• 52 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

The Self-Destruction of the New 52 Part 1

Source

Almost two years ago DC announced that in the wake of its most recent comic book event that the DC Universe was going to be relaunched with a new initiative called The New 52. All of the previous DC books would end and 52 new #1s would take their place.

I still remember that time very vividly. In forums and comic news sites, the speculation about what would happen was very high but DC reassured everyone and I quote “this is a relaunch, not a reboot

Of course anyone who has been paying attention in the past two years now know that that quote is an utter lie and the DCU was indeed rebooted. However it was not a complete reboot and the objective of the reboot was to attract new readers to expand the horizons of who shall be reading comics and reach a wider demographic. The reboot would gain the interest of new readers because of the new digital market (typo) and their would be an impulse on the diversity of titles that would be added to the New 52.

Personally, I was really optimistic about this event because at the time I believed the books that were already working DC on both ambits of quality and sales were going to be left untouched. Those titles were Green Lantern and Batman. While Titles that did not work during the pre-New 52 like Teen Titans, Superman, and Justice League would be reworked and have a chance to become better.

Little did I know that the price for such opportunities was going to be high and was never going to pay off.

I read almost every single comic from the New 52 and for each of those comics I read I gave them a fair chance. Even comics like Mr Terrific by Eric Wallace, Deathstroke by Kyle Higgins, Hawk and Dove by Liefeld and Gates and more. Comics which will probably disappear from everybody’s memories in just a couple of years if they haven’t already. I gave all of these comics the same opportunities and I saw very little to be amazed.

I’m not going to complain about just a couple of bad books or even the initiative itself. The idea of the New 52 is about starting fresh, revitalize old concepts, reviving old characters and old possibilities but the reality is chances are only as good as how they are taken. Almost two years after the fact I can honestly say that the New 52 has been a Complete Failure.

Since DC implemented their new policies for digital comics their sales are still far from comparing with the direct market.

New characters and new comics that were suppose to push diversity in this new universe are now either gone for good, cancelled or just simply changed to something missing the original point of the comic.

The new focus of the New 52 is to play things as safe as possible with little to no regard on quality. As long as the sales are doing well there are no other concerns.

The Failures

We don’t need to look far to find the failures of the New 52.

You just need to look at every single comic that has been cancelled to realize why these titles were cancelled. Then you will understand the problem of the New 52 as a whole.

Static Shock, Mister Terrific, Hawk and Dove, Men of War, Blackhawks, O.M.A.C., Captain Atom, Resurrection Man, Voodoo, Justice League International,Grifter, Frankenstein Agent of S.H.A.D.E, Legion Lost,Blue Beetle, Fury of the Firestorm, Savage Hawkman, Ravagers, Deathstroke, Sword of Sorcery, DCU:Presents, Team 7 and I, Vampire

22 Cancellations

22 Failures

Just think about it for a second. If a book was cancelled because of its quality then is obvious that there was a problem with the book, either with the characters, or the writers, or the editors, etc. There had to be something wrong with the title.

However there is more to this. What if a book was cancelled and it was actually good?

Then you have to wonder, why did DC allow it to be cancelled? Why wasn’t it promoted better? Why didn’t it get the impulse that it deserved?

An example is I, Vampire, a fantastic horror comic. It was amazingly drawn, well written, had huge critical success, nominations to a couple of awards as well as being one of the highest selling graphic novels on NYT and yet it was recently cancelled with issue 19 because of very low sales on the direct market.

Those who aren’t familiar with I, Vampire should know that is a really surprising book because it doesn’t maintain an stable status quo for more than 7 issues. There is a reason for this, Joshua Hale Fialkov speeded up his own storylines to get them done as soon as possible.

By issue 6 the story had taken a twist that was meant to happen until the 2nd year of the book, by issue 12 it was getting into plots that were meant for the 3rd year. When this book ends it will have an ending that Fialkov envisioned but sadly it will not have the time and respect that it deserves.

The whole concept created by these three “seasons” are very limited. They had to be rushed because if they hadn’t, it would have never seen an end. The editor, Chris Conroy, knew that they would never see a second year of publication.

This is an example of one of the failures of trying to diversify genres, which was one of the main objectives of the New 52. Even with quality and a good reputation it is not enough to ignore the book is doomed for cancellation.

To Be Continued…

PLEASE CHECK COMICFRONTLINE FOR MORE UPDATES

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Added Part 4

#2 Posted by BlueLantern1995 (2448 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel Now vs New52...Marvel Now wins hands down. New52 is dropping dead in the water.

#3 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio
#4 Posted by colonyofcells (2038 posts) - - Show Bio

New 52 does seem a failure since there are no new bestsellers except for Justice League. Maybe another universe reboot is needed and this time, maybe just drop the obsolete paper and go digital only. Can still print some paper books later on that can be sold on amazon or other places. Dc just maybe needs to learn from other people on the internet launching experimental titles to find a broader customer base and not just geeks.

#5 Posted by Xanni15 (6758 posts) - - Show Bio

Nice!

#6 Edited by Reignmaker (2234 posts) - - Show Bio

I think this guy summed it up pretty well: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/04/13/comics-realism-the-content-win-but-brand-fail-of-dcs-new-52/

The New 52 hasn't faltered because of its content, it has faltered because of its marketing. Sadly, quality and variety has little to do with whether a comic book sells. Marvel learned by watching DC take the first step, and you'll notice what feels like 80% of Marvel's offerings are now centered around their X-Men or Avengers brands. And regardless of whether the content inside the book truly feels like an X-Men or Avengers book, the book sells because of the name on the cover. Don't believe me? How do you explain crap like Red Lanterns still being on the shelves when books like I Vampire up and died? Powerful brands beat quality, and the sales numbers consistently show this.

