# DC Comics Reboot



## Sensei Payne (Jun 29, 2011)

I really think that the reboot is a good idea.

http://cliqueclack.com/flicks/2011/06/25/dc-comics-reboot/

I know tons of people that really enjoy graphic novels and not comics...because the comics have just so much back story, that its hard to keep up with everything.  

It seems like its a new start for the new generation.


----------



## OKenpo942 (Jun 29, 2011)

I really like the reboot. It is quite different from when I was a kid, but it is kinda fun listening to my boys talking about and pretending to be the super heroes tha I grew up with.  They think it is pretty cool that I have prior knowledge of the hero in the 'new' movie as well.

James


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jun 29, 2011)

It will be interesting to see what is actualy changed and what stays the same.
They could ruin some of there long standing  heros with to much of a change but then again it seemed like one of their writers tried that and thats one of the reasons for the reboot


----------



## granfire (Jun 29, 2011)

like really bringing back the old timey comic more geared towards the younger audience? 
I am all for it!


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jun 29, 2011)

granfire said:


> like really bringing back the old timey comic more geared towards the younger audience?
> I am all for it!


 

They really aren't making it more geared toward a "younger audience" persay...more so a more "Modern" Audience.


----------



## Omar B (Jun 29, 2011)

Yeah, I'm really worried about this.  This all stems from the Slagel and Shuster family lawsuit that's coming to court in December next year.  They have to rush out a Superman movie before then because if they don't DC could literaly loose the rights to everything Slagel and Shuster wrote on the character.  No Krypton, no Lex, no first couple years that effectively defined the character.

They are starting to align things so they can retell the story with a new restart not using any of the original creators creations but keeping what they did in the years after.  So DC is using this summer's Flashpoint event (the Flash showing up in an alternate world) to justify changes universe wide.  So Superman is the reason they are going to clean house.

They can always go back to the original pending the lawsuit.  But I really hate the designs, it looks like Superman is wearing an armored costume which means he is no longer invulnerable.  They also took away the trunks which from a design standpoint is great, ads color, visual interest and makes him not look like a naked blue guy.

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/is-this-the-full-dcnu-justice-league-110626.html

http://i.newsarama.com/images/new-jla_02.jpg


----------



## granfire (Jun 29, 2011)

seriously... you miss his red undies?

well, if they just want to produce more 'collectables' then screw them.

If they somehow managed to find a way to bridge the gap from "teen titans' to the current comic market, more power to them.

I understand that 35 yo nerds have more money, but there are new nerds coming up behind them, if you want them as fan base, you have to be on your toes to get them before the competition does!


----------



## Omar B (Jun 29, 2011)

Yes.  They are not undies, they are worn above his clothes so they are not _under_ anything.  They are athletic trunks as worn by circus strongmen around the time Slagel and Shuster created the character.  Circus strongmen and Superman wear them for several reasons, one of the main ones is modesty.  After all, one layer of tights don't hide the junk so well.  Just like modern male ballet dancers still wear leotards and trunks of the same color over it (my sister dances ballet so I know these types of dudes quite well).  This was even an issue on Superman Returns DVD special features where they talked about how thick the trunks should be to hide/obscure stuff, modesty is a big deal when dealing with kids.  He has to be drawn keeping the Greek Ideal of physical perfection in mind, but also skipping the nudity.  Just like Batman's black trunks, or the black pattern on Spider-man's costume.  Remember the codpiece controversy that happened when Batman Forever was released?

The lack of the red trunks also makes the uniform look unbalanced from a design standpoint.  See they also had to keep the red in the midsection to still keep it from looking like a naked blue guy by adding a red belt, but in doing so you have lost the red trunks and the gold belt.  So the design looses more than it gains by removing them.  

You'll also notice that from the lines on the stomach and legs that Bruce and Clark are wearing armor of the same design.  So did Batman make a uniform for Superman or did superman make the uniform for Batman?  either way, both the human and the alien wearing the same armored uniform means that either somebody is not invulnerable anymore, or for some reason he still is but feels the need to wear armor and a high color under his work clothes. 

There's a reason he's the icon, the first, the greatest.  There's a reason an entire industry strang up following him.


