Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: DC Exodus

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> Bookworms >> The Comic Shack >> RE: DC Exodus Page: <<   < prev  16 17 18 19 [20]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: DC Exodus - 5/2/2014 10:45:44 AM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3085
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild about Wilder

Never thought I'd say this BUT! after more years than I care to mention I'm seriously getting disilusioned with the state of the industry & product & am thinking of just cutting back to the bear minimum of maybe 8-10 a month as with all the multiple crossovers between comics I don't & have no intention of getting (mainly DC) it's begining to make me lose faith in the whole industry.


I only get one regular monthly title with the occasional mini series or special here and there...

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 571
RE: DC Exodus - 5/2/2014 10:41:12 PM   
Olaf


Posts: 23701
Joined: 26/2/2007
From: 41N 93W

quote:

ORIGINAL: furrybastard

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

Why are there never any stories of people leaving Marvel to work for DC I wonder?

http://www.newsarama.com/20207-batman-editor-mike-marts-returns-to-marvel-as-executive-editor.html


Self Publish/Online --> DC --> Marvel --> Image. This is the desired trajectory of any serious comic creator these days. "The Big Two" are just stepping stones. Whole new world.


I would suggest a tiny alteration and say that it currently stands as Self Publish/Online --> DC --> Marvel --> Image --> film/television. That seems to be where the money is and Image's creator ownership model makes it considerably more appealing if you can make a Walking Dead-style success out of it. (Hence canny guys like Brubaker and Morrison gravitating in their direction, or Mark Millar's new book practically screaming 'make a movie/tv show out of me please'.)

Obviously, people need to make a living so I don't really take exception to this. And the whole setup at Image currently has a nice balance between 1. make the book you (the creator) want to make and 2. it's on you to make it both a critical and a commercial success. Particularly good since creator-owned books don't have the benefit of a legion of drones buying based on a title character, ergo good reviews are required for good sales. If Stephenson or Fraction or DeConnick end up rich off the back of selling the rights to their Image titles to Hollywood, it'll be deserved because they made the books commercially viable in the first place by making them really good reads.

Otherwise I totally agree regarding the present status of the Big Two. I'm buying more comics now than I was at any point over the last five years at least, but I only buy one DC/Marvel book (Trillium, though Sandman as well whenever it feels like coming out).

_____________________________

I tried to groan, Help! Help! But the tone that came out was that of polite conversation.

Empire Top 100 Albums Poll 2013: CLICK HERE

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 572
RE: DC Exodus - 6/2/2014 12:00:45 AM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5180
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olaf

Self Publish/Online --> DC --> Marvel --> Image. This is the desired trajectory of any serious comic creator these days. "The Big Two" are just stepping stones. Whole new world.


I would suggest a tiny alteration and say that it currently stands as Self Publish/Online --> DC --> Marvel --> Image --> film/television. That seems to be where the money is and Image's creator ownership model makes it considerably more appealing if you can make a Walking Dead-style success out of it. (Hence canny guys like Brubaker and Morrison gravitating in their direction, or Mark Millar's new book practically screaming 'make a movie/tv show out of me please'.)

Obviously, people need to make a living so I don't really take exception to this. And the whole setup at Image currently has a nice balance between 1. make the book you (the creator) want to make and 2. it's on you to make it both a critical and a commercial success. Particularly good since creator-owned books don't have the benefit of a legion of drones buying based on a title character, ergo good reviews are required for good sales. If Stephenson or Fraction or DeConnick end up rich off the back of selling the rights to their Image titles to Hollywood, it'll be deserved because they made the books commercially viable in the first place by making them really good reads.

Otherwise I totally agree regarding the present status of the Big Two. I'm buying more comics now than I was at any point over the last five years at least, but I only buy one DC/Marvel book (Trillium, though Sandman as well whenever it feels like coming out).


Hmm. Well I feel that the vast majority of Image comics are intended to be just that and it's not really a case of creators trying to break into film/television. Mark Millar and Kirkman's Skybound are very much attempting to do those things but with comics like Prophet, Fatale, Manhattan Projects, East of West and Saga etc., I really think those comics are meant to be comics. Most of them woudn't make for particularly appealing adaptations and don't seem to be chasing the Hollywood dollar either (Vaughan - already a successful TV writer - and Staples have refused to sell the rights to Saga for any kind of media adaptation).