Judging on the new titles coming out for DC, they're starting to catch on. If they want to promote diversity, they're going to have to do it under the guise of another Justice League title. Which is actually why I think Marvel has an edge here. Marvel specializes in lots of different teams. When you have a team book, there's opportunities to experiment and introduce new faces with varying tones. DC is forced to consistently fall back on the 'ol Superman/Batman thing, where we're experiencing the same single characters over and over again.

#7 Posted by colonyofcells (2038 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel seems to be now specializing in avengers zombies and x-men zombies, and my guess is, dc can do better than that with a new management. Right now, dc is quite similar to Marvel since dc is just serving batman zombies, lantern zombies and Justice league zombies.

#8 Edited by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah man I was on board with the reboot at first, but now I question how much of it was worth it. Things felt promising at first, and now I can't help but feel disillusioned. I'm going to quickly run through each line.

Batman absolutely lost in the reboot. T timeline they established makes zero sense, having four Robins in 5 years. Zero Month did nothing to rectify this. Dick Grayson lost all the history that made him so unique. He was a Robin intern for a year now, and his history with the Titans is gone. Tim Drake wasn't but was Robin? Both characters are a shell of their former selves. Red Hood and Outlaws is good, but they didn't reboot Jason, not really. The only benefit was Roy Harper, we can now put Cry for Justice and Rise of Arsenal behind us. So all of this history is gone, and Morrison's "everything counts" was nullified. So this one was a big minus. Like you already said, Batwoman basically had zero effect from the reboot.

Superman I feel the opposite. This line benefitted for the most part, despite the recent editorial hang-ups. New Krypton established that Luthor wiped out a 100,000 Kryptonians, and that just doesn't sit well with me. There's no way I can imagine him still operating as a super-villain comfortably when Superman knows he has that on his hands. Glad that's out. Plus, Secret Origin was a lame, nostalgic origin story, especially compared to Morrison's opening Action arc. Then move on to Supergirl and Superboy: Supergirl benefits from the reboot. It's a much better story than what Loeb and Turner did, and it's by far the most compelling take on her. Superboy is a mixed bag. Lobdell's initial issues were really cool take on Superboy, but now his new origin story is unnecessarily convoluted and a callback to 90s Marvel. So besides this one issue of Superboy, overall there's a benefit.

The Justice League line I'll break into bullets:

  • The flagship book didn't need a reboot. In fact Johns and Lee had planned it before all that. Ditto Aquaman, whose story continues right off Brightest Day.
  • The Flash is good now, but didn't need a reboot. If anything I prefer Barry and Iris married, and Wally...existing.
  • Firestorm, Green Arrow, and Hawkman all undoubtedly lost to the reboot. Don't think I need to say more.
  • Earth-2 is good, but inferior to the old JSA. World's Finest is a waste, and we lost Helena Bertinelli. I guess Power Girl's origin is much simpler though? I know people like pre-FP Power Girl, but to be honest, she didn't just come from Earth-2, she came from Earth-Two of the old, destroyed Multiverse. I think it's simpler now, writing problems aside.
  • JLI lost, no doubt. They could have spun out of the brilliant Generation Lost.
    • Krul's Captain Atom was pretty good, but again no reboot necessary.
  • Justice League of America is tricker. Steve Trevor benefits, but no reason they couldn't have used Tom Tresser or introduce Steve Trevor's nephew or something.
    • Martian Manhunter is definitely a cooler character now. I'm not completely sure if the reboot was needed or not though. Maybe it was, but I don't know.
    • Don't think Katanna and Vibe needed the reboot to be introduced.
#9 Edited by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio

To continue from the last post...

Green Lantern definitely did not need a reboot, and wasn't really rebooted, though some stories happened different and in a shorter span. But you get the idea.

Young Justice: ...Yeah I think this line speaks for itself right now. Utter failure.

So that brings us to the Dark line. Of these, I think all of them could have worked in the old continuity. Constantine and Swamp Thing in particular were already introduced in Brightest Day. Maybe Demon Knights you could make a case needed the reboot. In the old continuity it would have had to be set before Ystin goes to the present in Seven Soldiers.

And finally the Edge line. The non-Wildstorm stuff could have been done without the reboot, and the Wildstorm books have been big failures anyhow.

Okay I got lazier towards the end, but I really wanted to go through and see if rebooting was really worth it. I think not in the long run. I don't have a problem with the fact that they did it, but I think it could have been done better. Look how much Young Justice introduced in what was a brand new DCU? Methinks the baby was thrown with the bathwater.

#10 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (11147 posts) - - Show Bio

I miss Pre-N52 DCU so much but I have to admit, DC was slowly killing it. They needed the N52 reboot really badly but it would have been so much better if they did it like Marvel. Clean slate but nothing was erased.

#11 Edited by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio

I miss Pre-N52 DCU so much but I have to admit, DC was slowly killing it. They needed the N52 reboot really badly but it would have been so much better if they did it like Marvel. Clean slate but nothing was erased.

Maybe some things needed to be erased though? Like New Krypton and Cry for Justice? I'm really conflicted. I like how Marvel did their relaunch and keeping everything.

#12 Posted by ArturoCalaKayVee (11147 posts) - - Show Bio

@mr_holmes: I didn't mind New Krypton nearly as much as I minded Cry for Justice. CFJ is one of the examples I was thinking of when I said "DC was slowly killing their Universe." They just did some things they could never have recovered from, such as that. I'd go as far to say that the Titans becoming the new JLA was something DC wouldn't have been able to recover from if they hadn't decided to reboot. N52 could have been a blessing in disguise but they're going about it horribly.

#13 Edited by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio

@arturocalakayvee: Yeah I agree with that last sentence. To be clear, my problem with New Krypton was just more how it was resolved. I rather that whole thing just not happen.

