AICN COMICS ROUNDTABLE
DC’S NEW 52
ONE MONTH (or so) LATER!
Hey folks, Ambush Bug here with another @$$Hole Roundtable. This time we gab about DC’s New 52, one month after the new relaunch. Here are our collective thoughts on the biggest thing to happen in comics this year. Enjoy!AMBUSH BUG (BUG): OK, so you've all had a chance to pick and choose and read DC's New 52. What are your initial thoughts on the entire thing? Has your opinion about the reboot/relaunch/re-whatever changed since first hearing about the news a few months ago?
MATT ADLER (MATT): It's changed a little, but mostly because of the launch event that JD and I went to. When I first heard about it, it sounded like a poorly thought-out Hail Mary pass that had a high probability of imploding disastrously. From the event, I got the sense that they HAVE thought this out more than we gave them credit for, and that even if some of the books don't work out, they have contingency plans.OPTIMOUS DOUCHE (OD): I was never adverse to change, so no. The DC Universe was a garbled mess because of FINAL CRISIS and a really sullen atmosphere because of BLACKEST NIGHT; the old universe needed an enema. I think a re-whatever, though, is the best description. With so much canon of the past few years being carried forward by BATMAN and GREEN LANTERN, reboot just doesn't apply.
MATT: I don't have a problem calling it a reboot; if Crisis on Infinite Earths, which maintained much of the ongoing continuity, was a reboot then so is this.
HUMPHREY LEE (HUMPHREY): Yeah, I was never particularly averse to this relaunch myself either, if for no other reason than mainstream comics just seem so stagnant right now. A shake up of some kind was in order and, while I may not agree just going new #1's across the board as the best idea for it, I figured it was better than nothing.BUG: I tend to agree. DC was a mess with Morrison's FINAL CRISIS and handfuls of mini-reboots making continuity a complete mess. That said, going into 52, I was fully ready to drop DC altogether. It seemed like a good stopping point for me and I wasn't in stories reintroducing me to characters I already knew. But this selective memory DC is doing with what sticks and what doesn’t reeks of egotism.
SUPERHERO: So did you drop them? Or did you add books?BUG: I did drop quite a few books and used it to narrow down a lot of stuff. There are some decisions I simply can't get behind; Barbara Gordon walking is one of them. So that book could promise bacon and blow jobs and I wouldn't follow it.
KLETUS KASADAY (KC): Mmmm...bacon.
HUMPHREY: God, is it even legal to have both those things at the same time? And in what ratio are we talking here?
KC: I don't think the relaunch was necessarily a bad thing, but the question is how many of these titles will remain after a few months? And while DC is seeing an increase in sales now, will that remain the case in about 8 months? Overall I think it was a pretty ballsy move, and I have to give it to DC for trying something as risky as this, but I'm still on the fence as to whether it was completely necessary. They definitely have created a buzz and I've definitely seen a few new faces in the shop looking for the new 52. Bad titles aside I'd consider it a success so far.OD: If they stayed with the old universe, though, there would have been no surge or buzz at all.
SUPERHERO: I don't think that's true. They could of pulled any kind of giant, monster event and that would have pulled in sales numbers. "Re-setting" the universe wasn't necessary. Especially since it wasn't much of a re-set. They could have done any number of things to get me to look at their books again. This just made me want to look at the freakshow for a bit. It's not bringing me back as a hardcore fan or anything.OD: I'm sorry, Supes--I have to respectfully disagree with the idea any event would have worked. IDENTITY CRISIS spewed forth an ejaculation of events that lasted for close to five years. Never in that time did DC see the sell-out success they received with 52. JUSTICE LEAGUE was the top ordered book of the year. We can all debate what tomorrow brings, but from a pure business perspective, they worked and fanboys totally jerked it.
SUPERHERO: I disagree with your disagreement. The fanboys will go for almost anything as long as there's hype behind it. They could have started all issues at number one...come up with some crazy reason for it...and fans still would have flocked to it if it had been hyped correctly. Re-setting the universe was not necessary.MATT: I disagree with your disagreement with Douche's disagreement. The days when fanboys would go for any event are long fading, and I think the diminishing sales numbers are showing that. DC had to do something radical to grab market share. Whether it works in the long run remains to be seen.