----------



## granfire (Jun 29, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Yes.  They are not undies, they are worn above his clothes so they are not _under_ anything.  They are athletic trunks as worn by circus strongmen around the time Slagel and Shuster created the character.  Circus strongmen and Superman wear them for several reasons, one of the main ones is modesty.  After all, one layer of tights don't hide the junk so well.  Just like modern male ballet dancers still wear leotards and trunks of the same color over it (my sister dances ballet so I know these types of dudes quite well).  This was even an issue on Superman Returns DVD special features where they talked about how thick the trunks should be to hide/obscure stuff, modesty is a big deal when dealing with kids.  He has to be drawn keeping the Greek Ideal of physical perfection in mind, but also skipping the nudity.  Just like Batman's black trunks, or the black pattern on Spider-man's costume.  Remember the codpiece controversy that happened when Batman Forever was released?
> 
> The lack of the red trunks also makes the uniform look unbalanced from a design standpoint.  See they also had to keep the red in the midsection to still keep it from looking like a naked blue guy by adding a red belt, but in doing so you have lost the red trunks and the gold belt.  So the design looses more than it gains by removing them.
> 
> ...



:lfao:

It's like underarmor...go with the times already!


----------



## Omar B (Jun 29, 2011)

Yes, timeless characters should go with the times.  Sure.  Herculese should be wearing jeans and a t-shirt, Robin Hood should have an AK47 too.  Thanks for the laughing icon there, shows exactly how seriously you do or don't take major changes to something a person like myself has followed for my 30 years.  Waytta be belittleing to something you don't follow or truly understand.

I guess if you are not a comic fan and are not in the store every week following this it seems silly.  But it's the same deal when people refer to karate as kung fu and think of all martial artists artists as just people who want to fight.  Misconceptions about things they don't truly understand.


----------



## granfire (Jun 29, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Yes, timeless characters should go with the times.  Sure.  Herculese should be wearing jeans and a t-shirt, Robin Hood should have an AK47 too.  Thanks for the laughing icon there, shows exactly how seriously you do or don't take major changes to something a person like myself has followed for my 30 years.  Waytta be belittleing to something you don't follow or truly understand.
> 
> I guess if you are not a comic fan and are not in the store every week following this it seems silly.  But it's the same deal when people refer to karate as kung fu and think of all martial artists artists as just people who want to fight.  Misconceptions about things they don't truly understand.




I am poking serious fun at you!
(and no, would not do that to just anyone! ^_^)



besides, Robin Hood would be a sniper...and he has been translated into modern times plenty...

People refer to Taekwondo as Karate all the time. 

but frankly, the red trunks, or lack there off I had not even noticed. 

I am a comic fan, but I am not following what they made of them.

Like the card collector hobby before, or the diecast hobby, comic books have been warped into something they were not. Just because the original customer base grew up they neglected the new base. 
Now they are scrambling with an audience they want to sell characters to to whom they had no previous exposure.
So they have to spin the ark way back to before Adam and Eve, tick of the long time fans.

So

when your nerd is showing I get all giggly ^_^

So <3 and peace.


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jun 30, 2011)

I have been a die hard Superman fan since I was a little kid..and I gotta say..i am pretty excited about this.

You are aware that the origional fabric Superman's Suit is made of is from his Kryptonian Space ship...also the suit itself is a Kryptonian Emergency Rescue suit...its what they would wear when a ship would crash or they were, say, lost at sea. So it doesn't mean he will no longer be invulnerable...just maybe they are true to the origin of the suit.

As for Batman's suit...it could easily be from the design from the Christian Bale movies.  Bullits don't bounce off of Batman. So thats a no brainer.

As for the Red underwear situation...I honestly don't care...yeah its a nod to the strongman suit...which is fine...but, I don't have issues with them keeping hem or doing away with them...alls I ask is

Don't do this again.


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

Sensei Payne said:


> I have been a die hard Superman fan since I was a little kid..and I gotta say..i am pretty excited about this.
> 
> You are aware that the origional fabric Superman's Suit is made of is from his Kryptonian Space ship...also the suit itself is a Kryptonian Emergency Rescue suit...its what they would wear when a ship would crash or they were, say, lost at sea. So it doesn't mean he will no longer be invulnerable...just maybe they are true to the origin of the suit.
> 
> ...



Split personality?

Popular theme...






No, no super hero, and I guess the red/blue is just a conceptional necessity....


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jun 30, 2011)

granfire said:


> Split personality?
> 
> Popular theme...
> 
> ...


 

No it was a story Arc after he was ressurected...so it actually happened. its not just concept art.


