55 replies to this topic

[Raiden]

Ok then. Carry on you raving, tootles.

Edited by DreamCat, 14 May 2014 - 01:02 AM.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

Look at the suit. Rubberized shape.

And the shape of the muscles. Affleck has very short muscle bellies. His muscles wouldn't look like that even on steroids.

New 52 is awesome. Much more plausible with super and power levels and how someone like batman would actually fare against him.

I think the white eye think is cool looking too. But don't get how they can do it without looking cheap.

You're one of very few people who like new 52. Majority of the fans hate it. Comics getting cancelled left and right. Creators constantly leaving because they're being told to completely re-write things all the time. Complete wiping of most characters not only storylines, but personality (especially bad for girls who now just get to be tangerines most of time). And this isn't a "people don't like change" thing. Things like that don't last two years.

[Socalmuscle]

You're one of very few people who like new 52. Majority of the fans hate it. Comics getting cancelled left and right. Creators constantly leaving because they're being told to completely re-write things all the time. Complete wiping of most characters not only storylines, but personality (especially bad for girls who now just get to be tangerines most of time). And this isn't a "people don't like change" thing. Things like that don't last two years.

Actually, the majority like it.
Even I didn't like it at first. And most didn't. Because it's changed everything.
People by nature don't like change.

But it was a good thing. And I see that now. As do most. It's why DC is continuing the development along these lines after the new 52 kickoff.

The entire "logic" (yes, even make believe should be logical to some degree) of each character, how they fit, what they can and cannot do, and even what would really happen of they and to face off, is now set right.

And the updated costumes are better too.

The comics that don't make it are not making it for the same reasons that have always led to cancellation. Just look at marvels winter soldier for example.

The new 52 paradigm shift is here to stay. For the better.

[Raiden]

No such thing as permenent in comics. Deaths.births,reboots whatever.

[Xiombarg]

Actually, the majority like it.
Even I didn't like it at first. And most didn't. Because it's changed everything.
People by nature don't like change.

But it was a good thing. And I see that now. As do most. It's why DC is continuing the development along these lines after the new 52 kickoff.

The entire "logic" (yes, even make believe should be logical to some degree) of each character, how they fit, what they can and cannot do, and even what would really happen of they and to face off, is now set right.

And the updated costumes are better too.

The comics that don't make it are not making it for the same reasons that have always led to cancellation. Just look at marvels winter soldier for example.

The new 52 paradigm shift is here to stay. For the better.

A lot of the New 52 was a miss for certain characters.  Take the Static reboot for example.

It had an amazing potential, but the producers were put in charge of the story, not the writer (who knew Dwayne McDuffie).  The reboot was so awful it was cancelled and the writer himself posted online to make it clear that the story's failure was due to the producers taking away his job and DC's focus on just treating Static as a cashgrab.

 

Not saying all of New 52 is bad though, Court of Owls was pretty great.  I haven't read the series where the Joker stapled his face back on, though, seemed like it was pushing it.

 

But the 52 paradigm shift is actually going to change yet again with the New 52 Future's End event.  They already killed off Batman (Bruce) yet again.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

Actually, the majority like it.
Even I didn't like it at first. And most didn't. Because it's changed everything.
People by nature don't like change.

But it was a good thing. And I see that now. As do most. It's why DC is continuing the development along these lines after the new 52 kickoff.

The entire "logic" (yes, even make believe should be logical to some degree) of each character, how they fit, what they can and cannot do, and even what would really happen of they and to face off, is now set right.

And the updated costumes are better too.

The comics that don't make it are not making it for the same reasons that have always led to cancellation. Just look at marvels winter soldier for example.

The new 52 paradigm shift is here to stay. For the better.