There is that mentality of creating comics with the sole purpose of making them into movies and it's a rather sad state of affairs if the industry goes that way. In fact I would argue that it's Marvel and DC who are very much at the forefront of this. There have been a few creators becoming quite vocal about this in recent years, feeling that they are hired to do work-for-hire for one of the "Big Two" who then stripmine any successful ideas to turn into movies and the creators get zero credit. Looking at things like the New 52, stuff like Green Arrow and Wonder Woman are clearly DC attempting to cultivate these characters for media adaptation. Ditto with Marvel's constant reimagining of series' like Black Widow, Dearedevil etc. Brubaker's Captain America run is being adapted into the Winter Soldier movie. Warren Ellis was quite vocal about how he found this practice distasteful; I don't think he was too impressed by the Iron Man films cherrypicking from his Iron Man: Extremis with no credit. (I believe Brubaker has been credited in the new Captain America film)

I would argue that Image are at the forefront of moving away from this practice (whilst simultaneously serving as one of the prime examples in the case of The Walking Dead!). If you're going to sell your ideas, then it's best to be the one who profits from it too. I think a lot of creators at Marvel and DC are feeling like they're being paid scale and then their work is later used in massively successful, billion dollar grossing movies and they get absolutely nothing for it, not even a story credit. Jim Starlin is a good example here; he gave an interview about a year ago saying he was surprised to having not been consulted about Thanos appearing at the end of Avengers because a) he created the character and b) it turns out he actually owns the character and - through whatever convuluted methods these companies have - Marvel does not; they're essentially leasing Thanos from him. Apparently Marvel were on the phone with him within a few hours; I imagine that little fact caused quite the panic. But that's the exception to the rule. Most creators don't see squat from their ideas being adapted.

For me, Image are the one company that's still making comics for the sake of comics. That's likely the reason so many writers and artists are abandoning Marvel and DC and saving their best work for Image.


< Message edited by furrybastard -- 6/2/2014 12:11:48 AM >

(in reply to Olaf)
Post #: 573
RE: DC Exodus - 6/2/2014 12:34:45 PM   
Olaf


Posts: 23701
Joined: 26/2/2007
From: 41N 93W
I probably wasn't as clear as I wanted to be - of course, there's a great range of titles that are intended to be comics first and foremost right now (probably my three favourite books at the moment are Nowhere Men, Manhattan Projects and Sex Criminals, and none of them particularly cry out for a blockbuster film adaptation).

And I wouldn't disagree for a second for DC and Marvel are the worst for aiming the market in the direction of film adaptations. (I'm reminded of the recent introduction of Nick Fury's black, also eyepatched son, also called Nick Fury, with a friend called Agent Coulson.) They're clearly responsible for setting the whole thing into motion with their success with adaptations over the last decade particularly. My point is more that the film/TV side of things is by far the biggest money generator in the comics industry since the comics themselves aren't a mass medium anymore, so the reality is that creators need to have one eye on that as a potential source of income. So if you do want to make money in the comics industry - and again, I wouldn't look down on anyone who does as long as they're producing good work - the choice becomes: work for DC/Marvel and get nothing when they turn your ideas into billion-dollar movies, or take said ideas to Image and keep the money yourself. Image was founded in the first place around an intersection of commercial and creative interests, and that's still the case.

That intersection has made it by far the best company in the mainstream comics industry right now (probably because it's essentially an 'indie' sensibility at heart), and I hope it continues without a number of suspiciously PG-13 superhero film treatments disguised as comic books start springing up. Luckily their current editorial seems to have a clear sense of what's good comics rather than what's a good potential movie, which I guess is what it'll always hinge on (compare Image today to Image in the 90s).

_____________________________

I tried to groan, Help! Help! But the tone that came out was that of polite conversation.

Empire Top 100 Albums Poll 2013: CLICK HERE

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 574
RE: Batman Eternal - 9/5/2014 8:22:45 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3085
Joined: 30/9/2005
Anyone else been reading Batman Eternal? Really enjoying it so far but can see me dropping out before the run's complete. Just can't justify purchasing a weekly title on top of my other comics.

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Olaf)
Post #: 575
RE: Batman Eternal - 10/5/2014 12:03:06 PM   
benmharper


Posts: 2237
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Carlisle
I've read the first 3 issues and have really enjoyed it so far. But, like you, I don't know if I'm going to continue due to the weekly cost on top of all the others on my pull list

_____________________________

#3 member of The Wire fan club. PM Dantes Inferno to join.

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 576
RE: Batman Eternal - 12/5/2014 7:02:13 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18188
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
It appears to be offering something different to the character but at the moment there is a glut of Batman titles most of which have no continuity and make no sense between comics.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to benmharper)
Post #: 577
RE: Batman Eternal - 13/5/2014 12:46:24 AM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5180
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
DC's whole output is pretty much 'Batman & Friends' now.