HUMPHREY; Yeah, I'm with the Douche here. If you want another event, go choose any of the three Marvel does a year hoping to drum up a few more 100K selling titles as a temporary fix to declining sales/readership. And DC's already "reset" their universe, what, three times this past decade?SLEAZY G (SLEAZY): I think what stayed and what went is very telling. If there was ever any doubt as to who the architects of the DCU are at this time, those doubts are permanently erased. Much as Quesada and Bendis are the go-to universe builders for Marvel, it's Johns and Morrison at DC with Didio in the background. We already knew this based on their job titles, but this cements it: if those two weren't involved, it's not canon--and even then it's iffy. Clearly, their work on BATMAN, GREEN LANTERN, BLACKEST NIGHT, CRISIS, etc. are in, and anything they do on Supes or with the kids in the Justice League will be as well. But even Johns' work with in FLASH and HAWKMAN is out the window, and I'm not putting any money on the SEVEN SOLDIERS stuff being in continuity either. One's thing for sure, though: if those two aren't directly involved, it's probably not canonical in the New DCU. That means everything except Bats, GL and the related minis are up for grabs at this point. It's as close to a reboot as I've ever seen--two titles as the foundation and another 50 up for grabs.
MATT: I don't think Johns and Morrison got preferential treatment in this; Batman and GL maintained their continuities because they were selling well. But in addition to the ones you named, SUPERMAN SECRET ORIGIN is out the window, Didio has said the same for all the Crises, and I'd bet Morrison's JLA run is moot too.SLEAZY: I'm fine with a line-wide change to the universe, and I'm fine with the titles they chose as the core to build the new universe around. What I'm not fine with are bad character decisions (Barbara Gordon should still be in that wheelchair for anyone of at least half a dozen reasons), relaunches that not a goddamned person cares about (HAWK AND DOVE? VOODOO?!?) and titles that sound interesting and have been written well in the past that, well, suck (FRANKENSTEIN, HAWKMAN).
MAJIN FU (MF): This brings me to another point of contention: where's the diversity? Changing what had become fundamental aspects of these characters (i.e. Barbara Gordon's wheelchair, Amanda Waller's obesity) narrows the reflection of real people even more. Instead we get Batwing and Mister Terrific, both of which feel forced more than anything. It's not about taking the heroes that are already there and changing them to be politically correct, but including characters that reflect our world as a whole. Instead of pussyfooting the ties to reality by placing superheroes in real locations like Seattle and Manhattan, DC could introduce characters that are more like actual people. This doesn't include the superheroes, of course, since wearing spandex all the time already carries some implications that you are somehow "different", but plenty of the auxiliary characters (like Barbara's roommate in BATGIRL) merely serve as stereotypes. Including people from all walks of life is something I thought the DC was really going to work on with the reboot, and they failed miserably in my opinion.
MATT: Diversity seems to be a big problem in this relaunch, and I'd include in that the depiction of women. Jim Shooter recently reviewed a couple of books I hadn't read (CATWOMAN and RED HOOD) and I was really struck by how tone-deaf the portrayals of women were in these books; I mean, really appealing to the most narrow stereotype of comic book readers possible.KC: The problem is saying "we're going to increase diversity in our comics" because then DC is put under a microscope and every little move they do as far as that goes in scrutinized (not that it shouldn't be). The first time they brought that up in recent years they immediately killed Ryan Choi (Atom) and Mister Terrific and people were like what the hell?!? Then they said it again for the new 52 and all the things that Majin mentioned happened. I think if you’re going to diversify then do it, but the more they talk about it the more questionable the results seem.
HENRY HIGGINS IS MY HOMEBOY (HHH): And that's not even beginning to speak of the implications brought up by the newest Teen Titan, who seems (at least at first glance) to be an attempt to fill in every spot on the diversity Bingo game.MF: What first got me thinking this reboot thing was headed in the wrong direction is when I started hearing about the creative teams. Frankly, a majority of them didn't get me excited at all. And while I'm all for artists also writing their own books, I have always appreciated the collaborative effort put into many American comics. It keeps things fresh and promotes experimentation. Still, I don't see how letting guys like Tony Daniel or David Finch getting to write new #1s for flagship characters is supposed to get me excited. There are a few good creative teams, but some of the titles they were assigned left me scratching my head. (Gail Simone writing FIRESTORM?)
MATT: The artists-turned-writers thing struck me as a way to get them to sign exclusives. There are a lot of creators I can think of that are missing from this relaunch, but the thing is, we don't know much about the behind the scenes workings. We do know that this move was pretty sudden and done on tight deadlines, especially with DC's new no-late-books policy, so it's possible some of the better talent wasn't willing to work under those conditions--not to mention that Marvel does have a lot of the better talent locked up in exclusives. As for characters that are missing from the relaunch, it's possible they want to take the time to put something together for them, and things are in the works. Jim Lee flat-out told me that they already have "mid-season replacements" lined up.KC: I know this isn't going to happen but DC should hold off on events for like two years (I know, I know), let some shit build up and come into an event naturally. The worst thing, in my opinion, that they could do now is start having all these new titles be forced into some event that's going to change stuff yet again before anything solid is really established.