 

I follow DC on facebook. To this day, pretty much every post is flooded with "can we please get rid of new 52" or something similar. And this opinion is the majority. I'm not saying ALL of New 52 is bad, but there is absolutely no doubt MOST of it is bad. That's why something like 6(?) of the 52 titles are Batman related. Those and Superman are pretty much DC's only consistenly good-selling series. Teen Titans? Ruined. I frinking loved it, but the new books was just completely mediocre, and all that lost history was NOT replaced by anything better. Same goes for a lot of small comics and characters. I think one of the most famous being Starfire, who's personality they changed to cheap 2$ whore, put on a team with people that didn't make sense for her to team with, and somehow managed to make dress more revealingly. Nobody liked this change.

 

A lot of the New 52 was a miss for certain characters.  Take the Static reboot for example.

It had an amazing potential, but the producers were put in charge of the story, not the writer (who knew Dwayne McDuffie).  The reboot was so awful it was cancelled and the writer himself posted online to make it clear that the story's failure was due to the producers taking away his job and DC's focus on just treating Static as a cashgrab.

 

Not saying all of New 52 is bad though, Court of Owls was pretty great.  I haven't read the series where the Joker stapled his face back on, though, seemed like it was pushing it.

 

But the 52 paradigm shift is actually going to change yet again with the New 52 Future's End event.  They already killed off Batman (Bruce) yet again.

There have been numerous instances of similar things. Writers are practically fleeing DC, and they all have the same story "No control. Numerous rewrites until the whole thing was dead and no fun."

They also somehow managed to get their female creator percentage to drop from 12% to 1%. Definitely not helping with the whole girls becoming tangerinetier theme that's going around it the comics right now.

[Socalmuscle]

A lot of the New 52 was a miss for certain characters. Take the Static reboot for example.
It had an amazing potential, but the producers were put in charge of the story, not the writer (who knew Dwayne McDuffie). The reboot was so awful it was cancelled and the writer himself posted online to make it clear that the story's failure was due to the producers taking away his job and DC's focus on just treating Static as a cashgrab.

Not saying all of New 52 is bad though, Court of Owls was pretty great. I haven't read the series where the Joker stapled his face back on, though, seemed like it was pushing it.

But the 52 paradigm shift is actually going to change yet again with the New 52 Future's End event. They already killed off Batman (Bruce) yet again.

I looked at the list of comics that were cancelled. And they all seemed to be niche markets, including static shock. Static always seemed like a 1990s character that fit a certain time.

Not sure how her fit in with comic readers today.

And it could be that the writer didn't want to take the heat for the failure also.

But let's say static failed for exactly the reasons the writer says.

That doesn't mean the new 52 is any thing less than a success as a whole. It may be a situation where some titles benefit immensely where others suffer under one cohesive vision.

[Xiombarg]

That doesn't mean the new 52 is any thing less than a success as a whole. It may be a situation where some titles benefit immensely where others suffer under one cohesive vision.

Oh, I can easily list good and well received titles that came from the New 52; Wonder Woman, Swamp Thing, JL Dark, Court of Owls, etc.

But there were some misses as well like Static and the early Catwoman run.

 

The universe is just lacking a sense of impact or permanence, imo.

[Socalmuscle]

Oh, I can easily list good and well received titles that came from the New 52; Wonder Woman, Swamp Thing, JL Dark, Court of Owls, etc.
But there were some misses as well like Static and the early Catwoman run.
 
The universe is just lacking a sense of impact or permanence, imo.

Perhaps to be expected with only a few years in the early going versus scores of previous history?

Change is tough. Even if it makes sense.

But I can see the Overrall change hurting some franchises.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

I looked at the list of comics that were cancelled. And they all seemed to be niche markets, including static shock. Static always seemed like a 1990s character that fit a certain time.

Not sure how her fit in with comic readers today.

And it could be that the writer didn't want to take the heat for the failure also.

But let's say static failed for exactly the reasons the writer says.

That doesn't mean the new 52 is any thing less than a success as a whole. It may be a situation where some titles benefit immensely where others suffer under one cohesive vision.

