Batman and Superman to be rebooted by Johns and Straczynski in 2010
Unknown
Daibhid Ceanaideach
>
> http://www.examiner.com/x-19312-Columbus-Comic-Books-Examiner~y2009m12d
> 7-Batman-and-Superman-to-be-rebooted-by-Johns-and-Straczynski-in-2010
From the sound of it, it's not an actual reboot, where these versions of
the characters replace the current versions, it's just an alternate
universe take (the mysterious Earth-One of the new Multiverse, apparently).
In fact it sounds an awful lot like All-Star Volume 2.
--
Dave
"All those with psychokinesis, raise my hand."
The Room With No Doors, Kate Orman
Unknown
"Daibhid Ceanaideach" <daibhidc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CDB957A6B2B3da...@130.133.1.4...
Yeah, the article even mentions Marvel's ultimate line.
Not sure about the ongoing graphic novel approach.
Marty
> "Daibhid Ceanaideach" <daibhidchened...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Noted:
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2009/12/08/swipe-file-batman-and-batman/
John
> Yeah, the article even mentions Marvel's ultimate line.
>
> Not sure about the ongoing graphic novel approach.
The objective is to try to appeal to people who don't read traditional
comics. From that perspective, publishing them as graphic novels
works (after all, we'll buy it either way).
JD
Unknown
"John" <jo...@desmarais.org> wrote in message
news:3b1b6242-1114-4b3f...@e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
I can see it not being as successful as they want if they aren't careful
with the frequency and the price point. We'll have to see the full details
of the format.
Marty
> "John" <j...@desmarais.org> wrote in message
About $20? I reckon it'll sell really well. After all, nearly all of
us are going to buy it no?
I mean it's Gary Frank and Geoff Johns on Ultimate Batman. JMS on
Ultimate Superman (not familiar with his artist). What's not to like?
In a format that's more n00b friendly too! So we should see some
crossover sales. I wonder if this'll come close to the JLA:Earth 2
sales.
I'm sure they'll advertise it quite a bit in bookstores beforehand
(perhaps in association with some film? animation?), perhaps some
magazines or newspapers.
The geeks will come.
Unknown
"Marty" <killha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fbb369e1-4f95-4e84...@g7g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
DC says they will ongoing books. Would you be willing to pay $20 every
month? Every two months? Are they going to do one of each every year?
Is it going to be one story per novel?
(And having Geoff Johns, Gary Frank, and JMS isn't a guarantee of sales.
Superman: Secret Origin, Adventure Comics, and The Brave and the Bold
aren't having spectacular sales right now.)
Like I said, there are a lot of unanswered questions that DC will have to
address to be successful with this.
Daibhid Ceanaideach
>
> "Marty" <killha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fbb369e1-4f95-4e84...@g7g2000yqa.googlegroups.com..
> . On 9 Dec, 04:03, "MG" <()> wrote:
>> "John" <j...@desmarais.org> wrote in message
>>
>> news:3b1b6242-1114-4b3f...@e4g2000prn.googlegroups.com.
I don't believe it's going to be a monthly. Partly because I don't
believe it could be done, but mostly because the idea seems to be to
appeal to people who *don't* buy comics every month. Since a trade
paperback (which seems to be the size we're talking about) contains six
issues, I'd guess these graphic novels would come out every six months.
That makes $40 a year, which compares favorably to $47.88 a year for a
monthly title at $3.99.
I'm less certain about the idea this will appeal to people who like
Superman and Batman as characters (from Smallville and the Dark Knight
films, maybe), but don't read comics. I can see how it might, *if they
pick it up*. But if you're not a comics reader, why would you be in the
graphic novels section of your local bookshop in the first place?
Duggy
> DC says they will ongoing books. Would you be willing to pay $20 every
> month? Every two months? Are they going to do one of each every year?
"Also important to note is that DC is appearing to abandon the monthly
model for this initiative."