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

Didn't say it was conceptional...never crossed my mind...


no, it's a popular theme to incorporate for some reason.
Some times it makes more sense, sometimes it's a bit contrived.

(was it bad superman/good superman? Or rather aggressive-assertive vs more docile?)


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jun 30, 2011)

granfire said:


> Didn't say it was conceptional...never crossed my mind...
> 
> 
> no, it's a popular theme to incorporate for some reason.
> ...


 
honestly..when i found out he didn;t have his powers, I stopped reading...until he got his regular powers back...

I just know that there was some sort of an issue with the way he metabolized solar energy after he came back to life.


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

Sensei Payne said:


> honestly..when i found out he didn;t have his powers, I stopped reading...until he got his regular powers back...
> 
> I just know that there was some sort of an issue with the way he metabolized solar energy after he came back to life.



Contrived then...
(waiting for Omar to fill us in)


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jun 30, 2011)

from WIKI


> "Superman Red/Superman Blue"
> The second incarnation of Superman Red and Superman Blue began in a 1998 storyline. Superman had developed electricity-based abilities,[1] which eventually forced him to adopt a blue and white containment suit. He also gained the ability to turn his powers "off," though this left him as vulnerable as a normal human. This version of Superman was referred to by some fans as "Electric Blue Superman".[2]
> In the _Superman Red/Superman Blue_ one-shot (February 1998), a trap created by the Cyborg-Superman caused Superman to split into two beings who represented different aspects of his personality, though each believed himself to be the original. Superman Blue was the more cerebral entity, preferring to think his way out of situations and actually solve problems with his mind as well as his powers. Superman Red was more rash, but also more decisive, preferring action over taking the time to think. Over time these two personalities grew more and more polarized and individual, to the point that neither entity wanted to become one Superman again.[3][4]
> Both Supermen deeply loved Lois Lane; unlike in the earlier Red/Blue story, there was not another love interest for one of the Supermen to pair up with. Instead, they fought over Lois' affections, each with almost no consideration for her feelings; Lois lost her tolerance for this and essentially kicked them both out of the house until they could figure out how to unite.[5]
> ...


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

sounds like they ran out of ideas...


----------



## Omar B (Jun 30, 2011)

Sensei Payne said:


> I have been a die hard Superman fan since I was a little kid..and I gotta say..i am pretty excited about this.
> *You are aware that the origional fabric Superman's Suit is made of is from his Kryptonian Space ship*...*also the suit itself is a Kryptonian Emergency Rescue suit...its what they would wear when a ship would crash or they were, say, lost at sea. So it doesn't mean he will no longer be invulnerable...just maybe they are true to the origin of the suit.*
> As for Batman's suit...it could easily be from the design from the Christian Bale movies.  Bullits don't bounce off of Batman. So thats a no brainer.
> As for the Red underwear situation...I honestly don't care...yeah its a nod to the strongman suit...which is fine...but, I don't have issues with them keeping hem or doing away with them...alls I ask is
> ...



The uniform being made from a blanket in the ship is pre-1984 restart (ie. The version of the story they used in the Donner movie) and that's been retconned out of continuity.  Neither is that suit any sort of survival suit.  

This is his Survival suit that came with his ship:






Or maybe you were thinking of his black solar suit which he wears to recharg because it allows in more light (we even see it in SR).






As for Superman Blue/Superman Red.  That was apart of the fallout from DC's Longest Night event when the Sun was snuffed out by the Suneater and since Superman is solar powered he wasn't very effective in that storyline.  Anyways, Hal Jordan sacrificed his life to atone for killing millions of people in Coast City when he became Parallax by throwing himself into the sun to reignite it.  The amount of energy released overcharged Kal and then he couldn't cotrole his powers anymore, even grew to like 10 feet tall at one point.  






Anyways, his powers expanded in all kinds of crazy ways he could not control till he stepped in the way of a bullet to protect someone but instead of bouncing off him it went right through.

And yes, the trunks are important, it's apart of the iconography.  It's the design that most superheros are based upon.  When people call things about him dated, old fashioned, etc, they seem to realize that it's because he was the first, the template.

As for him wearing an armored uniform that's the same as Batman's it worries me greatly.  It means he is not invulnerable anymore.  Remember, this is about the Slagel/Shuster Vs. DC Comics lawsuit, that's why they are trying to get the new Superman movie out before December next year.  Imagine loosing everything about Superman written by the creators?  No Krypton, Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, Kyrptonite, Ma and Pa Kent, I could go on.  We are talking about discarding basically everything the character is.