Static isn't really niche. He was famous enough to gt his own TV show. Teen Titans is definitely not niche. Was a huge seller when Johns did his run and a pretty big seller when Mckeever did his. At m local Chapters it's the only comic they sell other than the Batmans and Suermans.

 

Of the writers, what say you of this?

 

 

 

"There were editorial decisions about the direction of the book that conflicted with the story I was hired to tell, and I felt that it was better to let DC tell their story the way they want. I’m grateful for the opportunity and I’ll miss working with the entire Green Lantern team.

"This was not an easy decision to make emotionally or financially, but, I’m sure it was the right decision for both me, and for the Green Lantern books. The outpouring of support, your kind words and well wishes means so much to me and my family."

 

 

Fialkov stopped short of explaining exactly what conflicts arose that led him to leave the books, but "high profile industry sources" told Bleeding Cool's Rich Johnston that he walked because DC asked him to kill off longtime Green Lantern John Stewart, something Fialkov never intended to do in the story he pitched to DC editors.

 

 

 

Fialkov's departure comes in the same week that writer Andy Diggle left his gig as the new writer of Action Comics, possibly for similar reasons. Their departures are the latest in a string of creator walk-offs at DC over the last year that already includes former iZombie and Superman writer Chris Roberson, former Batwoman and Wonder Woman writer Greg Rucka and former Savage Hawkman, Grifter and Deathstroke writer/artist Rob Liefeld.

[/quote]

 

Source: http://www.blastr.co...m-kill-redacted

Don't think all those high profile creators just "didn't want to take heat" for non existent failures, as all these comics were still making sales.

From Wikipedia:

 

 

The launch of the New 52 was met with criticism at the lack of female creators, which had dropped from 12% to 1%...

This led to a tense interaction between fans and DC Comics co-publisher Dan DiDio at the 2011 San Diego Comic Con,^[113][114] where DiDio was asked by a fan about the drop of female creators on DC titles from 12% to 1%. DiDio responded: "What do those numbers mean to you? What do they mean to you? Who should we be hiring? Tell me right now. Who should we be hiring right now? Tell me." 

DC has also received criticism for its handling of certain female characters during the relaunch, sparking discussion of exploitative overtones in titles such as Catwoman #1 and Red Hood and the Outlaws #1

 

Jim Shooter is a comic writer in case you don't know, so straight from someone in the industry:

 

Writer/editor Jim Shooter disliked the treatment of female characters in general, and referred to the treatment of Starfire in particular as "porn for kids"

Responding to the criticism, Catwoman writer Judd Winick explained that it was DC that desired this tone for that book.^[121]

 

A number of editorial controversies emerged in the wake of The New 52, prompting Topless Robot, a genre website owned by The Village Voice, to publish an article in September 2013, "The Eight Biggest DC Creative Screw-Ups Since the New 52 Began". A number of these controversies concerned firings or resignations of creators, which in some cases, stemmed from conflicts between those creators and editorial decisions.

I would hope you've heard of George Perez:

 

Writer/artist George Pérez, who left Superman after six issues, explained his departure in July 2012 as a result of the level of editorial oversight exerted on the title. This included the inconsistent reasons given for rewrites of his material, the inability of editors to answer basic questions about the new Superman's status quo, such as whether his adoptive parents were still alive, and the restrictions created by not being told that Action Comics, with which Superman had to remain consistent, was set five years before Superman.

 In the following month Rob Liefeld, who had been hired by DC to plot Grifter and The Savage Hawkman, and to plot and draw Deathstroke, and who had indicated the previous month that his run on those titles would last into 2013,^[124][125] announced that he was quitting DC Comics, with his last issues being the #0 issues to be published that September. Though he characterized his experience on The New 52 as an overall positive one, he did not disguise his animosity toward editor Brian Smith, with whom his clashes were among his reasons for leaving the company.^[126][127] Other reasons he cited were frequent rewrites of his material, and the overall corporate culture that was more prevalent now that both DC and Marvel were owned by large media conglomerates