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/43302
Johns: "We’re planning on doing two novels a year and set in this new
universe, we’re getting unlimited creative freedom that we couldn’t
have in current continuity."
===
= DUG.
===
Unknown
That would make sense. Hopefully they won't go aboard and make them
hardcovers for over $25. (I'm hearing a lot of people talking about
dropping regular comic titles because the recent price increases.)
>
> I'm less certain about the idea this will appeal to people who like
> Superman and Batman as characters (from Smallville and the Dark Knight
> films, maybe), but don't read comics. I can see how it might, *if they
> pick it up*. But if you're not a comics reader, why would you be in the
> graphic novels section of your local bookshop in the first place?
It doesn't seem like movies and tv drive comic sales, don't know if it would
help novels.
Duggy
> "Daibhid Ceanaideach" <daibhidchened...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > Superman and Batman as characters (from Smallville and the Dark Knight
> > films, maybe), but don't read comics. I can see how it might, *if they
> > pick it up*. But if you're not a comics reader, why would you be in the
> > graphic novels section of your local bookshop in the first place?
> It doesn't seem like movies and tv drive comic sales, don't know if it would
> help novels.
The advantages that OGNs have over monthly comics for new readers is:
- they can be sold in mainstream venues (someone is more likely to
look at the GN section of a bookshop than to walk int a comic shop.
- they have a shelf life longer than a month, so in 2 years time or
after the next Superman movie is released then the first OGN could
still be available.
- these also aren't tied up in a complex continuity.
Problems:
- Superman: Earth One isn't Smallville & Batman: Earth One isn't The
Dark Knight.
- To us, having read about the new series "Earth One" makes sense...
to a new reader it is meaningless, and may actually seem like it is
tied into a existing continuity.
I'm sure there are other issues.
===
= DUG.
===
Rob D.
> It doesn't seem like movies and tv drive comic sales, don't know if it would
> help novels.
They definitely drive the non-monthly-comics (graphic novels),
storybooks, and tie-in books and product sales. Take a look in any
Barnes & Noble, Borders, or Waldenbooks store around the opening of a
big movie; there's *always* a special display and special product tied
to it. It's been this way for at least 20 years (when I last worked
for Waldenbooks). If it didn't work, they wouldn't still be doing it.
Marty
> (And having Geoff Johns, Gary Frank, and JMS isn't a guarantee of sales.
> Superman: Secret Origin, Adventure Comics, and The Brave and the Bold
> aren't having spectacular sales right now.)
Blackest Night is having pretty phenomenal sales right now. Secret
Origin is doing ok I think? I'm loving it to be sure, and it's always
the top listed book for that week at Forbidden Planet here in London
(not that I get comics there, but it's populist so I think it's a good
gauge).
Adventure comics was the 4th best selling title in November. Granted
that's due to BN, but my point is that Geoff Johns is a *name*, B'nB
may not get great sales, but JMS is a name too. Many Sci- fi (Babylon
5) and film buff (you heard of a little film called Changeling?) fans
will know of him.
Mix those names with a special project rebooting Superman and Batman
and the projects are pretty much going to be winners.
I look forward to the WW (I bet you this will turn out to be long
rumoured A*WW Adam Hughes project), GL and Flash.
Kenneth M. Lin
he still bitter about Supreme Powers?
Duggy
wrote:
> I noticed that Gary Frank didn't want to do Superman with Jan Michael S. Is
> he still bitter about Supreme Powers?
"Didn't want to do" or "is doing Batman instead".
The two are very different things.
===
= DUG.
===
Eminence
I think the key is that if these *are* successful, they give DC a
toehold to completely abandon (either gradually or overnight) the
FUBAR'd continuity (so-called) of the current DCU in favor of
transitioning successful (i.e., popular/well-selling) characters over
to this new Earth-One. It gives them a clean slate.
Eminence
_______________
Usenet: Global Village of the Damned
Scott Eiler
> I think the key is that if these *are* successful, they give DC a
> toehold to completely abandon (either gradually or overnight) the
> FUBAR'd continuity (so-called) of the current DCU in favor of
> transitioning successful (i.e., popular/well-selling) characters over
> to this new Earth-One. It gives them a clean slate.