----------



## Balrog (Jun 30, 2011)

Not so much.  I grew up with classic Superman, Batman, etc. and I think the reboot sucks.

There are certain things you don't do.  One of them is you don't tug on Superman's cape.  They're not just tugging on it, they've given him a super-wedgie.

Two thumbs down on this.


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

you just think he's wearing an armored suit...
Michael Keaton's fault....not the most buff guy in the universe....


----------



## Omar B (Jun 30, 2011)

granfire said:


> you just think he's wearing an armored suit...
> Michael Keaton's fault....not the most buff guy in the universe....



Nah, it's not Keaton's fault anything.  It was all there in the books.  Original 8 color printing back before digital inking could not do a solid dark color and retain any sort of definition.  It's the same reason both he and Superman have different colored capes to separate them from the background ... imagine a blue Superman with no cape or trunks flying in the blue sky, or a black Batman uniform against his black cape in a dark alley, you wouldn't see crap.  The red in Superman's cape as well as his trunks as well as the gold set him off against the primitive coloring back then when every blue (including his uniform and the sky had to be the same shade).

That's why people thought Batman wore gray even when Bob Kane said he wore black repeatedly.  hell, they couldn't get the scalloping on the cape either without making it blue and painting the scallops black.  Or how about the X-men's blue uniforms that are actually black, or the fact that The Hulk was designed (and indeed in the first issue) grey, but black pencil lines on grey doesn't work so they changed it.

as for the armor, Batman always wore armor.  Some artists took it for granted that the audience knew that he wore it under the grey/or is it black bodysuit.












First change DC got (with digital coloring) to paint Batman how he should look, they did. In  Batman - Troika.


----------



## granfire (Jun 30, 2011)

I am ashamed to say that I forgot the other subject I was enlightened with similar indepth knowledge....

But I am sure I will remember when called upon (if I ever make it into Jeopardy!)


----------



## Sensei Payne (Jul 1, 2011)

I honestly don't think they are going to mess with Superman's Powers to much...he is still going to be awesome over all...

I still think bullits will bounce off of him, and I still think kryptonite will still hurt him, and lex luthor will still try his same ol same old.


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

Sensei Payne said:


> I honestly don't think they are going to mess with Superman's Powers to much...he is still going to be awesome over all...
> 
> I still think bullits will bounce off of him, and I still think kryptonite will still hurt him, and lex luthor will still try his same ol same old.



 Well since if the lawsuit goes through they can't use anything that Slagel and Shuster wrote, yes we will loose Krypton so we will lose Kryptonite as well.  We will loose Ma and Pa Kent since they are his parents as written by them.  Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, Lana Lang, the solar power, most of the other major villains that go with him, etc.  We will still be able to maintain everything established after since so basically most of Silver-Age Superman.  But we'll get to keep Metropolis and The Daily Planet since Slagel and Shuster wrote it as New York and The Daily Sun.  But all the people in the building were their creations so those will have to go.  They are positioning themselves in a place where they can rewrite or disregard the first 12 years of the characters origins as written by the creators.  Too bad Slagel and Shuster were two silly kids who just wanted to write and draw because the lawyers screwed them out of their fair share of their own creation and DC forced them out of their own book.  If they were smart like Bob Kane was with his Batman deal where he had editorial controle and still made money till he died a few years ago when it was taken over by Denny O'neil.


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Well since if the lawsuit goes through they can't use anything that Slagel and Shuster wrote, yes we will loose Krypton so we will lose Kryptonite as well.  We will loose Ma and Pa Kent since they are his parents as written by them.  Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, Lana Lang, the solar power, most of the other major villains that go with him, etc.  We will still be able to maintain everything established after since so basically most of Silver-Age Superman.  But we'll get to keep Metropolis and The Daily Planet since Slagel and Shuster wrote it as New York and The Daily Sun.  But all the people in the building were their creations so those will have to go.  They are positioning themselves in a place where they can rewrite or disregard the first 12 years of the characters origins as written by the creators.  Too bad Slagel and Shuster were two silly kids who just wanted to write and draw because the lawyers screwed them out of their fair share of their own creation and DC forced them out of their own book.  If they were smart like Bob Kane was with his Batman deal where he had editorial controle and still made money till he died a few years ago when it was taken over by Denny O'neil.