 

In late November 2012, Rich Johnston of Bleeding Cool had noted the possibility of Gail Simone leaving Batgirl and possibly DC Comics as a whole.^[131] In December 2012, Gail Simone had revealed that she was no longer the writer of Batgirl,^[132] despite the title being a consistent top-seller, as well receiving favorable reviews.^[113] She had been informed by her new editor, Brian Cunningham, via e-mail of the creative change.^[133]Ray Fawkes would fill-in for two issues, Batgirl #17 and #18.^[134] Twelve days after being fired, however, Gail Simone had announced that she had been re-hired as the writer of Batgirl, and that she would return following Fawkes' issues.

 

In March 2013, both Andy Diggle and Joshua Hale Fialkov announced that they would be leaving their writing duties at DC Comics. Diggle had previously signed on as ongoing writer of Action Comics starting with issue #19, following Grant Morrison's run on the title. However, Diggle later announced that he would be leaving the title before the first issue had even been published, citing professional reasons

 

In September 2013, J. H. Williams III and W. Haden Blackman announced their intention to leave Batwoman with issue 26, citing last-minute editorial changes as the reason.^[138] Among these editorial decisions was a prohibition on having the title character marry her fiancée Maggie Sawyer.

 

So, I think it's pretty well documented that New 52 is incredibly controversial, and has been since day 1.

Also I think this begs the question: If this many people who are passionate enough about comics to actually want to create them, are dissatisfied with New 52, might there actually be something wrong with new 52?

[Socalmuscle]

[quote name="WydrA" post="285237" timestamp="1400132788"]Static isn't really niche. He was famous enough to gt his own TV show. Teen Titans is definitely not niche. Was a huge seller when Johns did his run and a pretty big seller when Mckeever did his. At m local Chapters it's the only comic they sell other than the Batmans and Suermans.
 
Of the writers, what say you of this?
 
 
 
 
Fialkov's departure comes in the same week that writer Andy Diggle left his gig as the new writer of Action Comics, possibly for similar reasons. Their departures are the latest in a string of creator walk-offs at DC over the last year that already includes former iZombie and Superman writer Chris Roberson, former Batwoman and Wonder Woman writer Greg Rucka and former Savage Hawkman, Grifter and Deathstroke writer/artist Rob Liefeld.
[/quote]
 
Source: http://www.blastr.co...m-kill-redacted
Don't think all those high profile creators just "didn't want to take heat" for non existent failures, as all these comics were still making sales.
From Wikipedia:
 
 
 
Jim Shooter is a comic writer in case you don't know, so straight from someone in the industry:
 

 

I would hope you've heard of George Perez:
 

 
So, I think it's pretty well documented that New 52 is incredibly controversial, and has been since day 1.
Also I think this begs the question: If this many people who are passionate enough about comics to actually want to create them, are dissatisfied with New 52, might there actually be something wrong with new 52?[/quote]

It was a huge sweeping change. Bound to irk people. Fans and creators alike.

But it's settling in. And Overrall was a good move. The original cd universe had become haphazard. So they needed to organize afresh and keep things relevent and logical.

To that end, they've done a great job.

Sour grapes from disgruntled employees is a common thing. Whether it's due to creative differences or anything else.

[Xiombarg]

Rob Liefeld.

Good.  Anyone is better off without Liefield, he is an awful artist and writer

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

 It was a huge sweeping change. Bound to irk people. Fans and creators alike.

But it's settling in. And Overrall was a good move. The original cd universe had become haphazard. So they needed to organize afresh and keep things relevent and logical.

To that end, they've done a great job.

Sour grapes from disgruntled employees is a common thing. Whether it's due to creative differences or anything else.

I don't think you really understand what's going on with creators here. We're talking about writers not being able to actually write stories, and basically just being script boys for the editors, to put out whatever drivel they want to see. Note not a single creator stated they had a problem with New 52, but all of them had problems with the way things were being handled post new 52. Something of this level is clearly much, much more than sour grapes. You also conveniently avoided the subject of sexualization of female character and the loss of the majority of their female creators. Something that once again even writers are admitting is a real problem.