Yeah, that trick worked so well after Crisis on Infinite Earths.
Duggy
There was no clean slate after CoIE.
In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
Earth-One, AFAIK, will be a completely clean slate. So, if it is
successful may lead to the abandonment of the continuity we have.
I honestly think that if Earth-One was done 10 - 15 years ago, Barry
wouldn't be back, he'd appear in The Flash: Earth One, and we'd have
Hal in Green Lantern: Earth-One, Oli in GA:EO, etc... and Wally, Kyle
& Connor would be active in the continuity universe...
Personally, I see that as a better option a "clean" Silver-Age like
universe, a progressing continuity, which I think would keep more
people happy than the back and forward twisted mess of progress and
nostalgia which only gets messier and annoys people.
===
= DUG.
===
Scott Eiler
> On Dec 12, 8:50 am, Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 11, 1:05 pm, Eminence <grey.emine...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > I think the key is that if these *are* successful, they give DC a
> > > toehold to completely abandon (either gradually or overnight) the
> > > FUBAR'd continuity (so-called) of the current DCU in favor of
> > > transitioning successful (i.e., popular/well-selling) characters over
> > > to this new Earth-One. It gives them a clean slate.
> >
> > Yeah, that trick worked so well after Crisis on Infinite Earths.
>
> There was no clean slate after CoIE. In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
There were a bunch of characters thrown together on the same world,
but most of the characters started with a clean slate at least. But
even that didn't last long.
> Earth-One, AFAIK, will be a completely clean slate. So, if it is
> successful may lead to the abandonment of the continuity we have.
... in favor of one that looks just like it. If we once again clean
the slate so that (for instance) Supergirl doesn't exist, we'll just
have to invent her again.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 8:50�am, Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 11, 1:05 pm, Eminence <grey.emine...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I think the key is that if these *are* successful, they give DC a
>> > toehold to completely abandon (either gradually or overnight) the
>> > FUBAR'd continuity (so-called) of the current DCU in favor of
>> > transitioning successful (i.e., popular/well-selling) characters over
>> > to this new Earth-One. It gives them a clean slate.
>> Yeah, that trick worked so well after Crisis on Infinite Earths.
>
>There was no clean slate after CoIE.
>
>In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
>
>Earth-One, AFAIK, will be a completely clean slate. So, if it is
>successful may lead to the abandonment of the continuity we have.
That's highly doubtful...the Marvel Ultimate line, for example, was
highly successful but they never seriously thought about abandoning
the regular Marvel continuity for it...most likely, the only way DC
would abandon current continuity in favor of something like this
(assuming this is even successful...though, with these creators, it
probably will be) is if the regular continuity stuff were all
tanking...and Blackest Night (among others) has most definitely
disproven that.
Personally, I think this could be interesting and I have no problem
with books set in the multiverse...I just don't want to see a load of
multiverse crossovers...that said, the Gary Frank Batman designs I've
seen really don't look very good to me.
black...@aol.com
"Introduction" to Batman and Superman to new readers? That is, does DC
expect them to pick up an issue or two of this new format, and then if
they like it DC expects them to then go and seek out the comics in a
comic shop? Barnes and Nobles and Borders already have an extensive
graphic novel section. Barnes and Noble already sells comics in their
stores. I really don't see the point of this new format. People who
normally don't go into comic shops can right now tonight get a Batman
or Superman comic at Barnes and Nobles or Borders.
grinningdemon
I'm fine with it...I don't want to see normal comics go away but most
everything is written to fit neatly into trades these days
anyway...why not occasionally skip the middle man? I'd like to see
more original graphic novels.
Warewolf
news:1pn8i5toel178r07t...@4ax.com:
> I'm fine with [the graphic novel format]...I don't want to see normal
> comics go away but most everything is written to fit neatly into trades
> these days anyway...why not occasionally skip the middle man? I'd like
> to see more original graphic novels.