BUG: You are absolutely right, there's no way that'll happen. That's what this industry is; one event after another. Expect a big status quo-shaking event by the spring. The foundation will not even have time to settle before they shake it up again. When did comics become the annoying kid in the class who screams "Look at me! Look at me!" every five minutes? So sad.BOTTLEIMP (IMP): And I have the feeling that many of these new number ones will be showing up in the bargain boxes for two bits apiece a year from now. I know that my local comics shop is being very selective with which "New 52" titles they order. My theory is that they've been left with "event" gluts before (I could have picked up the entire 52 series for about $40 at their last back issue sale) and don't want to throw money at this highly-hyped happening without more concrete evidence that people will actually be buying these comics.
KC: Psssh...you should see how many FEAR ITSELF tie-ins I have left on the shelf and I didn't even order that many but NOBODY gave a fuck about those. There's never any concrete evidence for what people will buy. For example, last month KICK ASS flew off the shelves, this month not so much. Ordering comics is really just a guessing game...OD: And the what the fuck is this dogmatic adherence to the number 52? It totally made sense when the weekly 52 book came out...since, you know, we adhere to that whole Gregorian calendar thing. It was a stretch when 52 universes were introduced. That sounded like a plan that never came to fruition. But now, it makes no sense.
BUG: Ironically, it appears that the 52 Universes don't exist anymore in this new Universe. Or maybe they do... (slaps head in frustration).OD: Earth One is still a definite, Destructo got confirmation from Johns that BATMAN: EARTH ONE is still going forward and Shane Davis let me take a peek at his sketch book for SUPERMAN: EARTH ONE Volume 2.
BUG: Again if I wasn't at a convention or following blogs and tweets, how am I, a prospective buyer, supposed to know this? Another indication that these guys may be hard at work churning out product to clutter the shelves but are not looking at the big picture here. At least after ZERO HOUR we knew what was what. Same goes for FINAL CRISIS, and look how much of a mess that turned out to be?
KC: A lot of the new 52 seem like they are still in the old universe...BUG: Exactly, there doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason to it. Just a bunch of number ones that start in no particular time or place. There was no official launch issue that said THIS IS THE NEW DC 52 U! JLA could have been used as the central hub for the universe, giving these "new readers" everyone is talking about a chance to experience and understand this New 52 DCU. Instead we get a flashback issue set five years in the past. How is this not a reboot again? Are they not telling the story of how the JLA is coming together again?
THE WRITING RAMBLER (RAMBLER): I definitely agree here. There's no real connection between the books other than vague, forced mentions. Even with books that should have direct connections like the BATMAN and GREEN LANTERN titles I don't feel any uniformity to it. I assume in time as DCU events happen there will be some remedy to it all, but for now it does feel really disjointed.BUG: Did events like IDENTITY CRISIS happen? Did FINAL CRISIS happen? Does Speedy still have AIDS? Where are Ralph and Sue Dibny? If there was ever a time for a new DC's WHO'S WHO it's now.
MF: Considering Starfire's more promiscuous new persona, I'd venture to say poor Speedy has a few STDs none of us have even heard of yet.HUMPHREY: I assume the reality punching in INFINITE CRISIS de-AIDSed Speedy. I dunno who to ask about that, though.
BUG: So Superman's punch cures AIDS? Now that's a new power! Who says these characters are stuck in amber?
HUMPHREY: No, no, no. It's Superboy's punching that cures AIDS. Superman isn't down with the whoring.KC: Didio tweeted (supposedly) that none of the crises actually happened in this continuity. Soooo where was Batman? Do Sinestro and Hal only remember their events and nothing else? We need Doc Brown to clear this shit up.
BUG: Gotta call bullshit on that too. We shouldn't have to have these holes filled in via a stupid tweet from Didio. They should be addressed in the comic itself. You shouldn't have to follow multiple media 24-7 to understand what the hell you're reading.
MATT: The question is, though, is that really information a new reader needs? If the various Crises never happened, and they're not referenced in the books, what difference does it make?BUG: Then DC should man up and call it a reboot! Because if they’re rewriting history, it’s a reboot. They are just trying to please old fans and new by not calling it anything, which is both impossible and confusing.
