FastestBlender

The no marriage edict is a symptom, not a cause. What should have been discussed is how many writers have fallen to these last minute editorial changes, which are not making your comics better, kids.

http://guttersandpanels.com/gutters-and-panels/2013/3/23/the-new-52-timeline-of-departures

And now we find out they won't even allow the Batwoman team to finish with issue 26

http://comicsbeat.com/mark-andreyko-taking-over-batwoman/

Take a stand, don't support this type of treatment of creative talent nor useless gimmicks like Forever Evil. Buy comics from publisher committed to telling good stories.

Also, both Matt and Tony were grading in 1/2 stars on this podcast. Why is that still not an option for reviewers?

@the_stegman: You want to make an argument to the contrary? By all means.

I don't know how any could support DC Comics after their disgraceful treatment of creative talent over these past few years. I am completely disgusted at how Bob Harras and his cohorts are caring for these characters. Make an impact, don't buy DC Comics.

If there are continually concerns from the audience that all the rated books consist of fours and fives, maybe it isn't the audience that's the problem. You've stated that Comic vine can only review a fraction of the comics put out every week and so you pick the comics you like. That's fine, but you at least have to indicate that this isn't a fair sampling of the product. What if I went to Stan and Jack's apple orchard and picked through 10 bushels to produce a bushel full of the best Apples I could find. Then I presented these as a representation of what Stan and Jack's apple orchard has to offer on my site and went on my apple podcast and proclaimed that "Stan and Jack's apples have never been better!" Is that a fair representation? So the easiest solution is to do away with the rating system (something that has been discussed before) and present the 20 or so books as Comicvine's picks of the week, akin to what retailers do at shops. Less complaining, less insinuations of bribery, it would be a welcome change.

Talking of of your tuchas, @undeadpool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_(1989_film)#Development

"The success of The Dark Knight Returnsand The Killing Jokerekindled Warner Bros.' interest in a film adaptation."

"I was never a giant comic book fan, but I've always loved the image of Batman and the Joker. The reason I've never been a comic book fan — and I think it started when I was a child — is because I could never tell which box I was supposed to read. I don't know if it was dyslexia or whatever, but that's why I loved The Killing Joke, because for the first time I could tell which one to read. It's my favorite. It's the first comic I've ever loved. And the success of those graphic novels made our ideas more acceptable."

—Tim Burton^[2]

Tim Burton, Burton on Burton: Revised Edition (London: Faber and Faber, 2006) 71.

That was such a non-discussion of the Affleck casting. OK he's been a good actor in the past and the Daredevil movie had script problems. But did he feel like a good Matt Murdock in a bad Daredevil film? if anything Damon is a better casting for DD. Affleck has the charisma to be the billionaire playboy but he lacks the damaged psyche quality to play The Batman. It's why Keaton and Bale were a good fit and Kilmer and Clooney were not. Corey's trying to mock fan outrage by comparing the casting of Bale & Ledger. When Bale was cast, there was no outrage because we'd seen his devotion to unhinged roles like Bateman in American Psycho. And Ledger? He was a complete unknown so I for one was optimistic. And that gets to the heart of it. We all know waaay to much about Ben Affleck to take him seriously as this type of character. From the K. Smith in jokes to the paparazzi nonsense, there's just too much to ignore.

@muyjingo Agreed. There is no secure comic book continuity, it's a fallacy. The fact that Nightwing is in this book is not a fault of the storytelling. If you take @g_man line of thought to it's natural conclusion, every X-Book not named Wolverine should get demerits in a review because Wolverine's doing something else in his book.

Can we make this the permanent Comic Vine Podcast panel? Honestly it's the best ep I've heard in years. No music, nitpicking continuity, no Barry Allen in London, no fake Gasps, no hyperbole on how 'Amazing' each book was. The list goes on and on. Plus the three of you flowed well together and acknowledged each other's points. This is also a much more manageable length of show. There is no need to run 90 minutes on rudimentary questions that can be solved via a google search.

However... if that's you're interpretation of the Comic Vine rating system, then there's no rating for exemplary issues. The kind that win Eisners, do they get a 6/5? That is why many, including IGN, reserve the perfect rating for the once a year stunning issue.

From IGN: "The story, dialogue, and character arcs of Earth 2 are all executed with the best intentions, yet every single one of those elements fall flat. But that’s nothing new for this beleaguered series. This chapter continues the downward spiral brought on by issue after issue of overstuffed word balloons, debuts of dull characters, and plot threads that go on for an eternity."

The man who wrote Starman is no longer with us. And I doubt you'll hear him on the podcast anytime soon

@g_man "There wasn't anything as memorable or as epic as grand-scale I guess as what Scott (Snyder) has been doing"

Wow. This is a new level of Snyder hyperbole.

You need go no farther than this site itself to find 97 other Batman stories that are just as memorable, epic, and grand-scale as what Snyder is doing:

http://www.comicvine.com/profile/the_poet/blog/comic-vines-top-100-batman-universe-stories/79521/

To think Snyder's work is going to be remembered as well as The Dark Knight Returns, The Killing Joke and Batman Year One is short sighted. He writes a good Batman. He's yet to define the character for a generation (i.e. Moore, Miller, ONeil/Adams, Timm/Dini, Rogers/Engleheart)

Isn't anyone picking up on the pattern that the rating system is consistently misinterpreted? Listen at two hours in, all three of you have a different interpretation of what 3/5 stars mean. If the staff don't have a steady interpretation, how can you expect and audience of thousands to? Not to mention the academic interpretation of a 3/5 which is a 60/100 or a failing grade. It's because there aren't enough crayons to color with. Use 1/2 stars or double up to 10. Imagine a 4.5 on Aquaman 22. That'd probably satiate both Matt and Tony. It's a simple adjustment that would save a lot of headaches.