The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[nietoperz]

I haven't actually paid the press release much attention other than to joke about it, but you don't see anything a little fishy in a corporate conglomerate like Warner Bros/DC using last year's socio-economic buzzwords like "occupy" and "1%, 99%", complete with wristbands and everything, to market $3-4 comic books? They occupy wall street already, as TWX on the NYSE!

In a way, though, that's just the reality of corporate advertising - if I allowed that to annoy me overmuch I would probably end up dropping every DC and Marvel book I currently pull. Both books' synopses and creative teams are interesting enough for me to want to give them a punt. It's nice that DC are trying something different for once, also.

[Victorian Squid]

In a way, though, that's just the reality of corporate advertising - if I allowed that to annoy me overmuch I would probably end up dropping every DC and Marvel book I currently pull. Both books' synopses and creative teams are interesting enough for me to want to give them a punt. It's nice that DC are trying something different for once, also.

Sure that's a reality, and I don't trust the messenger in this case. It's telling, though, that you say it's a reality of corporate advertising here. You see, to me, that's very close to the same point I was just making.

(But in my case, I've long since dropped all DC & Marvel books and have no interest in the creative teams. If I were going to buy anything from DC, I'd try Matt Kindt's and Ales Kot's books, mainly to see if either one can keep any remnant of their own unique styles or just both get ground beneath the wheel.)

I would argue, though, that DC has been trying many different things, to see what sticks. Most just haven't worked.

[nietoperz]

But at least they're trying. I mean, the majority of the DCnU has kind of fizzled, mainly because of inept editorial micro management, but by the same token the fact that they have been willing to take a punt on stuff like I, Vampire, Dial H and Animal Man can only be a good thing, even if they haven't set the sales charts on fire in all cases. I see this as more of that, which is great: lord knows the core super-hero titles that don't involve Batman are kind of pants just now.

[Victorian Squid]

But at least they're trying. I mean, the majority of the DCnU has kind of fizzled, mainly because of inept editorial micro management, but by the same token the fact that they have been willing to take a punt on stuff like I, Vampire, Dial H and Animal Man can only be a good thing, even if they haven't set the sales charts on fire in all cases. I see this as more of that, which is great: lord knows the core super-hero titles that don't involve Batman are kind of pants just now.

I wonder how free these new books will be of editorial micro-management? It doesn't show any sign of slowing down. What's been evident instead is that there is a seemingly never-ending list of writers and artists eager to replace the ones who flame out or fade away from it.

But they're both miniseries, I think, right? Maybe editorial won't have time to mess with them much.

[nietoperz]

They're ongoings, as far as I can tell. And editorial don't seem to mess with the fringe books (or those written by Scott Snyder) quite as much, so let's see.

[S.F. Jude Terror]

I haven't actually paid the press release much attention other than to joke about it, but you don't see anything a little fishy in a corporate conglomerate like Warner Bros/DC using last year's socio-economic buzzwords like "occupy" and "1%, 99%", complete with wristbands and everything, to market $3-4 comic books? They occupy wall street already, as TWX on the NYSE!

[alaska1125]

Sure that's a reality, and I don't trust the messenger in this case. It's telling, though, that you say it's a reality of corporate advertising here. You see, to me, that's very close to the same point I was just making.

(But in my case, I've long since dropped all DC & Marvel books and have no interest in the creative teams. If I were going to buy anything from DC, I'd try Matt Kindt's and Ales Kot's books, mainly to see if either one can keep any remnant of their own unique styles or just both get ground beneath the wheel.)

I would argue, though, that DC has been trying many different things, to see what sticks. Most just haven't worked.

And this perfectly encapsulates the problem. Yes, I applaud taking a leap with titles like I, Vampire and Frankenstein. The problem is that since they aren't looking at critical success, but simply the bottom line, it makes it increasingly difficult to invest funds and devotion to any new title. It's made even more difficult with DC's current scattershot business model. Reboot? Fine. But stick with some consistency for the love of God. Man, what a waste of perfectly good characters and concepts. Yeah, I'm a little pissed...

[GLX]

I haven't actually paid the press release much attention other than to joke about it, but you don't see anything a little fishy in a corporate conglomerate like Warner Bros/DC using last year's socio-economic buzzwords like "occupy" and "1%, 99%", complete with wristbands and everything, to market $3-4 comic books? They occupy wall street already, as TWX on the NYSE!

Yep.

[S.F. Jude Terror]

Didn't they try to latch onto that theme last year with Superman assaulting bankers or something?

[Arion]

And this perfectly encapsulates the problem. Yes, I applaud taking a leap with titles like I, Vampire and Frankenstein. The problem is that since they aren't looking at critical success, but simply the bottom line, it makes it increasingly difficult to invest funds and devotion to any new title. It's made even more difficult with DC's current scattershot business model. Reboot? Fine. But stick with some consistency for the love of God. Man, what a waste of perfectly good characters and concepts. Yeah, I'm a little pissed...

I know what you mean.

[Juan Cena]

Didn't they try to latch onto that theme last year with Superman assaulting bankers or something?

Morrison's Superman was kind of hyped like that originally. But he really didn't go anywhere with it.

[UnionJack]

And this perfectly encapsulates the problem. Yes, I applaud taking a leap with titles like I, Vampire and Frankenstein. The problem is that since they aren't looking at critical success, but simply the bottom line, it makes it increasingly difficult to invest funds and devotion to any new title. It's made even more difficult with DC's current scattershot business model. Reboot? Fine. But stick with some consistency for the love of God. Man, what a waste of perfectly good characters and concepts. Yeah, I'm a little pissed...

Exactly as I feel. I'm beginning to think there's no point in buying titles based on more marginal (but usually better) characters as they won't last. This then perpetuates the situation where we're stuck with a choice of reading Batman, Justice League, Avengers, X-Men & Wolverine. At least if you want to read Marvel or DC. There are lots of great, or potentially great characters if given a good creative team, who just don't get a chance. The publishers & the comic buying public are both complicit in this predicament. Fans would rather read five Batman comics a month than try out something like OMAC, Frankenstein or SoS & DC are willing to give them 5 helpings of Batman. So frustrating.

[Arion]

Didn't they try to latch onto that theme last year with Superman assaulting bankers or something?

Superman and Batman should assault South-American bankers. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

[IvCNuB4]

Morrison's Superman was kind of hyped like that originally. But he really didn't go anywhere with it.

Could that be in Reboot Action Comics #1 when young Superman holds that rich corrupt guy over his head and pretends that he's going to toss the guy over the balcony ?

In that link they explain Superman going after corrupt bankers was a reference to the 1930s Superman who actually did that.

[Victorian Squid]

Yeah! My kind of Superman would toss BlueMole off of a skyscraper!