#14 Posted by ccraft (5078 posts) - - Show Bio

Another I hate DC new 52? Jeez...

#15 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

New 52 does seem a failure since there are no new bestsellers except for Justice League. Maybe another universe reboot is needed and this time, maybe just drop the obsolete paper and go digital only. Can still print some paper books later on that can be sold on amazon or other places. Dc just maybe needs to learn from other people on the internet launching experimental titles to find a broader customer base and not just geeks.

I was going to mention that on part 2, practically Justice League is the only franchise which has somehow benefited from a reboot, but again, was it necessary to reboot everything else to make it work and it wasnt necessary to create the 5 years old timeline, which once again only benefits the Justice League and no one else.

as for the digital market, that was yet another thing that DC tried to pull but it just hasnt work out well yet

I think this guy summed it up pretty well: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/04/13/comics-realism-the-content-win-but-brand-fail-of-dcs-new-52/

The New 52 hasn't faltered because of its content, it has faltered because of its marketing. Sadly, quality and variety has little to do with whether a comic book sells. Marvel learned by watching DC take the first step, and you'll notice what feels like 80% of Marvel's offerings are now centered around their X-Men or Avengers brands. And regardless of whether the content inside the book truly feels like an X-Men or Avengers book, the book sells because of the name on the cover. Don't believe me? How do you explain crap like Red Lanterns still being on the shelves when books like I Vampire up and died? Powerful brands beat quality, and the sales numbers consistently show this.

Judging on the new titles coming out for DC, they're starting to catch on. If they want to promote diversity, they're going to have to do it under the guise of another Justice League title. Which is actually why I think Marvel has an edge here. Marvel specializes in lots of different teams. When you have a team book, there's opportunities to experiment and introduce new faces with varying tones. DC is forced to consistently fall back on the 'ol Superman/Batman thing, where we're experiencing the same single characters over and over again.

the problem is that DC is just rewarding branding over quality, it wouldnt be that big of an issue if it was more lenient to some titles because they please a minor fanbase.the climate is such at DC that if a title like Sandman or Starman had been produced during the New 52 it would had already been cancelled.

And sadly, that is pretty much what happen with I, Vampire.

Marvel seems to be now specializing in avengers zombies and x-men zombies, and my guess is, dc can do better than that with a new management. Right now, dc is quite similar to Marvel since dc is just serving batman zombies, lantern zombies and Justice league zombies.

Nevertheless Marvel lets titles like Hawkeye and Daredevil flourish as they turn to be both critical successes regardless of their sales.

DC preffers to have a title that sells 90000 and is a piece of crap rather than one that sells 20000 and wins an Eisner

Yeah man I was on board with the reboot at first, but now I question how much of it was worth it. Things felt promising at first, and now I can't help but feel disillusioned. I'm going to quickly run through each line.

Batman absolutely lost in the reboot. T timeline they established makes zero sense, having four Robins in 5 years. Zero Month did nothing to rectify this. Dick Grayson lost all the history that made him so unique. He was a Robin intern for a year now, and his history with the Titans is gone. Tim Drake wasn't but was Robin? Both characters are a shell of their former selves. Red Hood and Outlaws is good, but they didn't reboot Jason, not really. The only benefit was Roy Harper, we can now put Cry for Justice and Rise of Arsenal behind us. So all of this history is gone, and Morrison's "everything counts" was nullified. So this one was a big minus. Like you already said, Batwoman basically had zero effect from the reboot.

Superman I feel the opposite. This line benefitted for the most part, despite the recent editorial hang-ups. New Krypton established that Luthor wiped out a 100,000 Kryptonians, and that just doesn't sit well with me. There's no way I can imagine him still operating as a super-villain comfortably when Superman knows he has that on his hands. Glad that's out. Plus, Secret Origin was a lame, nostalgic origin story, especially compared to Morrison's opening Action arc. Then move on to Supergirl and Superboy: Supergirl benefits from the reboot. It's a much better story than what Loeb and Turner did, and it's by far the most compelling take on her. Superboy is a mixed bag. Lobdell's initial issues were really cool take on Superboy, but now his new origin story is unnecessarily convoluted and a callback to 90s Marvel. So besides this one issue of Superboy, overall there's a benefit.

The Justice League line I'll break into bullets:

  • The flagship book didn't need a reboot. In fact Johns and Lee had planned it before all that. Ditto Aquaman, whose story continues right off Brightest Day.
  • The Flash is good now, but didn't need a reboot. If anything I prefer Barry and Iris married, and Wally...existing.
  • Firestorm, Green Arrow, and Hawkman all undoubtedly lost to the reboot. Don't think I need to say more.
  • Earth-2 is good, but inferior to the old JSA. World's Finest is a waste, and we lost Helena Bertinelli. I guess Power Girl's origin is much simpler though? I know people like pre-FP Power Girl, but to be honest, she didn't just come from Earth-2, she came from Earth-Two of the old, destroyed Multiverse. I think it's simpler now, writing problems aside.
  • JLI lost, no doubt. They could have spun out of the brilliant Generation Lost.
    • Krul's Captain Atom was pretty good, but again no reboot necessary.
  • Justice League of America is tricker. Steve Trevor benefits, but no reason they couldn't have used Tom Tresser or introduce Steve Trevor's nephew or something.
    • Martian Manhunter is definitely a cooler character now. I'm not completely sure if the reboot was needed or not though. Maybe it was, but I don't know.
    • Don't think Katanna and Vibe needed the reboot to be introduced.

Superman was a disaster before the New 52, the new 52 didnt really fixed it, but it didnt make it worst and erased some of the damage.

I agree the Superboy reboot was fresh, original and actually good. I was really invested in this new Superboy and his relation with Ravager and Red and then it all just went to crap when the book introduced Harvest. The origin is an absolute mess, we are talking Cable and Strife levels of badness here.