MF: Seems like a lot of characters with huge potential got overlooked in the name of retreading familiar territory. Taking this opportunity to reintroduce old characters (like Aquaman) was a brilliant move, but some of the character choices left me baffled and frustrated that some of my favorites were hardly getting any attention. Plastic Man and Captain Marvel, anyone? Just me? (shuffles back into his corner)KC: Hopefully DC will be trying out different characters as some of these books start to fade out. I think that the amount of time DC had to plan this has a lot to do with the weird choices that were made character-wise. I also think there should have been a few more villain books for those sadistic folks like myself...
BUG: See, I hate villain books. They always take the fire out of the character. All of those Marvel villain books like Venom, Bullseye, Daken, even Elektra all made their appearances in the books they originated lesser. Keep them as villains. I don't want a JOKER or a LEX LUTHOR book. Just give me a good Joker story in BATMAN. If you need villains, I guess there's SUICIDE SQUAD...MF: Agreed. Superheroes by their very nature represent what we should all aspire to be, while villains serve as the foils to help us understand the difference. It's why I have trouble understanding why anyone would be interested in RED LANTERNS. In a comic about cosmic haters, what is the point? I have noticed many people buying the book at my local comic shop, and I'd really appreciate an explanation for what people see in that book, or is the hateful cast all part of the fun?
KC: The thing I like about RED LANTERNS is that they are a group of aliens fueled by revenge. Think Charles Bronson with a Red Lantern ring. They're doing the right thing in the wrong way. The conflict here, though, is that Atrocitus is starting to change his mind about going around the galaxy burning people alive with acid blood. He's starting to lose his resolve and possibly control of the Red Lantern Corps. It's like a military general halfway through a war deciding that he isn't into killing any more, he's worried about anyone else finding out because he knows he's going to lose the troops if anyone finds out...the difference here is that this crew may just end up killing him, then wreaking havoc across the galaxy. Atrocitus basically has created a monster that he can't control (all the other Red Lanterns are pretty much brainless zombies) and on top of that he may not even care about being a Red Lantern anymore. I haven't read the second issue yet, though. I do like you calling them cosmic haters though...sounds like a comic from Kat Williams.
MF: Thanks, that clears things up a bit. But I still think the book doesn't deserve to exist when DC's history is rich with less-hateful heroes for the new young readers to latch onto.RAMBLER: Thanks, Kletus. I was afraid I was going to be sitting alone in a corner waving my RED LANTERN flag.
KC: Oh and I liked HAWKMAN... {Slowly raises hand}
SLEAZY: (quickly raises hand) I disliked HAWKMAN...
RAMBLER: { hands still busy waving Red Lantern flag} I didn’t hate HAWKMAN. I just kinda didn’t care about reading it anymore after I finished the first issue.VROOM: (from behind his hardcover) You both should read HABIBI. This book is magnificent!
SLEAZY: Oh, is that the one with Black Adam?
VROOM: (goes back to his independent book, muttering incoherently.)
MF: Again with the Red Lanterns! I just can't help thinking the book could have been replaced with something much cooler, while having the same dark tone, like New Gods or something. To each his own I guess.SLEAZY: I beseech you, sir: do not cry out for the New Gods. To do so would suggest that anyone gave enough of a shit to bother buying another train wreck of a New Gods title. It's bad enough we've got two Legion books--do you have any idea how much less popular the New Gods are? How few "fans" of those characters there are? Seriously, after Darkseid, who else does anybody care about? Granny Goodness? Orion? Desaad? Please.
SUPERHERO: Yo, Mister Miracle and Big Barda are pretty badass...but point taken.SLEAZY: If by "badass" you mean "dull as shit", then sure. But if by "badass" you meant "badass", then no...they're actually dull as shit.
SUPERHERO: Sleazy needs a nappy-do. Grumpy, grumpy Sleazy...
MF: Haters gonna hate.
BUG: Little known fact: the G in Sleazy G stands for Grumpypants. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Fourth World. Someone will one day come along and make Sleazy eat his Grumpypants. Imagine Abnett & Lanning on NEW GODS. If they could rub a little of that NOVA/GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY magic on it, I'd be there.IMP: Now THAT'S a writer/property pairing that I'd love to read!
BUG: The tendency to give artists their own books is kind of out of control. At least they seem to have the good sense to pair a writer with these guys to keep them on track. I agree that this could have been a huge opportunity for DC to nab some big talent, but they tried to spread it too thin and the talent they do have is somewhat wasted. Fialkov is a huge talent, but somewhat wasted on an obscure title. It's cool to see Palmiotti & Gray on ALL STAR WESTERN and Abnett & Lanning on RESURRECTION MAN, but they should be on bigger books. Wasted talent.SLEAZY: Something to consider, though, is whether the quality writing talent is actually "wasted". Maybe what they're doing is actually what they *prefer* to do. Fialkov on TEEN TITANS doesn't make a lot of sense to me--I suspect he's writing what he'd like to be writing. It's just unfortunate they didn't go after stronger talent than Scott Lobdell or JT Krul to boost some of these relaunch titles. How much more ass would a Brubaker RED HOOD kick?