Bob Kane learned from their mistakes?

Happens a lot to the enthusiastic newbs, music, writing, invention...the world is full of tragic stories like that.

Generally speaking $$$ fixes a lot of those problems though...should they win their case, the publisher might have to shell out some major money...UI mean, Kryptonite and Lois Lane, those are canon, can't have the man of steel without either...


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

granfire said:


> *Bob Kane learned from their mistakes?*
> Happens a lot to the enthusiastic newbs, music, writing, invention...the world is full of tragic stories like that.
> Generally speaking $$$ fixes a lot of those problems though...should they win their case, the publisher might have to shell out some major money...UI mean, Kryptonite and Lois Lane, those are canon, can't have the man of steel without either...



Bob didn't make the mistake, Slagel and Shuster did.  Bob was also a grown man and author at the time who came into the industry a couple years after those two.  He had the experience of a grown writer who knew how the business worked.

It could get settled like the Wonder Woman thing, or like the Watchmen film rights thing a couple years ago.  But WW and Watchmen don't make nearly the money Superman does, movies, TV, animation, merchandising, and we have not even considered his comic titles since he headlines 5 books as well as being in the JL books.


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Bob didn't make the mistake, Slagel and Shuster did.  Bob was also a grown man and author at the time who came into the industry a couple years after those two.  He had the experience of a grown writer who knew how the business worked.
> 
> It could get settled like the Wonder Woman thing, or like the Watchmen film rights thing a couple years ago.  But WW and Watchmen don't make nearly the money Superman does, movies, TV, animation, merchandising, and we have not even considered his comic titles since he headlines 5 books as well as being in the JL books.



Oh,a s established author, i bet he paid his dues....

I think Superman being the one who basically started it all (or made it acceptable), I think there is a huge bargaining chip.

Wonder Woman - gotta love her - but being a rather minor player (actually most past Badman and maybe Hulk) there is not much in terms of back story to be lost, but it seems  with Superman....Like I said, you lose Kryptonite and Lois Lane, there isn't much left. Clark Smith, mild mannered reporter for the Huffington Post?


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

Nah.  They changed it to Metropolis and The Daily Planet from Ny and The Daily Sun after the Slagel/Shuster split from the company.  All the supporting cast was the same though.  So keep the Daily Planet and populae it with a new cast?


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Nah.  They changed it to Metropolis and The Daily Planet from Ny and The Daily Sun after the Slagel/Shuster split from the company.  All the supporting cast was the same though.  So keep the Daily Planet and populae it with a new cast?



I don't think you can trademark the staff of a paper...

But he could start working for Faux? :lfao:

(If I keep going down that road you will end up hating me...as I lack the required respect for the gravity of the matter)

It would be interesting to see the outcome, from a purely academical POV: How to you divide the royalties on an American Icon/Pop culture which has steeped into the very fabric of consciousness. I think even the dullest knife in the drawer knows what's what when you mention Kryptonite and 'Man of Steel' (except my dumb spell checker....has no idea what that stuff is...)


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

granfire said:


> *I don't think you can trademark the staff of a paper...*
> But he could start working for Faux? :lfao:
> (If I keep going down that road you will end up hating me...as I lack the required respect for the gravity of the matter)
> It would be interesting to see the outcome, from a purely academical POV: How to you divide the royalties on an American Icon/Pop culture which has steeped into the very fabric of consciousness. I think even the dullest knife in the drawer knows what's what when you mention Kryptonite and 'Man of Steel' (except my dumb spell checker....has no idea what that stuff is...)



You can.  Slagel/Shuster created Perry White, Jimmy Olson, Lois Lane, Kat Grant, etc as the staff of the Daily Sun a New York newspaper.  DC Changed the name of the paper to The Daily Planet (because a solar powered hero working at The Daily Sun is too on the nose), Metropolis' daily paper but retained the same cast.  So yes, the cast are a creation of the originals, just the name on the building was changed after they were ousted from their own book.