Now Aquaman didnt needed a reboot but it didnt harm it much, other than the lost of Aqualad and Aquagirl most of the changes have been benign but it is also because Johns fill it with new elements that just made it more interesting.

Flash is kind of the same case of JSA/Earth2, both might be good bt for completely different reasons.

agree on Firestorm and the others, such a gigantic trainwreck

Worlds Finest is a piece of crap and I can think of 3 or more ways to make Powergirl's origin simpler without making her a walking sexpun. Huntress is just boring.

My avatar is Maxwell Lord for a reason, what a huge waste was JLI in comparison with Jl:GL

Captain Atom, I think Krul is one of the worst writers that DC got in the new 52 and the little i read about CA was pretty bad, Krul was writing a Doctor Manhattan story and he is just nothing compared to Moore. though im not sure if i should blame him or if that was the editor's idea.

New Katana is really cool, and the same can be said about Vibe

To continue from the last post...

Green Lantern definitely did not need a reboot, and wasn't really rebooted, though some stories happened different and in a shorter span. But you get the idea.

Young Justice: ...Yeah I think this line speaks for itself right now. Utter failure.

So that brings us to the Dark line. Of these, I think all of them could have worked in the old continuity. Constantine and Swamp Thing in particular were already introduced in Brightest Day. Maybe Demon Knights you could make a case needed the reboot. In the old continuity it would have had to be set before Ystin goes to the present in Seven Soldiers.

And finally the Edge line. The non-Wildstorm stuff could have been done without the reboot, and the Wildstorm books have been big failures anyhow.

Okay I got lazier towards the end, but I really wanted to go through and see if rebooting was really worth it. I think not in the long run. I don't have a problem with the fact that they did it, but I think it could have been done better. Look how much Young Justice introduced in what was a brand new DCU? Methinks the baby was thrown with the bathwater.

GL is like 90% the same thing

Young Justice line was an utter failure

Dark line, I agree on al

Edge, the only book that i can think as non-wildstorm that got rebooted was Omac, All-Star Western is pretty much a continuation of Jonah Hex and the continuity is still the same, again on of the few ones that didnt needed it and didnt got it. Wildstorm was an utter failure.

I miss Pre-N52 DCU so much but I have to admit, DC was slowly killing it. They needed the N52 reboot really badly but it would have been so much better if they did it like Marvel. Clean slate but nothing was erased.

I dont question that DC needed to do something drastic and certain things of the New 52 were not only necessary but indispensable, however looking back, it just could had been done much much better and for every necessary action on it there were 3 or 4 that just werent necessary.

bottomline is this, the new 52 was suppose to be the solution for a lot of problems, it not only failed to solve most of those issues but created a lot of new ones

@ccraft said:

Another I hate DC new 52? Jeez...

Try to think why there are so many of these first

#16 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio
#17 Posted by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio
#18 Posted by BlueLantern1995 (2448 posts) - - Show Bio

As I said things are messed up. Why do a reboot when a relaunch will suffice? Sometimes being confrontational can be good but most of the time, it just ends up hurting you both as is the case with the reboot called the New 52.

#19 Edited by dum529001 (1624 posts) - - Show Bio

The New 52 needs a new 52!

Reboot this failed reboot.

#20 Edited by OldManRaffles (28 posts) - - Show Bio

Series' fail because not enough people buy them. Marvel relies on their two main brands whilst DC brings out a variety of different books. The only reason Marvel produce good figures is because they play it safe. They use their two main brands Avengers and Xmen and force consecutive crossovers on the consumer. At least DC try different things. The majority of people don't like change, but to change is to survive. The New 52 has brought in many new readers and I for one think this is a great thing. As time goes on old favourite characters will be re-introduced, as well as many new ones. It seems everyone wants everything now. If everything people loved about the old DC was delivered immediately there would be nothing to look forward to.

#21 Posted by TheManInTheShoe (3876 posts) - - Show Bio

It's not that bad, some titles are worth reading, The Flash, Batman, Justice League, Detective Comics etc

#22 Edited by Cezar_TheScribe (2614 posts) - - Show Bio

Dan Didio doesn't know what he's talking about. He needs to find a new job.

People aren't "secretly" leaving superhero comics. Why do they have the name illegally trademarked? Superhero Lawsuit

Pushing diversity is wrong. Don't push liberal beliefs on me.

#23 Posted by theTimeStreamer (2841 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccraft said:

Another I hate DC new 52? Jeez...

if the shoe fits.....

#24 Posted by The Stegman (23212 posts) - - Show Bio

I think this guy summed it up pretty well: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/04/13/comics-realism-the-content-win-but-brand-fail-of-dcs-new-52/

The New 52 hasn't faltered because of its content, it has faltered because of its marketing. Sadly, quality and variety has little to do with whether a comic book sells. Marvel learned by watching DC take the first step, and you'll notice what feels like 80% of Marvel's offerings are now centered around their X-Men or Avengers brands. And regardless of whether the content inside the book truly feels like an X-Men or Avengers book, the book sells because of the name on the cover. Don't believe me? How do you explain crap like Red Lanterns still being on the shelves when books like I Vampire up and died? Powerful brands beat quality, and the sales numbers consistently show this.

Judging on the new titles coming out for DC, they're starting to catch on. If they want to promote diversity, they're going to have to do it under the guise of another Justice League title. Which is actually why I think Marvel has an edge here. Marvel specializes in lots of different teams. When you have a team book, there's opportunities to experiment and introduce new faces with varying tones. DC is forced to consistently fall back on the 'ol Superman/Batman thing, where we're experiencing the same single characters over and over again.

