looking not the image DC were telling us this new universe would be portraying.
Keep up the good work, I always enjoy reading your thoughts.
Thanks for your kind words, Rob. As someone who's fought obesity through my whole life, the Amanda Waller/Etta Candy examples stand out for me as well. Even more egregiously, Geoff Johns' reconceiving slovenly Harvey Bullock to look more like Harvey "Apollo" Dent in Batman: Earth One which just recently came out. That's not strictly-speaking New 52, but very much of the trend.
ReplyDeleteI see you're in Yorkshire. That's a corner of the UK I've only skirted in my travels, despite the attraction for me of the Viking artifacts at York itself. Maybe whenever I make my way back over there, we can meet up at a pub and have a pint or three...
Cheers!
Yes if you ever come this way I would like that we live about 30 minutes train ride from York, we spend a lot of time there just walking around and taking in the sights its one of our favourite citys. The Jorvik viking centre is excellent but the York Castle museum is also excellent and well worth a visit.As I said let me know and we can chat comics over a pint.
Delete