And maybe a few out-of-print classics make their return? ^_^
I have no doubt that they (and we) could come up with some (semi-)original
ideas for stories but how do you think, say, a robot romance novel would
appeal with the public?
Not that there is a shortage of niches to be (partially) filled either. ^_^
Signed,
Warewolf
who should probably write a 'wish list' before the holidays end. *shrug*
grinningdemon
wrote:
>grinningdemon <grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote in
>news:1pn8i5toel178r07t...@4ax.com:
>
>> I'm fine with [the graphic novel format]...I don't want to see normal
>> comics go away but most everything is written to fit neatly into trades
>> these days anyway...why not occasionally skip the middle man? I'd like
>> to see more original graphic novels.
>
>And maybe a few out-of-print classics make their return? ^_^
Couldn't hurt...I would personally like to get my hands on some of the
long out-of-print Conan graphic novels Marvel put out in the 80s and
early 90s...I have a few but there are still several I haven't been
able to track down at a reasonable price.
>I have no doubt that they (and we) could come up with some (semi-)original
>ideas for stories but how do you think, say, a robot romance novel would
>appeal with the public?
Actually, a friend of mine currently writing just such a book...kind
of.
Raymond Speer
I count eighty seven vampire books on their shelves. I did not have time
to peruse them more throughly but maybe six to a dozen of them are
readable.
In addition, I am old enough to recall the great enthusiasm for serial
killers in books written in English.
If vampires can be such a fad, and serial killers equally popular. then
there is no reason why there cannot be ten billion ripoffs of "robots in
love" for sale in bookstores.
Duggy
> > There was no clean slate after CoIE. In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
> There were a bunch of characters thrown together on the same world,
> but most of the characters started with a clean slate at least. But
> even that didn't last long.
The only character I can think of who started with a clean slate was
Wonder Woman and that was a later addition.
> > Earth-One, AFAIK, will be a completely clean slate. So, if it is
> > successful may lead to the abandonment of the continuity we have.
> ... in favor of one that looks just like it. If we once again clean
> the slate so that (for instance) Supergirl doesn't exist, we'll just
> have to invent her again.
Yeah, but this time there can be one Kara Zor-El/LInda Lee/Danvers not
Matrix & Earth-born Angel Linda Danvers & Some brainwashed girl from
the future & Kara & et c...
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> That's highly doubtful...
Agreed, I said "may" to acknowledge a previous point.
> the Marvel Ultimate line, for example, was
> highly successful but they never seriously thought about abandoning
> the regular Marvel continuity for it...most likely, the only way DC
> would abandon current continuity in favor of something like this
> (assuming this is even successful...though, with these creators, it
> probably will be) is if the regular continuity stuff were all
> tanking...and Blackest Night (among others) has most definitely
> disproven that.
Agreed... that Earth One would have to do massively better than
continuity for one to replace the other... but I think that CoIE, Zero
Hour & Infinite Crisis prove that you don't have to have every time
tanking for a universe to be shaken up.
Say in ten years a large Earth One family of titles are doing pretty
well and most current continuity titles are doing average... but say
"Booster Gold" is massively successful... you don't think they'd
consider relaunching Booster Gold as BOOSTER GOLD: EARTH ONE and doing
the same with any other title they think that they can "salvage"?
I'd not saying it is probable only possible.
> Personally, I think this could be interesting and I have no problem
> with books set in the multiverse...I just don't want to see a load of
> multiverse crossovers...that said, the Gary Frank Batman designs I've
> seen really don't look very good to me.
Agreed.
What I would like to see Earth One do is collect up the dead "icons"
so they don't have to be reintroduced in continiuity.
===
= DUG.
===
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 3:11 pm, Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
>> > There was no clean slate after CoIE. In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
>> There were a bunch of characters thrown together on the same world,
>> but most of the characters started with a clean slate at least. But
>> even that didn't last long.