As much as I hate it, I agree with this. Names sale, you can have a fantastic book like I Vampire, but as long as it doesn't have a "Super" "Bat" or "Justice League" stapled across it, people will ignore it, sales will continue to drop, and the company will have no choice but to scrap it. It's sad, but that's how it works.

Online
#25 Posted by Stormbox (2001 posts) - - Show Bio

@arnoldoaad said:

@ccraft said:

Another I hate DC new 52? Jeez...

Try to think why there are so many of these first

Agreed

#26 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

Series' fail because not enough people buy them. Marvel relies on their two main brands whilst DC brings out a variety of different books. The only reason Marvel produce good figures is because they play it safe. They use their two main brands Avengers and Xmen and force consecutive crossovers on the consumer. At least DC try different things. The majority of people don't like change, but to change is to survive. The New 52 has brought in many new readers and I for one think this is a great thing. As time goes on old favourite characters will be re-introduced, as well as many new ones. It seems everyone wants everything now. If everything people loved about the old DC was delivered immediately there would be nothing to look forward to.

When I talk about the Failure of all those titles that didnt sell well I was not just talking about the title itself, but also the character.

It is easy to produce a book about X character and then make another one if that series fails but this are not the same cases, what is happening here, the characters get completely rebooted and redesign.

It is not that easy to make to recreations stick and because that is the hand that DC is dealing we are one way or another stuck with them or they get rebooted again and lost complete credibility.

Look for example Wildstorm, every single Wildstorm property failed, ALL OF THEM, this is not a group of titles that was just selling low, its a complete and utter failure from the initiative itself to add the WS properties on DC, and then we get Stormwatch that despite having been rebooted 1 year and a half ago, It was rebooted again.Why the hell should we feel invested if they will get rebooted again and again.

My point is this, what you say is right, eventually favorite character will reappear, but They wont be the same characters.

Do you think the fans of Hellblazer looked forward to Constantine as he is now in the New 52?

and finally you can disagree with me on the content of the new 52 and I can accept that, but please look at the practices and gimmicks they pool and the massive exodus of talent that they are having because of that.

It's not that bad, some titles are worth reading, The Flash, Batman, Justice League, Detective Comics etc

Please Read part 2 for that.

Dan Didio doesn't know what he's talking about. He needs to find a new job.

People aren't "secretly" leaving superhero comics. Why do they have the name illegally trademarked? Superhero Lawsuit

Pushing diversity is wrong. Don't push liberal beliefs on me.

Didio is not as bad as some people think he is

The real problem is Harras

#27 Edited by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio
#28 Posted by colonyofcells (2038 posts) - - Show Bio

Before New 52, dc was already doing reboots/retcons almost every month. After New 52, I was just expecting dc to continue business as usual with more reboots/retcons almost every month. The stories are more important than consistency or continuity. Last minute changes are also acceptable if the product improves. My work is computer related where last minute changes are quite normal and we are all told to embrace change.

#29 Edited by Veshark (9058 posts) - - Show Bio

All critical acclaim and business decisions aside...has the New 52 actually brought in new readers?

I'm genuinely curious. I've noticed some posters saying that the New 52 was their introduction into superhero comics. But I wonder how many of them are actually staying for the long run?

#30 Posted by GundamHeavyarms (701 posts) - - Show Bio

While I do think that the new 52 has failed marketing wise, they did try playing around with different genres. I know that advertising on television is expensive, but they could have done a better viral campaign, those little youtube videos weren't enough. Marvel now is successful because most of the books are avengers and x men. I like hickman's avengers, and Im also interested in brian wood's x men, but the $3.99 price tags and double shipping is going to hurt more than help.

#31 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

@veshark said:

All critical acclaim and business decisions aside...has the New 52 actually brought in new readers?

I'm genuinely curious. I've noticed some posters saying that the New 52 was their introduction into superhero comics. But I wonder how many of them are actually staying for the long run?

I heard about a survey that was made which result on 17%(i think i remember this correctly) of new readers

Before New 52, dc was already doing reboots/retcons almost every month. After New 52, I was just expecting dc to continue business as usual with more reboots/retcons almost every month. The stories are more important than consistency or continuity. Last minute changes are also acceptable if the product improves. My work is computer related where last minute changes are quite normal and we are all told to embrace change.

this is not the same kind of work. I think this constant last minute changes just show a complete lack of direction and a lack of a long term plan when it comes to telling a story for all these characters.The end result is completely pointless if people are going to be less interested if they know that the story will be scrapped out.

#32 Posted by WaveMotionCannon (5195 posts) - - Show Bio

@cezar_thescribe: #22 Edited by Cezar_TheScribe (1878 posts) - 9 days, 22 hours ago - Show Bio

Dan Didio doesn't know what he's talking about. He needs to find a new job.

People aren't "secretly" leaving superhero comics. Why do they have the name illegally trademarked? Superhero Lawsuit

Pushing diversity is wrong. Don't push liberal beliefs on me.

So if its All White it's All Right huh??

#33 Posted by FlashKnight (448 posts) - - Show Bio

Is it a crime to really like the New 52? Smh, all I see are people complaining about it. I love it.

#34 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

Is it a crime to really like the New 52? Smh, all I see are people complaining about it. I love it.

what do you like about it exactly?

#35 Posted by Mr_Holmes (49 posts) - - Show Bio

Hopefully the losing marketshare will force DC to change this crap.

#36 Posted by FlashKnight (448 posts) - - Show Bio

@flashknight said:

Is it a crime to really like the New 52? Smh, all I see are people complaining about it. I love it.

what do you like about it exactly?

Mostly how it made it easier for new readers, like I was a year ago, to find an easy place to start. As for the stories, I love the Batman, Superman, Green Lantern, Flash, Justice League, and Stormwatch series.