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 578
RE: Batman Eternal - 13/5/2014 6:35:45 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18188
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
There appear to be a five concurrent and conflicting storylines running at the same time as well. The "Forever Evil" storyline just seemed to go nowhere and they were talking about events which did not seem to happen in any of the other comics. This happens all the time and other times a storyline is progressing in one issue and then in the next issue it is a completely different story with no apparent conclusion to the first one. It is a complete mess at the moment. Personally I have dropped most of the DC comics I used to purchase.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 579
RE: Batman Eternal - 19/5/2014 9:47:39 AM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1655
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
I'm picking up Snyder's run BUT! will probably cut it after that.
Am really PISSED OFF! with DC about bringing Wally West back as another Race I've been following my favorite comic book character The Flash for more years than I'd like to mention & Wally when he became Flash soon to my suprise overtook Barry as my all time favorite but to just do this obviously for the reaction (however shortlived that'll be?) just goes to show what's wrong with DC these days, I'd sooner they'd not have brought him back at all.

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 580
RE: Batman Eternal - 19/5/2014 2:29:43 PM   
britesparc


Posts: 2055
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Manchester
That seems a bit of a funny attitude, if you don't mind me saying, especially considering so much else has changed in the New 52. If he's exactly the same character, but just happens to be black, what difference does it make other than a positive one of better representation?

Now, there are issues regarding the fact that - at first glance - he's a black kid vandalising stuff, which arguably reinforces stereotypes rather than eliminating them, and does seem out of character with Wally. But just the fact that he's black, in and of itself, strikes me as a good thing. They should have done it with more characters I reckon (but then we get into the whole 52 "reboot" and what should they have changed, and what shouldn't they, and blah blah blah).

Also re: Batman Eternal. I'm enjoying it too, so far. Although I wonder, given Zero Year, where the Roman fits into current continuity.

_____________________________

You can't drink a pint of Bovril.

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 581
RE: Batman Eternal - 19/5/2014 6:11:55 PM   
furrybastard

 

Posts: 5180
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Ireland
I don't see it as much of a problem either. I don't think it's so much DC looking for a reaction or stirring up controversy - after all, it's only controversial if you want it to be - but rather doing a bit more to fairly represent their modern day diverse readership. It's not like 'being white' was ever a major plot point for The Flash, at least not to my knowlege. The Big Two have a very, uh, single-toned lineup of heroes and villains for the most part.

It's interesting that both companies to different extents are actually attempting to change this and I applaud them for it (it's rare I'll do that for either of them!). Recently Marvel have started to release a number of female-centred books. They haven't sold them to readers based on gender so much as creative teams and those books are almost all really, really good. It's clear that Marvel sees some heroes as their big 'event' type blockbusters while second-tier characters can be used to bring in some of the readership that's moved to Image/Dark Horse etc. (Hawkeye seems to have been the experiment... and it's worked!)

The new Ms. Marvel comic, in particular, is very, very good. I'd never read a Captain Marvel comic in my life but picked it up cos' I like Alphona's artwork and the premise seemed quite unusual for a Marvel comic. Similarly, She-Hulk and Black Widow are both decent comics, the former moreso. I'm a big fan of Pulido's artwork anyway as well as Dan Slott's earlier run, and this is very much in the same spirit.

In the right creative hands, it's always interesting to see a character looked at from another perspective. Ultimately it will come down to whether the stories are good. If DC really want to shake things up, following Marvel's lead in this way would be much more effective than the monotoned, bland conformity of the New 52 reboot.


(in reply to britesparc)
Post #: 582
RE: Batman Eternal - 19/5/2014 8:43:38 PM   
britesparc


Posts: 2055
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Manchester
Yeah, what he said.

The thing that baffles me about the New 52 - and I'm a far bigger DC fan than Marvel - is that they had a built-in, invested audience in characters from the cartoons - DC's wider media, pre the MCU, was always stronger than Marvel's, in my opinion - but they ignored them.

For instance, when they rebooted, they should have put out a Teen Titans featuring Robin, Beast Boy, and Raven, at the very least (maybe with Wonder Girl and Superboy rounding it out). Cyclops in the JL is quite nice, and if they really wanted to put Starfire in the Red Hood book, they should have made her a naive newbie to Earth, like in the cartoon, rather than the one-dimensional sexbot that we got. Surely this is more appealing to readers, new and old?