_*The Legal View: The Once and Future Superman*




*by Jeff Trexler*_ _
 DC has cited its changes and additions to the Super-verse as grounds  for reducing the Siegel heirss share of Superman material produced  since 1999. A recent Variety article takes this even further, reporting thatNeil Gaimans success in winning co-ownership of Medieval Spawn  provides legal precedent for giving DC complete ownership of the  contemporary Superman, limiting the Siegels interest to the far less  lucrative 1938 version of the character.
 Does DC have strong legal grounds for splitting Superman between The  Man of Tomorrow and The Man of Yesterday? Click below to see if Gaiman v. McFarlane is legal kryptonite for creators rightsor whether thats just another misconceived retcon.
 It would indeed be ironic if Neil Gaimanwho likened the Siegels  landmark 2008 courtroom victory to his ownwere to provide the basis for  gutting the heirs financial stake in modern Superman material. But  thats not likely to happen. In fact, DC has a strong incentive not to  rely on __Gaiman as precedent for splitting Superman in twonamely, its arguments in the Superboy case_.   continued here - http://www.comicsbeat.com/2011/06/24/the-legal-view-the-once-and-future-superman/


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

so the intern gets a real job with the enquirer, Lois, well, that's a tough one...I'll get back to you on that one....the boss has a well deserved heart attack....
Problem solved, at least 2 out of 3....

K, he is send out to interview Sarah Bachman (wink wink) and falls madly in love....

K, you can shoot me now.


----------



## Scott T (Jul 1, 2011)

Um, Omar...

Siegal, not Slagel.


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

ok


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

Omar B said:


> ok



:lfao:

I AM sorry, but I can't help it! HONEST!!!


----------



## Omar B (Jul 1, 2011)

I pronounce it as "Suzanne" too.  Luckily at some point I did cite the lawsuit rather than talking off the top of my head when clearly I cannot remember letters or the orders they go in.


----------



## granfire (Jul 1, 2011)

Omar B said:


> I pronounce it as "Suzanne" too.  Luckily at some point I did cite the lawsuit rather than talking off the top of my head when clearly I cannot remember letters or the orders they go in.



I <3 you anyhow


:angel:

(but, no, Dahling, my name is not  Suzanne....)


----------



## Omar B (Jul 2, 2011)

granfire said:


> I <3 you anyhow
> 
> 
> :angel:
> ...



I was refering to Slagel.


----------



## Sensei Payne (Sep 10, 2012)

So now Superman and Wonder Woman are a couple in the new 52, this is new to the DC world because its the first time that they got together in the legit time line for the comic series.

I personally think its awesome...but what are your thoughts on this?


----------



## granfire (Sep 10, 2012)

Sensei Payne said:


> So now Superman and Wonder Woman are a couple in the new 52, this is new to the DC world because its the first time that they got together in the legit time line for the comic series.
> 
> I personally think its awesome...but what are your thoughts on this?



So they are not making her gay.....

(what did she do? Strangle Lois with her golden lasso?)


----------



## Sensei Payne (Sep 10, 2012)

they just never put Lois and Clark together as a couple...Lois has been seeing someone else for a few years, and I even think that she is engaged to him...or at least living together.


----------



## arnisador (Sep 10, 2012)

Not a fan, though I do like what they've done with some characters. But I am tired of all the fixing-continuity-by-changing-continuity they've been doing for so long now.


----------



## Sensei Payne (Sep 11, 2012)

arnisador said:


> Not a fan, though I do like what they've done with some characters. But I am tired of all the fixing-continuity-by-changing-continuity they've been doing for so long now.



Well it has for a good reason...

Comics are now considered a specialty...so in order to keeps sales up, they have to keep up with the times...and that's really rough to do in a monthly book.


----------



## JWLuiza (Sep 11, 2012)

I think the great thing is you can pick your continuity. I loved Red Robin in the previous continuity and jumped ship from many books with the New 52, but love the new stories when I do read them. I STILL have my old stories in cardboard boxes that I can go read. I don't want to keep reading the same stuff over and over again. Change is good. 

The backstory to the new 52 gives them an out after whatever big onslaught is coming arrives and delves into a multi-title multi-month cross-over so they COULD go back to pre-New 52 if they wanted.


----------



## arnisador (Sep 11, 2012)

I get the marketing problem. It seems like most issues on the stand are issue #1 of whatever series anyway! Well, I'm a traditionalist, I suppose.


----------



## Omar B (Sep 12, 2012)

Sensei Payne said:


> So now Superman and Wonder Woman are a couple in the new 52, this is new to the DC world because its the first time that they got together in the legit time line for the comic series.
> 
> I personally think its awesome...but what are your thoughts on this?