KC: I agree. DC should have been on mad grab for new talent--not that they don't have any now, but it would have been nice for them to bring in some new people that would garner more excitement for creative teams. DNA on one of the GREEN LANTERN titles would have been awesome; hell, Palmiotti & Gray on a BATMAN book would have been cool too...BUG: So let's get into specifics. What parts of the new 52 did you like and dislike?
MATT: I've been lucky in that I've avoided any books that I might dislike, so everything I picked up, I liked. Off the top of my head, that includes ACTION COMICS, SUPERMAN, WONDER WOMAN, JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL, GREEN LANTERN, GREEN LANTREN: NEW GUARDIANS, AQUAMAN, and LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES.
OD: For me the real gold was found in the ultra iconic or the ultra eclectic books: ACTION, BATMAN and WONDER WOMAN were simply great reintroductions to characters that you can't drastically change. It was a little old and a little new. If DC had to cut budgets tomorrow and fire 3/4 of their stuff, these are the books that should remain...always! The other books that really stick in my mind without any cheat sheets were: FRANKENSTEIN, ANIMAL MAN, JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK, ALL STAR WESTERN, DEMON NIGHTS and STORMWATCH. If I lost my job tomorrow, these are all the books I would scrimp and save to keep reading. My absolute hate hate hates were RED LANTERNS and LEGION LOST.
MF: First of all, DEMON KNIGHTS was probably the most fun I had out of the first month, with some great art and a really eclectic cast of characters I look forward to learning more about. AQUAMAN was the biggest disappointment. Why does a guy whose domain is over 70% of the planet (including places the human eye has hardly seen before) spend almost his entire first issue in a diner convincing a bunch of cynics that he's cool? It's just silly. He has nothing to prove in my opinion, and if he did, he could prove it through his actions instead of pouting and leaving a perfectly good fish and chips just sitting there. But the best of the bunch was easily ACTION COMICS. Superman is the greatest superhero ever, and seeing this fresh perspective really fired up my interest once again in the Man of Steel. As overall quality goes, in both presentation and original concept, it was a step above the rest. No wait, BATWOMAN was definitely the BEST book of the week, but also one of the least new reader-friendly, so ACTION COMICS wins by a nose. Also, the costume redesigns are cluttered and pull away from the iconic nature of many of these characters. It works for Batman, since he's a human that wears armor, and Batwoman has thankfully hardly changed, but the rest are pretty forgettable. Were there any of the costumes redesigns people particularly liked?
OD: Since I don't have a vagina, I don't really care how they dress.MF: Well considering it's a visual medium I thought it was alright to ask, Douche.
SUPERHERO: Hey everyone! Douche made a funny! So, for the record, Douche votes for the Green Lantern costume with all purple and yellow polka dots! You don't have to be a woman to appreciate good design aesthetic, Douche. Time to head back to your caveman dwelling if that's how your thinking goes, my friend.
OD: Sorry, I just think this is a no win debate and for me the costumes are an infinitesimal element in the grand scheme of things. Plus, I just felt like having a Sleazy moment. Why did Superman wear red undies? Because without them, the material of the time would have shown his super uncircumcised cock (yes, in my world Superman is still sporting his trouser sweater. Who could have cut it off and with what?).SUPERHERO: Costumes are not an infinitesimal element...especially when concerning branded characters. They are what bring recognition to a character the world over. And while the jeans and t-shirt might have been what most people would wear to go out to fight crime, a cape with jeans and a t-shirt would not. Not unless you were eight years old or mentally deficient. That is one of the most ridiculous getups I've ever seen in a superhero comic.
MF: I thought the t-shirt/jeans combo really suited his character, who's just getting into the whole activist Superman thing. And while I kinda agree that the cape looks goofy, they explain its indestructibility in issue 2, so it really doesn't bother me.
KC: I’m fine with Superman's costume as well; it's not as bad as that red and blue electric crap. It caught me off guard at first, but what would a first time, first of a kind superhero who was just starting out wear? As far as the costume changes go, it doesn't really bother me that much because I know that eventually those old costumes will be back, so whatevs...IMP: I've gotta side with Superhero on this one. I'm a fan of costume redesigns when they add something new and/or different to the overall look of the character in a way that reflects personality, abilities, etc. What I DON'T care for is sloppy, overly complicated noodly designs that do nothing except make headaches for whoever's inking. Jim Lee's inelegant additions of purposeless, incongruous piping and seam lines add nothing to the costumes, and in the particular case of Green Lantern, they actually detract from the classic simplicity of his look. But hey, if the past is any indication, these new looks have just so much time on this earth before the inevitable return to the iconic outfits.