I know, I know, I'm all shoulda-coulda, which is the easiest thing in the world for a fan to do on the internet. But I still feel like they never quite seem to translate cross-media success into comics sales.

_____________________________

You can't drink a pint of Bovril.

(in reply to furrybastard)
Post #: 583
RE: Batman Eternal - 20/5/2014 12:16:08 PM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1655
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
It may be just me and him being my favorite comic book character & having every issue of his run as the Flash + a fair few with him as Kid Flash but the fact that a character who as far as I know has spent roughly 50 years being a Red headed Green eyed middle American kid being so radically changed just seems a slap in the face of those people who've followed his exploits so long and also makes a joke of past storylines like the longtime friendship between him & Dick, his family etc. Make the character of Kid Flash Black by all means I'd just rather it wasn't Wally himself & I won't even start on how they're gonna explain the difference between Iris in the comic & Iris on the TV show.
And it's not a race thing so much as some of my all time favorite characters such as Sam Wilson & John Stewart happen to be Black. If DC really wanted to push the boundaries howabout a Black Robin?

(in reply to britesparc)
Post #: 584
RE: Batman Eternal - 20/5/2014 1:28:55 PM   
britesparc


Posts: 2055
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Manchester
The thing is, pre-52 Wally West is clearly a different character. I agree with you insofar as I prefer Wally as the Flash. If you're a fan of that character, I think that ship's sailed. I love Stephanie Brown, but even reappearing in Batman Eternal, I'm prepared to believe her to be a different character. She just won't have the same history, especially her history with Tim; it's just not possible (in fact, don't get me started on New 52 Tim Drake).

But I still think, if it was the same character with more-or-less the same history, the ethnicity wouldn't bother me at all. They could have easily made Dick Grayson or Barbara Gordon black as far as I'm concerned. New 52 Wally does seem, at first glance, to be slightly different in character to old-52 Wally, mind you (irrespective of race), so I can understand fans being a little irked. All the same, I'm glad he's back, and it's nice to see a potentially-prominent character become a person of colour.

Whilst we're on the subject of diversity, flat-out something I'd definitely have done if I was DC was make Tim Drake gay. He's a big character, it fits his history to a certain degree, and it allows them to tackle all those "Robin is gay" prejudices head-on. Plus in the Teen Titans line-up, you could have had some nice soap opera (Tim fancies Superboy but he fancies Wonder Girl but she fancies Bunker who fancies Tim!).

_____________________________

You can't drink a pint of Bovril.

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 585
RE: Batman Eternal - 21/5/2014 10:27:42 AM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1655
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
The other thing that worries me when Superman & Batman start getting close to the 1000 mark whose to say they won't go back & with that etc etc?

(in reply to britesparc)
Post #: 586
RE: Batman Eternal - 22/5/2014 7:29:08 PM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3085
Joined: 30/9/2005
First issue of Batman: Eternal I've been disappointed in. Literally did not have a clue what was going on at all and that's not in a good way either. No idea who the hell this Jim Corrigan character is. Gentleman Ghost??? The Spectre??? Why is Batwing in Gotham? I stopped reading his title after about 6 issues. What exactly is the story with The Joker's Daughter? I recognise her from the villains covers but no idea as to who r what she really is? Is that The Joker's actual face she's wearing? Is she really his daughter? Also confused as to why she seems to be referring to him as being dead rather than just missing his face. Since I'm only regularly reading Snyder's Batman title I have little clue as to what's going on in the larger DC universe and I understand they do have to make reference to what goes on but could they at least offer a little explanation for people who are just reading the one (or in my case now, two) stories?

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 587
RE: Batman Eternal - 23/5/2014 12:14:24 PM   
BudBaxter

 

Posts: 674
Joined: 31/1/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

First issue of Batman: Eternal I've been disappointed in. Literally did not have a clue what was going on at all and that's not in a good way either. No idea who the hell this Jim Corrigan character is. Gentleman Ghost??? The Spectre??? Why is Batwing in Gotham? I stopped reading his title after about 6 issues. What exactly is the story with The Joker's Daughter? I recognise her from the villains covers but no idea as to who r what she really is? Is that The Joker's actual face she's wearing? Is she really his daughter? Also confused as to why she seems to be referring to him as being dead rather than just missing his face. Since I'm only regularly reading Snyder's Batman title I have little clue as to what's going on in the larger DC universe and I understand they do have to make reference to what goes on but could they at least offer a little explanation for people who are just reading the one (or in my case now, two) stories?