#37 Posted by Nerx (15088 posts) - - Show Bio

If it ain't broke

break it first

fix it later

#38 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

@flashknight: see on one hand they did provide an easy place to start but they didnt need to reboot the entire universe to do that, Green Lantern and Batman which you are mentioning here had practically nothing like that.

and good that you are enjoying Stormwatch because it got rebooted yet again 2 months ago

#40 Posted by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

Boohoo my favorite books that suck ass are being canceled left and right, whatever will I do?

Trash books get canceled, good books stay until their done.

Grow up and get over it, bunch of whiners.

if it was as simple as that then why is Catwoman and Batgirl still going on?

those are the trashiest of the trash

#41 Posted by FlashKnight (448 posts) - - Show Bio

@flashknight: see on one hand they did provide an easy place to start but they didnt need to reboot the entire universe to do that, Green Lantern and Batman which you are mentioning here had practically nothing like that.

and good that you are enjoying Stormwatch because it got rebooted yet again 2 months ago

They rebooted Stormwatch? Lol well that made my day a bit less fun. Then again, I was only reading it for Martian Manhunter anyway (he is my favorite comic character). But ya the entire reboot was unnecessary. If they wanted to reboot they either should have done it sooner, or not done one at all in my opinion.

#42 Edited by KlytemnestraHippocrata (5 posts) - - Show Bio

My article or response is mainly about Wonder Woman in the New 52.

I do not like anything that has been done to Wonder Woman in the New 52. I think the writer is lousy and I prefer the work Gail Simone was doing. The new story does not have any love or romance in it. It is just find a new way to kill a demon. The writer has not taken any time to learn about the underlying Greek mythology and constantly puts the Roman versions of the Gods in place of the Greek gods. The origin story is awful. Queen Hippolyta would never sleep with Zeus. The writer seems to have lost sight of the fact that Hippolyta is Ares daughter. And if anything, Diana's father would be Heracles.

Persephone loves Hades. She would never be trapped in Tartarus with Hades. In the story of Hades and Persephone, Hades initially kidnaps Persephone, but she willingly stays with Hades out of love. When she spends the 3 months in the underworld with Hades that is why there is a winter.

Also, Greek gods have a dual nature. No one in a Greek story is entirely dark or light. Even Diana is not entirely light and dark in her stories because that is a hallmark of Greek plays. The new writer should not be anywhere near Wonder Woman comics. I feel the new writer and the staff at DC Comics have "Beiber-fied" Wonder Woman comics. It is painful to watch as a fan. I want to renew my subscription to Wonder Woman, but I do not want DC Comics to think I like the New 52. I hate the new 52.

I do not like that the artist got rid of the Eagle on Diana's uniform and replaced it with a star. Someone needs to sit down and explain to the guy that the eagle is the sign of Zeus. All the parts of Diana's uniform are motifs from classical Greek literature. The writer and artist seem to have lost sight that Diana is 2,800 years old and the other Amazons are 3,500 years old. They are all immortal.

I think that William Moulton Marsten and Elisabeth Marsten would be sad to see what they had done to the character. Marsten was a scholar and an educated man. The character Diana is suppose to be about love and the pursuit of feminine concepts and balance. In Paganism, masculine is direct energy and feminine is indirect energy.

Diana is a Libra. And she is a champion of justice. Justice seeks to have balance in life. The character they are portraying here has none of those qualities. Diana seeks to bring love into the world. I wish the writers would sit down and make some attempt to write a real story with drama that involves comedy and tragedy for the characters.

I wish the New 52 creators had took their ideas and made them with new characters and not hijacked Wonder Woman, Batman, and Superman. I hope Man of Steel is not based on the New 52 Superman. I do not wish bad health onto anyone, but I wish the writer and artist for the new Wonder Woman, Batman, and Superman would just go get a job for another title. The New 52 is a disaster for me to witness.

Max Gaines would have fired these people a long time ago. I feel that what is being done to these titles should be a crime, but mainly with Wonder Woman. I feel like a bunch of "bozos" have hijacked my comic book heroine and have ruined a National Treasure. Wonder Woman is the reason Max Gaines changed the name of All American Publications to DC Comics. I see what is being done to Wonder Woman as nothing more than vandalism.

Thank you.

#43 Posted by KlytemnestraHippocrata (5 posts) - - Show Bio

Continue...

I think what is being done to Wonder Woman should be a crime. The writer and artist should be in jail. Gloria Steinem would not like what is being done. I actually have been following Wonder Woman in detail for 39 years. I can write in great detail what is bad with the current New 52 vision of the character, but I am making a YouTube video that does that in detail. I consider Brian Azzarello (not sure how to spell his name) as a literature-terrorist. Certainly, he is a comic book hack. I do not like violence and wish only good things for Brian Azzarello. He needs to move on.

Thank you.

#44 Posted by Teerack (5420 posts) - - Show Bio

The quote in the beginning is true and honestly doesn't have much to do with why the New 52 is falling apart.

Online
#45 Edited by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

@teerack said:

The quote in the beginning is true and honestly doesn't have much to do with why the New 52 is falling apart.

correct on both accounts

The quote is to show the attitude and atmosphere of desperation that lead to the New 52

#46 Edited by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

@klytemnestrahippocrata: the way that you feel about Azzarello is pretty much the same way I feel about Batgirl and some other people feel about Teen Titans or hell some people even Hate Snyder's Batman.

I know some people hate WW with the same passion as you but my was that when the people want to point out at the success of the new 52 one of such things that they point out is WW, if someone considers WW a success, is for a lot of different reasons, not just because Wonder Woman got blessed by The New 52 but despite of it.

Wonder Woman is not an example of how good is the new 52, it has nothing to do with the new 52.

but I do like the book.

your points of WW =/= Greek Myth therefore it fails is just irrelevant because the point of Azzarello is not to imitate Greek Mythology but to somehow create a new mythology around the same basic concepts, is like the Sandman on many regards.