And yes, I agree the universe needed organizing, I agree they've done a better job there, but it wasn't worth losing great stories, and that's what it's cost us. I prefer to read a great story that isn't actually canon, or is retracted from canon than a crappy shallow not-worth-my-time piece of crap that i can be certain will remain canon.

In other words, overall, not a good move, as we gained one positive for about 4 big negatives.

Good.  Anyone is better off without Liefield, he is an awful artist and writer

yeah that drawing is just... wooh.

[Socalmuscle]

I don't think you really understand what's going on with creators here. We're talking about writers not being able to actually write stories, and basically just being script boys for the editors, to put out whatever drivel they want to see. Note not a single creator stated they had a problem with New 52, but all of them had problems with the way things were being handled post new 52. Something of this level is clearly much, much more than sour grapes. You also conveniently avoided the subject of sexualization of female character and the loss of the majority of their female creators. Something that once again even writers are admitting is a real problem.
And yes, I agree the universe needed organizing, I agree they've done a better job there, but it wasn't worth losing great stories, and that's what it's cost us. I prefer to read a great story that isn't actually canon, or is retracted from canon than a crappy shallow not-worth-my-time piece of crap that i can be certain will remain canon.
In other words, overall, not a good move, as we gained one positive for about 4 big negatives.
yeah that drawing is just... wooh.

Actually, I think you don't understand corporate cohesion.

The cd universe was a mess requiring constant retcon and reboots. Half the time no one knew what was canon. In the new universe, non-canon is very clear. Such as the very cool injustice run.

The new 52 provides a relevent reset button with the wise addition of corporate oversight over all creative direction in order to make sure the universe plays nice together.

Writers can write stories within a sandbox. This sandbox provides limits so the writer doesn't think he's more important than the whole and do his own thing, breaking the cohesion that was started. These creatives are used to having more control. So they get bent. But not everyone.

That's all this.

It's a good concept and has been executed well n

But such a sweeping change and also change in stricter oversight will bring some fallout. No avoiding it.

Good. Anyone is better off without Liefield, he is an awful artist and writer

Good grief. Is that the red skull in caps uniform?

And is that some kind of cancer that's causing such uneven and horrid proportions on his torso?

Nightmarish. Lol

Edited by Socalmuscle, 14 May 2014 - 10:55 PM.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

Actually, I think you don't understand corporate cohesion.

The cd universe was a mess requiring constant retcon and reboots. Half the time no one knew what was canon.

The new 52 provides a relevent reset button with the wise addition of corporate oversight over all creative direction in order to make sure the universe plays nice together.

Writers can write stories within a sandbox. This sandbox provides limits so the writer doesn't think he's more important than the whole and do his own thing, breaking the cohesion that was started. These creatives are used to having more control. So they get bent. But not everyone.

That's all this.

It's a good concept and has been executed well n

But such a sweeping change and also change in stricter oversight will bring some fallout. No avoiding it.

Good grief. Is that the red skull in caps uniform?

And is that some kind of cancer that's causing such uneven and horrid proportions on his torso?

Nightmarish. Lol

Like i said, i'm very aware of the lack of canon pre reboot, and like i said, they've done a good job fixing that, but I don't see why dc couldn't just do things marvel style and have their level clarity while  NOT frinking every good story in the butt before they even see the light of day. And the fact editors are actually telling writers who they must kill shows that this is clearly more than just writers revolting against being watched over.

[Socalmuscle]

Like i said, i'm very aware of the lack of canon pre reboot, and like i said, they've done a good job fixing that, but I don't see why dc couldn't just do things marvel style and have their level clarity while  NOT frinking every good story in the butt before they even see the light of day. And the fact editors are actually telling writers who they must kill shows that this is clearly more than just writers revolting against being watched over.