The Joker's Daughter is an idiotic character made up for Ann Nocenti's idiotic run of Catowman. She's just a nutbag who found The Joker's discarded face in the sewers & decided to wear it as a mask. For some reason, this has made her a new supervillain. She has a gang of fellow sewer (sorry, 'Gotham Underground') -dwellers. Hopefully they'll get rid of her soon or just restrict her to the Catwoman book. She's a terrible character.

No clue why Batwing's in Gotham. I've only just found out it's a different guy in the suit to the initial run of the character!

Jim Corrigan is 'The Spectre', an old-school DC character. I think this is his first appearance in The New 52.

Enjoyed the first couple of issues, the story of Gordon & the train crash, but it seems to have veered of in a completely different direction now...


It's still better than the other DC weekly, Future's End though.

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 588
RE: Batman Eternal - 26/5/2014 10:42:11 AM   
Vadersville


Posts: 3085
Joined: 30/9/2005
Thanks for the info, Budbaxter!

On the discussion of changing established character's race, sexuality, etc, I personally don't see it as anything other than a publicity stunt. If they were really serious about bringing a Black Flash into the comics why not just invent a brand new character? As a friend of mine said in a similar conversation recently, "What would you rather, John Stewart or a Black Hal Jordan?" Likewise with britesparc's suggestion of making Tim Drake gay. Why? why not bring in a new character as Robin (especially since there's currently an opening) and make him gay instead?

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to BudBaxter)
Post #: 589
RE: Batman Eternal - 26/5/2014 10:48:31 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18188
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
That is the thing. If you change and established character it brings baggage and those fans of the existing character will not like it, create a good new character who may have longevity under their own right and you could create a winner. The thing is DC is not really about creativity or investing in the future at the moment but rather just pumping out potboiler comics whilst focusing on what can be turned into a film or television show.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 590
RE: Batman Eternal - 28/5/2014 11:45:42 AM   
britesparc


Posts: 2055
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Manchester
I think if you're rebooting things, Marvel Ultimates-style, that gives you licence to take certain, popular, pre-existing characters, but make them more diverse. Given the jokes about Batman and Robin being gay - and in particular, the jokes about Tim Drake and Conner Kent - grasping the nettle in a line-wide reboot and actually having him be gay (he certainly wasn't in the Old 52, and I don't think he is now, either) would have offered an opportunity to tell certain kinds of stories, reflect certain parts of the audience, and do so with a big A-list character in a big A-list book (and also prove how stupid all those jokes were).

Now, there are a ton of "ifs" in that paragraph, but I still think it could have worked. If they did it now, three years down the line, it'd make less sense, I think.

The problem both Marvel and DC have (maybe DC more than Marvel at the moment) is they have a bedrock of fans who want to see the big characters. That's why half the Marvel line is Avengers and half the DC line is Batman. So creating new minority superheroes who can support their own books is hard - Batwing is ending soon, for instance. This is why I think, where appropriate, making changes to existing characters can be a good thing. Having Robin - who's probably the third most recognisable superhero in the world - be a teenager just coming to terms with his sexuality would actually be a really, really big deal. Yeah, okay, Batman could find another, brand new, Robin and all that could still happen, but when DC rebooted their universe, they had an opportunity to do it then and there with Tim Drake, who was already a very, very popular character.

_____________________________

You can't drink a pint of Bovril.

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 591
RE: DC Universe to reboot?!? - 2/6/2014 10:31:18 AM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1655
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
With DC and their supposedly bold moves didn't they have this exact opportunity back when they had Milestone comics with Static(which I personelly loved) Icon & rocket etc but after a short time they pretty much bottled it even though they've brought them back occasionally?

(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 592
RE: DC Universe to reboot?!? - 2/6/2014 6:31:27 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18188
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
Didn't Milestone fold due to sales issues and the fact they were formed at a time when there was a massive glut of new companies on the scene which diluted any impact they may have had?

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 593
RE: DC Universe to reboot?!? - 25/8/2014 10:24:43 PM   
Imperion

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 16/6/2014
I believe the New 52 has worked well so far. I wonder if the next DC movies will follow this line's story.

(in reply to Vadersville)
Post #: 594
Page:   <<   < prev  16 17 18 19 [20]
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> Bookworms >> The Comic Shack >> RE: DC Exodus Page: <<   < prev  16 17 18 19 [20]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Movie News|Empire Blog|Movie Reviews|Future Films|Features|Video Interviews|Image Gallery|Competitions|Forum|Magazine|Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109