MATT: That's exactly the reason I can't get too worked up about this. Sure, some of the costumes look kind of silly, but just wait a year--they'll change again.
SUPERHERO: And if we're talking practicality? Have you ever tried to run in a pair of tight jeans? Forget about leaping a tall building! Those babies would be splittin' up the middle all the time! Give that super-guy some cargo pants at least. I mean, there is a reason Olympic athletes wear that spandex, right? Or maybe Michael Johnson should have run all those track and field events in some tight Levi's??KC: No I haven't--have YOU ever tried to run in a pair of tight jeans? Hahaha--what was the circumstance? : ) His jeans don't seem that tight. I doubt buying spandex is the first thing that would cross your mind when you discover you have superpowers and want to fight crime. Not that I’m against the spandex, but I’m fine with him not starting out with it, and yeah--he probably has a health supply of 501s.
BUG: I’d love it is they just over-hicked Superman out. He’d be rolling up into Metropolis in his double-wide, pumpin’ the Skynard and drinkin’ Schlitz. A white trash hipster Superman is what the kiddies are clamoring for these days. Someone they can relate to. So what about the Batman books? Is it a consensus that there are way too many of them for no apparent reason?MF: Absolutely. THE DARK KNIGHT book should have been cut when Finch couldn't make deadlines the first time. Barbara Gordon being Batgirl again is strange, to say the least, and a slap in the face to her fans to say the most. BATMAN #1 was a solid read, though, and BATWOMAN is completely justified for existing just by being one of the best books DC produced that month. I just ignored the rest. Even though I'm a huge fan of Dick Grayson, putting him back as Nightwing seems like a disservice to his character and a lame way to tie up the loose ends from his earlier run on DETECTIVE COMICS.
MATT: Deadpool had too many books. This is about right for a franchise like Batman. Bottom line, a lot of people (artists included, apparently) want to write Batman, and a lot of people want to read him.SUPERHERO: I've only had the chance to read DETECTIVE and I thought it was fine. I just didn't see the difference between this Batman and the one that's come before. And yes...too many Batbooks. But I guess he is the most popular superhero on the planet so they're going to pimp him out like nobody's business.
OD: Let them come out with 30 bat books as long as they are all quality reads, iconic in character and go in line with the Douche Reboot strategy of shitcanning everyone except Batman and Superman. My only grievance is a complete lack of consistency with the Robins in the scheme of the new timeline. If you read BATMAN Dick looks like he's 16, then you go to NIGHTWING and he's 25. They needed to straighten that shit out fast.
KC: I liked DETECTIVE as well. It did feel like it was still in the "old" universe, almost a direct continuation from Tony Daniel's previous run but with Bruce instead of Dick. I'm stilled bummed they canceled RED ROBIN; one of the few characters who had shown growth is now just shoved back into the TEEN TITANS. BATMAN, NIGHTWING & BATGIRL were all ok. I liked BATMAN & ROBIN too, but yeah, both BATMAN and GREEN LANTERN probably could have trimmed the fat a little.BUG: Agreed; I would have picked up a RED ROBIN or REDWING or whatever he's being called book, though. Anyone else feel a bit cheated with the whole NIGHTWING thing? We all knew Dick being Batman wasn't going to stick, but it definitely feels like a step backwards instead of forwards for the character having the only evolution being a move from blue highlights to red on his costume.
MATT: There are definitely too many former Robins; more than one speedster was too much, but Batman can have had multiple sidekicks of varying ages in his five year career? That's something that should have been cleaned up; wipe Drake, Todd, etc out of continuity, de-age Dick Grayson, and put him back to being Robin. Nightwing always struck me as a character that developed because nobody knew what to do with Dick Grayson anymore.BUG: That’s because for him to evolve the way he should the student would have to become the teacher some day. He hasn’t done that. He did do that, but now he’s taken a leap backwards.
KC: I don't know, i kind of feel like Dick deserves his own book but it does feel like he's back to the same old thing. At first they wanted to kill him in INFINITE CRISIS, then they balked on it, then he's Batman, then he's NIGHTREDWING. I think it's safe to say DC can't figure out what to do with Dick...