Not everyone agrees on what makes a good story so I won't argue your point.

But editors are part of the process in making sure that the writers stick to the corporate vision. Including killing someone off. The writer is then tasked with making a good story within those parameters.

Same thing I said previous.

A writer may not like being told what the sandbox is, but he is an employee, not the boss.

If writers ran their own way, we would could easily be back into the mess, undoing the unification that the new 52 has brought in.

That's why creative direction comes down and passed onto the writers. Keeps everything on the same page. Loss of beloved character or not.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

Not everyone agrees on what makes a good story so I won't argue your point.

But editors are part of the process in making sure that the writers stick to the corporate vision. Including killing someone off. The writer is then tasked with making a good story within those parameters.

Same thing I said previous.

A writer may not like being told what the sandbox is, but he is an employee, not the boss.

If writers ran their own way, we would could easily be back into the mess, undoing the unification that the new 52 has brought in.

That's why creative direction comes down and passed onto the writers. Keeps everything on the same page. Loss of beloved character or not.

Not everyone agrees on what makes a good story, but if huge numbers of people say it's bad, it's probably bad. Especially if that includes people who tell stories for a living.

Also, no i really don't think that's how it works regularly, or things like this would have been a regular occurrence pre new 52. This editor controls all has clearly never been the norm. They are supposed to make sure the writer doesn't pull something that'll go and mess stuff up for everyone, yes, but saying "i don't like it, rewrite the whole bucking issue?" That is clearly NOT the editors job.

[Raiden]

One way to have a Batman with white eyes and reboot. Rated R Sin City styled film. Only so many times you can reboot Batman with realism

[Socalmuscle]

Not everyone agrees on what makes a good story, but if huge numbers of people say it's bad, it's probably bad. Especially if that includes people who tell stories for a living.
Also, no i really don't think that's how it works regularly, or things like this would have been a regular occurrence pre new 52. This editor controls all has clearly never been the norm. They are supposed to make sure the writer doesn't pull something that'll go and mess stuff up for everyone, yes, but saying "i don't like it, rewrite the whole bucking issue?" That is clearly NOT the editors job.

The vocal minority.

Those who are satisfied don't say anything. Because they're happy.

And the editors job is whatever the corporation says it is. An editor exists to wake sure everything is correct. The writers job is to write. within certain parameters.

That's all there is to it.

If DC wants to go a certain direction, the writers need to follow suit. Not do their own thing in terms of overarching direction.

Dc is a company. Marvel is a company. Disney is a company. There is an order to things. Otherwise, it's chaos and will fail.

New 52 corrected many outstanding problems while also providing fresh relevance. Some people won't like it and complain. That's a side effect of change.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

The vocal minority.

Those who are satisfied don't say anything. Because they're happy.

And the editors job is whatever the corporation says it is. An editor exists to wake sure everything is correct. The writers job is to write. within certain parameters.

That's all there is to it.

If DC wants to go a certain direction, the writers need to follow suit. Not do their own thing in terms of overarching direction.

Dc is a company. Marvel is a company. Disney is a company. There is an order to things. Otherwise, it's chaos and will fail.

New 52 corrected many outstanding problems while also providing fresh relevance. Some people won't like it and complain. That's a side effect of change.

First of all, considering abysmal sales and all the proof oId posted, it's incredibly foolish to try and call this a vocal minority. Also, once again, vocal minorities don't complain about things like this for two years.

Once again, this is clearly NOT what the editor's job is supposed to be, or there wouldn't be so many people with this much experience quitting and saying it is wrong. This also goes for what writers "should" be doing.

Writer's do NOT need to follow suit. They're writers not slaves, and that's why so many are quitting.

The order before the corporate attitude is currently taking was working quite well for DC, and fans and creators alike were clearly more happy with the arrangement.

Once again, this is clearly more than people just "not liking" it. Writer's don't quit a job two years after a change because they didn't like said change. That's not good.