I will agree with you in the new origin, it has way many plot holes.

But ironically the best part of the title is not Wonder Woman but the world that Azzarello created for her.

#47 Posted by KlytemnestraHippocrata (5 posts) - - Show Bio

I disagree, he has not taken some basic concepts of Greek mythology. He has taken the name Greek Mythology and created a knock off brand. Why go through all the effort of trying to claim the mantel of "...better explaining..." the origin of the character if all that you are truly doing is being too lazy to do some basic research.

This is what was wrong with the third Batman movie. They spend two movies trying to be "reality-based" and then in the last movie they got rid of the "reality-based" concepts. They spend no time developing the relationships of the characters Bruce Wayne and Selena Kyle. Selena Kyle's only purpose in the movie was to ride a motorcycle in some exterior shots in the movie. The whole way they make Bruce Wayne poor is unrealistic. A man with that much wealth, has hard currencies as assets. He could loss all the money he has in stocks and it would not phase him. Batman didn't have any reason to be in the third movie in the trilogy. He just stood around watching other people. He did not do anything heroic in the movie.

I can get into the New 52 Batman, but they may prove to be too much. It just needs to go away.

The current Wonder Woman title is the same way. The character does not do anything heroic. They spend no time developing the character. All they do is write some long winded nonsense until the big ending in part 4 of the 4 part series. They hope that by dressing Diana in a tight bathing suit will carry the title.

At least with Gail Simone, she made an attempt to create some sensual moments with the character. She took time to develop relationships with the main character and the side characters. Brian Azzarello is not capable of writing a sensual love story. His stories are all vanilla ice cream stories and the illustrator just is there to sprinkle candy over the product to make some 14 year old guy think there is a compelling story there. All I see in the product now is a lazy writer.

That is what George Perez problem was. He did not spend any time developing relationships with the character. I think David E Kelley's screenplay was closer to Marston's vision of the character. Even Douglas Cramer had a better handle of the character Diana. At least they took the time to develop their characters even though they were limited by the constraints of television.

I have read many people's critic of the Wonder Woman Pilot of 2011. I think many of the critics were wrong. The screenplay was very Diana. Kelley had a better handle of the character Diana then George Perez and any of the other turkeys that have really hurt the character since 1985. The only exception being Gale Simone. She has a really good handle of the character.

Diana is laid-back, funny. She is not a brawler. She is the perfect Libra. Libras deal with one on one relationships. They live to express beauty and harmony in the world. Libra is concerned with expressing our mental and social identity. They deal with the fundamental aspects of opposites. This is one of the reasons why in the 2001 Pilot the character was trying to create a new identity for herself. That is a psychological aspect many people face in life.

Whereas Ares who deals with things that affect the self. He is the eternal one-year old. He never plans farther then he can see. He only knows what he wants. People usually mistake Ares from the Roman god Mars. Mars is the God of War, but Ares is not. Aphrodite deals with the relationships of others. She deals with aspects between people. That is what modern scholars call "politics." And Athena is the balance of those two forces of nature. That is what justice is about. The balance between the individual and the others.

In paganism, evil means only concerned with the self. Whereas good means to give to others. Justice seeks to find balance between the two. These conflicts are part of basic human nature that are in all stories. At least most compelling stories. Even William Marston, who was a scholar and an educated man, did not arrogantly gloss over the mythology of the character's origin. This writer has done that. All that he has done and continues to do for the character and title is prove he is arrogant and ignorant. All that he is doing to our young and new readers now is passing on ignorance to them by allowing this garbage to propagate to the masses.

To be fair, the direction of the mythology being hacked happened long before Brian. It really begins with George Perez. And Gail Simone was trying to change that. Now Brian has undid all the work Gail did to restore the character back. Wonder Woman did not need a reinvention or a made-up full of holes origin story.

Greek Mythology is a religion to some people. It may not be a religion to you, but it is a religion. I do not like the world the Azzarello has created.

No part of the origin story has he created resembles anything about Greek Mythology. He just simply took names of popular Gods and Heroes and stuck a cheap five minute write up onto the story. I am sure to a 14 year old that has no understanding of Greek Mythology, the story Azzarello created is probably good. But to scholarly people that spend time researching concepts beyond a five minute drive-by explanation, it is painful experience to watch.

Also, the Greek mythology is tied heavily into the foundation of tarot and astrology. Those are the foundation of the magick behind Diana's powers. He was better off making an origin story for another character if he is going to be lazy. This is a sad day in the history of Wonder Woman comics, it is indeed a dark time. It is like all he has done is walk by us fans and yell "Ni" to our faces. This is as bad as that bozo who gave Diana a jumpsuit and gun and took all her superpowers away. That guy's career writing Wonder Woman ended fast. This is also as bad as the guy who decided giving Diana an all black outfit would be a good thing. That writers career was short lived too in the series.

They should never higher anyone to write Wonder Woman comics that is not going to take the time to research the Greek Mythology around the character. When you tamper with the mythology, you are playing with fire. Also, it is consider bad luck and a bad omen.

Thank you.

#48 Edited by KlytemnestraHippocrata (5 posts) - - Show Bio

Also, Wonder Woman is not some nameless character. You are dealing with an iconic character that has a fan base that spans 72 years. That is about 7 generations of fans. When analyzed on a statistical level to the greater population of the the readers of the book, the 14 year old reader is a small blip on the distribution curve. The reader of the book or title that is along the central tendency of measurement is going to be someone who has lived at least 36 years of their life and are probably educated. Would it not make better sense to use the actual factual mythology that is well documented by many scholars going back some 2,500 years of material?