BUG: And what about the other icons? How about the ones no one seems to know what to do with, WONDER WOMAN and AQUAMAN?MF: I remember liking WONDER WOMAN when I first read it but now I can hardly remember what it was about. I like the character, but besides Darwyn Cooke's version in NEW FRONTIER, I can't seem to find a version of her character I can latch onto. Making her an ancillary character in her own book doesn't help. I've already shared my feelings on AQUAMAN so I won't go there again, but suffice it to say I will not be picking up the next issue, despite being a huge fan of the character. I just keep thinking of that issue of BRAVE & THE BOLD where he teams up with Etrigan and we see how truly powerful Aquaman can be (#32, available now at a back-issue bin of your LCS, kids!). Next to that, this new stuff looks like a kid playing in the sandbox: cute but hardly ambitious.
SUPERHERO: Haven't gotten to AQUAMAN yet but I did not hate WONDER WOMAN. I actually liked the art in WONDER WOMAN a lot. The story was just so-so and didn't really make me think this was an ALL-NEW WONDER WOMAN or anything. I felt the same way I did about DETECTIVE or SUPERMAN...what's so new here besides the costumes? The event should have been called PROJECT RUNWAY: THE DC EDITION...everyone gets a new costume!!! As well as other slightly cosmetic changes...HUMPHREY: Fuck! So many books it feels like I've answered this one already. They were both great far as I'm concerned. Johns is going to work his best magic to make Aquaman cool and Azzarello has a Diana story that's off the beaten path but looks to play up to her mythos a bit. This is what I wanted from the big guns in the reboot: something fresh and dedicated to updating the characters a bit but not throwing all of the past out the window.
MATT: I think both books are off to a strong start. I had my doubts about Azzarello writing another superhero book, but he nicely balances the action with intrigue here. And the art on AQUAMAN is just gorgeous. I will say I hope Geoff Johns doesn't hit this "everyone sees Aquaman as a joke" thing too hard; there's a danger that by making that a reality within the DCU, it makes it harder to shake the perception on the part of the readers. Aquaman shouldn't spend all his time trying to prove he's not a joke; it really shouldn't matter to him what people think of him.BUG: I think after all of this time, I kind of get Johns. He reads all the talkbacks and internet stuff. He knows the consensus is that Hal is lame, Barry is lamer, and Aquaman sucks (personally, I love Aquaman, but that’s me). So he is out to prove the fanboys wrong. I kind of like it that he sets himself up for these challenges. He struck gold with GL with the whole rainbow of fruit flavors league, but showed that even he can’t make Barry interesting. I’d argue that Hal isn’t even interesting; it’s the world Johns has created around him. He’s trying to do this again with Aquaman. But I agree, issue 1 was completely distracted by beating it into our heads that Aquaman is cool, yet the public doesn’t think so. And yes, Aquaman is above all of that and shouldn’t care.
OD: They knew what they wanted to do with AQUAMAN. I don't think it gives the character sustainability, though. The fish & chips guffaws can only carry for so long. Again, this goes back to the difference behind caricatures and characters, kind of like the RED LANTERNS. Characters live forever; caricatures are merely signs of the times. AQUAMAN worked in the day...again, why I say everything should have just gone back to BATMAN & SUPERMAN and new side characters should have been built and introduced over time.BUG: Azzarello is the last person I would think would do a WONDER WOMAN book and that’s actually the reason why I’m following it. Alright, jibberers, let's wrap up this jabber session. Any final thoughts on DC's New 52?
HUMPHREY: Needs more talent. That was the biggest problems coming into this and it's still one of the glaring weaknesses of the lineup. It's not that some of these titles I don't want to read, it's just that I have no inclination to read when there's not a quality team behind them. Then again, the industry as a whole could use more talent, which requires fans who want to grow up to be the talent, and so far the numbers are showing us that we have a bump in readership, but who the hell knows how those are skewing. End of the day, though, I read about half these damn things and a dozen of them are really fucking good which is a bump up from my DC pulls pre-relaunch and almost double my Marvel lineup now that I've decided I'd rather have the new $2.99 DC book than keep some old pulls that have been raise a buck because, well, Marvel assumes they can. Hopefully the readership, if it actually exists, trickles down into the Images and IDWs and whatnot of the industry where half my overall purchases lie, but one thing at a time.
MF: It was a fun ride, but honestly, ACTION COMICS, BATWOMAN and dare I say DEMON KNIGHTS were the only three comics that seemed worth the money in retrospect. I'll still check in on various titles from time to time, as many of these characters are near and dear to my heart (e.g. SWAMP THING, ANIMAL MAN, etc.) but I'm grateful to DC for giving me such a clear jumping off point at far as extended purchases go, and with such pretty colors to boot.BUG: The most interesting thing to me is Marvel's reaction to all of this. They have nothing going on. I don't know if it's intentional or what. It seems like instead of coming back with some cheap or rushed knockoff of what DC is doing like they often do, they're just sitting this one out and seeing if DC is going to crumble from this big change or succeed. Then again, maybe they thought the flaccid FEAR ITSELF and SPIDER ISLAND crossovers were going to be more popular than they turned out to be.