It's nothing new at all.  In Kingdom Come, the novel set in the future of Earth 1 after the death of Lois Superman and Diana do eventually get together and on the last page of the book out to dinner Bruce figures out that Diana is pregnant.  Earth 1 and DC pre-new-52 is gone.  Burt we do know that in the old Earth 1 Superman and Lois did get married (in fact the relationship with Lois is one of the better things from the old universe that I miss).  Before there was any serious concerted effort for continuity in the 50's and 60's you always had one offf stories with Superman dating WW or Lois Lane or Lana Lang or Lori Lemar, Barda, etc.  It's just newspapers jumping on stuff they don't understand.  "OMGF Superman is dating WW, this is crazy."  Except that it's happened many times before and we know that in one possible future they do get together in the end.  

But this continuity wipe so far has been OK.  Don't like the Jim Lee designs, don't like that Red Robin is gone or even Wally West (my favorite Flash).


----------



## Omar B (Sep 12, 2012)

arnisador said:


> I get the marketing problem. It seems like most issues on the stand are issue #1 of whatever series anyway! Well, I'm a traditionalist, I suppose.



Right now is a good point to jump into the new 52 universe.  We are a year (12 issues) in on evvery title and they just released zero issues of all the titles to help people more understand what's going on.  You can go to the comic shop and get the whole thing of any one title with zero and the other issues or the novels collecting all 12 thus far.

My recommendation to you all, read Batman Court Of Owls.  It's one of those epic Batman stories haing to do with The Owls (owl themed ninja) in Gotham targetting Batman and who's leader is convinced he is the son of Thomas Wayne which would make him Bruce's illegitimate brother.


----------



## JWLuiza (Sep 12, 2012)

Court of Owls is good. I second Omar's opinion. Swamp Thing is EPIC and disturbing and beautiful.


----------



## Omar B (Sep 12, 2012)

Animal Man has been a revelation.


----------



## Sensei Payne (Sep 13, 2012)

But really this is the first time that Superman and Wonder Woman are an actual couple in the Continutiy...sure they got together in Kingdom Come, and a few other alternate worlds...but never in the mainstream world...that is why this is such a big deal.


----------



## Omar B (Sep 13, 2012)

Out of continuity yes, but we still saw it happen several times.  It's not a new occurrence as it seems.  Just the news media at large jumping on a plot point in an ongoing series.  Every couple of years in comics there's a huge story that seems to garner attention outside of regular comic fans.  They never seem to remember that these are ongoing stories so a lot of stuff happens.  Or in the case of Superman giving up his US citizenship, was a backup story 4 pages long after the conclusion of a couple months long story arc and was put in there to make up the total 32 pages for the print.  The story was out of continuity, didn't count at all, was not written by the Superman series author or even it's current artist but rather David Goyer, a movie writer.


----------



## Sensei Payne (Sep 13, 2012)

I think the reason why the SM&WW connection was such a big deal this time is because of the Continuty, this time...and the reason why Superman renounced his Citizenship thing got headlines because SM has always been seen as Truth, Justice and the American Way...Classic...and it was a major switch, which personally, I don't like the globalist view, but I understand the point the writers were making.


----------



## Omar B (Sep 19, 2012)

Ok, now before the whole of newsmedia goes crazy I'm gonna jump universes and go over to the "Marvel Ultimate" universehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Marvel .  I know this is gonna be a big deal because as always the newsmedia does not understand such things.  In Marvel's Ultimate universe Captain America has been sworn in as President of the US.  I know this is going to get a lot of attention because earlier this year over in the Ultimate U Miles Morales took over as Spider-man and this became a huge deal.  Everyone was screaming about SM being Peter and on and on.  Except that they don't seem to understand that in the regular Marvel U (616) Peter Parker is still Spider Man.  People don't get that the 616 universe is the same universe created from the start of Marvel going back forever and the Ultimate universe started in the 90's.  Ultimate was an attempt to gain a new audience by starting a new continuity rather than the daunting task of having people not familiar with comics try to jump in and catch up on 60+ years of an ongoing story.  But now the Ultimate U has almost a decade of it's own continuity separate and apart from the regular Marvel, 616.

Compare how the story is written on a comic book site as opposed to a regular news site.  http://www.newsarama.com/comics/captain-america-ultimates-15-decision.html http://www.newsarama.com/comics/ultimate-captain-america-decision-revealed.html http://www.theeagle.com/article/20120919/BC0304/120919502/1090


----------



## arnisador (Sep 19, 2012)

The Ultimates never grabbed me.


----------