A new reader not familiar with the title is going to read the book and say "wow this is neat.' Then as they become more educated in the society and familiar with the actual mythology, they are going to turn around and say "wow, that Brain really was way off in his use of Greek Mythology."

Do you remember being a child reading DC Comics that were based on mythology, and then later discover that the early writers went to great length to be factual in a fictional story. People love that quality of a good story. Now, all that you are going to have are people saying "...wow, they really considered us lazy uninformed people."

See that is the difference between Superman comics and Batman comics and Wonder Woman Comics. Although Superman story is just a modern retelling of the origin of Jesus Christ by two Jewish guys. And instead of religion he has superpowers. People cannot go and research those aspects of the character because that evidence does not exist.

Diana on the other hand is based on well-documented empirical evidence. People can go research those stories. It is like trying to write a story based on Heracles or Thor. Once you glaze over the mythology, you loose your audience that really care about that.

Also you stated "...But ironically the best part of the title is not Wonder Woman but the world that Azzarello created for her..."

If the world is the thing you find best about the title and not the character Diana, that supports my argument or statements. The writer has not taken any time to develop the character, the only thing people like about the title is the environment she lives in. That is not evidence of good writing. Diana is not even important. Wonder Woman is lost in the story. She is just an attractive woman in a bathing suit in the story. No better than a hand drawn version of maxim magazine. And that is sad.

Diana is a wonderful character who is full of life. She is practically family to me. I care about her and her friends. I feel that Brian Azzarello does not. Your statement is evidence of that. That is also why these fake-fans of Wonder Woman comic books did not like the Wonder Woman Pilot 2011. Because since 1985, the writers have not created stories that help us to learn about and care about Diana. Except for Gale Simone.

This is why the title was losing readers.

People love Diana. The writers at Wonder Woman are the people we dislike. So, now as a fan, I am being blackmailed by a lazy writer and editor. If I do not invest in the title, then my favorite super-heroine goes away. My only hope is to buy a subscription which fools the writer and editor into believing their ideas are good. And Diana continues to go down this path of mediocre and lazy writers.

I want this to end so I can get on with reading about the stories of Diana. The world should be secondary to the main character. Diana is a 2,800 year old immortal with superpowers living in a world where the people she loves are going to continue to die. That is the tragedy of the character. Even if she finds love, she is always going to outlive the mortals she has relationships with. The character is always going to have to develop her identity to adapt to the time period she lives in.

Those are aspects people will be drawn to about the character. How do you go on knowing you are going to outlive everyone you know and love? She is alone in the world and that is sad. Those are things on a psychological level a reader can relate too. Kind of like in the movie Highlander "...who wants to live forever..." is a reoccurring theme in Diana's story.

This continual cycle of battling demon, battling guy on ego trip bent on taking over the world are not important. No one remembers those things. When you look back at Wonder Woman over the years or Superman, do you remember the people she beat? No. Why, it is not important. You do remember the characters.

Like Barbara Minerva. Her character is great because she is a woman who is obsessed with immortality. She wants to remain beautiful. People can relate to growing old. People identify with the problem Barbara faces. How does a immortal deal with that?

Thank you.

#49 Edited by arnoldoaad (1007 posts) - - Show Bio

@klytemnestrahippocrata: Wow

Im sorry but I have to say that I didnt expected such a long response when it is pretty off the topic.

I think your problem is "THIS IS NOT GREEK MYTHOLOGY"

I agree

But it is not suppose to be. just like the original WW is just inspired by Greek Myth, but it just used it as guidelines.

as far as I know Azzarello did do a lengthy research on Greek myth and you can tell, Greek myth is not just romantic stories, there are stories about incest, rape, heroes who are punished by the gods just for ego and their own amusement, if anything Azarello created a much modern mythology for WW.

the Lack of the eagle is not fault of anyone other than Jim Lee, for he did the redesign, I also blame him for the lack of pants.

and the comparison with other writers

I started reading WW during Rucka's run.

what I can say about them is this

Rucka is the one of all the writers who understood the character the best, his problam is that most of his plots just never lead anywhere because of editorial problems. If you want to read the best WW story ever made read Hiketeia, that is the best portray of the character by far.

the next writers until Gail just not only didnt understood character, they didnt understood the concept of the book. "Who is Wonder Woman?" is an ok story, nothing specially good about it but it is a terrible disservice to Donna Troy, who gets pretty much infantilized in the entire arc as a little girl who wanted to play dress-up as Wonder Woman and then leaves.

Amazons Attack I dont need to talk about that, everybody hates it.

then It came Gail.

I think Gail's WW is really really boring.you complement how Gail focused on the romantic aspect of WW, well I cannot remember a single thing that happen with like because Nemesis was such a boring and underdeveloped character that the most memorable thing that he did in that entire run was when he left her.

Im not saying that the run was bad, it wasnt, but it was unmemorableshe did know how to write Wonder Woman but there is just so much of her we can take, Gail devoted her series almost 90% to Wonder Woman and things like "supporting cast" were barely on it. so people like Nemesis, Etta Candy and the apes where non-essential to the story.

on contrast Azzarello's run is the exact opposite, most of the focus is on the supporting cast, on Zola, Lennox, the other gods, etc. and is because the story centers on them and how Diana is facing them.

about the villains, most of the villains on Azzarello's run have a very mythological feeling on them as all of them are Gods, and what are gods but living concepts and their designs reflect that.

on the case of Gail we have an amazon with a really complex motivation against Diana, Genocide, which has one of the worst origins i have ever seen and is essentially a non-character without any personality or motivation and some aliens.

#50 Edited by Celestialseed (96 posts) - - Show Bio

Just curious. Is it a mistake that DC only put it's faith to Batman, Supes, WW and JL for it's over all sale? They keep exaggerating their abilities and focus more on these characters.