MF: Fraction is a star in his own right (i.e. CASANOVA), but I agree FEAR ITSELF was uninspired. However, Marvel definitely has DC beat in terms of consistent storytelling, as in making up a story and sticking to it, no matter the cost, and I agree their line as a whole is more cohesive, thanks mostly to all the tie-ins. DC seems to be going in the opposite direction by removing continuity which has affected their characters for years, thus simplifying them for a wider readership, then giving them a new coat of paint and rushing them out the door. It's like a broken record that just keeps skipping every decade or so.MATT: I definitely think they thought FEAR ITSELF was going to be much bigger. Fraction was supposed to be their next superstar. But at the same time, I think there is very much a wait and see attitude; this move by DC had pretty much everyone in the industry blindsided, and nobody, not even DC, knows how it's going to pan out. Still, even if Marvel started working on a response as soon as the news first debuted, it'd be quite a while before we saw anything. And they still have one strong advantage over DC, and that's line cohesion. Everyone knows where the major Marvel characters fit in the overall scheme of things; the directionlessness that major icons like Superman, Wonder Woman, and the Flash have experienced over the past few years would be unthinkable at Marvel. Is that going to change at DC? That's up to editorial.
BUG: So final tally, top five and bottom five of DC’s New 52…GO!JOHNNY DESTRUCTO: Top Five: ACTION COMICS, ANIMAL MAN, WONDER WOMAN, AQUAMAN, & THE FLASH.
Bottom Five: STATIC SHOCK, HAWK & DOVE, JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL, GRIFTER, & CAPTAIN ATOM.
IMP: The Imp liked ANIMAL MAN, the Imp loathed HAWK & DOVE, and the Imp was ambivalent towards STATIC SHOCK.
MF: Top Five – ACTION COMICS, ANIMAL MAN, BATWOMAN, DEMON KNIGHTS, & SWAMP THING.MATT: Top 5 - ACTION COMICS, WONDER WOMAN, JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL, GREEN LANTERN: NEW GUARDIANS, & AQUAMAN.
Bottom 5 (books which I have zero interest in reading) - HAWK & DOVE, VOODOO, CAPTAIN ATOM, RED HOOD & THE OUTLAWS, & MISTER TERRIFIC.
HUMPHREY: Top Five - ANIMAL MAN, DEMON KNIGHTS, SWAMP THING, ALL STAR WESTERN, & BATMAN.Bottom Five - HAWK & DOVE, GREEN ARROW, RED HOOD AND THE OUTLAWS, VOODOO (no interest), & BATWING.
RAMBLER: My top 5: DETECTIVE COMICS, ALL-STAR WESTERN, ANIMAL MAN, ACTION COMICS, & RED LANTERNS.
Bottom Five: HAWK & DOVE, O.M.A.C., LEGION LOST, RESURRECTION MAN, & VOODOO.
OD: The Douche Abides – ACTION COMICS, DEMON KNIGHTS, JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK, DETECTIVE COMICS, & ALL STAR WESTERN.The Douche Resigns - CAPTAIN ATOM, RED LANTERNS, LEGION LOST, GRIFTER, & HAWK & DOVE
BUG: Top Five: SWAMP THING, ANIMAL MAN, ALL STAR WESTERN, BATMAN, and surprisingly, OMAC.
Bottom Five: STATIC SHOCK, HAWK & DOVE, VOODOO-DOO, both LEGION Books, & THE DARK KNIGHT (unnecessary).
SUPERHERO: Both LEGION books count as two, buddy! Although I read one of them and you're right...BUG: OK, take your pick. Neither were good.
KC: Top five – ACTION COMICS, ANIMAL MAN, RED LANTERNS, BATMAN & ROBIN, DEMON KNIGHTS
Bottom five - HAWK & DOVE, MR. TERRIFIC (no interest), LEGION LOST (no interest), JUSTICE LEAGUE (let down), & JUSTICE LEAGUE INTERNATIONAL (GENERATION LOST was better).
VROOM: Remind me again why we didn't Roundtable HABIBI?BUG: Time to wrap this ramble session on and let you Talkbackers continue the conversation in the talkbacks. If you made it to the end, pat yourselves on the back and keep this party going on. What did you think of DC’s New 52?
Proofs, co-edits & common sense provided by Sleazy G
Special thanks to Matt Adler for additional edits!