>
>The only character I can think of who started with a clean slate was
>Wonder Woman and that was a later addition.
Superman more or less had a clean slate after CoIE...until the retcons
started.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 7:40 pm, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> That's highly doubtful...
>
>Agreed, I said "may" to acknowledge a previous point.
>
>> the Marvel Ultimate line, for example, was
>> highly successful but they never seriously thought about abandoning
>> the regular Marvel continuity for it...most likely, the only way DC
>> would abandon current continuity in favor of something like this
>> (assuming this is even successful...though, with these creators, it
>> probably will be) is if the regular continuity stuff were all
>> tanking...and Blackest Night (among others) has most definitely
>> disproven that.
>
>Agreed... that Earth One would have to do massively better than
>continuity for one to replace the other... but I think that CoIE, Zero
>Hour & Infinite Crisis prove that you don't have to have every time
>tanking for a universe to be shaken up.
Well, it's a long way from shaking up the universe to totally
abandoning it and starting over...the only one that even came close to
that was CoIE and, as we all agree, that was a long way from a total
restart.
>Say in ten years a large Earth One family of titles are doing pretty
>well and most current continuity titles are doing average... but say
>"Booster Gold" is massively successful... you don't think they'd
>consider relaunching Booster Gold as BOOSTER GOLD: EARTH ONE and doing
>the same with any other title they think that they can "salvage"?
I would be very surprised to see this Earth One family of titles grow
much beyond the major "icons"...if it even goes beyond Superman and
Batman.
>I'd not saying it is probable only possible.
>
>> Personally, I think this could be interesting and I have no problem
>> with books set in the multiverse...I just don't want to see a load of
>> multiverse crossovers...that said, the Gary Frank Batman designs I've
>> seen really don't look very good to me.
>
>Agreed.
>
>What I would like to see Earth One do is collect up the dead "icons"
>so they don't have to be reintroduced in continiuity.
It's a little late for that, don't you think? The only "icon"
currently dead is Batman and everyone only THINKS he's
dead...personally, I don't have a problem with the occasional
resurrection...you can get some interesting story potential out of
it...it's just the blanket approach we've been seeing where anyone and
everyone is coming back that sucks...that said, I would be extremely
pissed off if we didn't get Batman back.
Billy Bissette
news:r82bi55t5ts2jfjkb...@4ax.com:
>>Say in ten years a large Earth One family of titles are doing pretty
>>well and most current continuity titles are doing average... but say
>>"Booster Gold" is massively successful... you don't think they'd
>>consider relaunching Booster Gold as BOOSTER GOLD: EARTH ONE and doing
>>the same with any other title they think that they can "salvage"?
>
> I would be very surprised to see this Earth One family of titles grow
> much beyond the major "icons"...if it even goes beyond Superman and
> Batman.
I wonder if it, given any success, will quickly go the Ultimate
route of throwing in everyone and every previous story just for the
sake of saying "Hey, here is the Earth One version of Booster Gold!"
and "Hey, this is the Earth One version of Matrix!".
grinningdemon
If it really starts to take off, then that is probably exactly what
will happen.
Raymond Speer
Did Superman have a clean slate with the Byrne revision?
John Byrne plagarized the suspended continuity shamelessly and
constantly. I think that proved that Byrne was not adverse to shortcuts
and certainly he thought he deserved his pay, in spite of crap like
Supergirl is really a shape changing glob from a cancelled alien
universe which the terrible trio of the SUPERMAN II movie really whacked
hard (whaddefook???) I am not eager for a new revision of any character
because that sounds to me like an invitation to editorial slackness.
"Okay Straczynski, this time around the origin of the Metal Men gets
built around the creation of Bizarro . . . "
Eminence
<grinni...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:39:01 -0800 (PST), Duggy
><Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 12, 3:11 pm, Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
>>> > There was no clean slate after CoIE. In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
>>> There were a bunch of characters thrown together on the same world,
>>> but most of the characters started with a clean slate at least. But
>>> even that didn't last long.
>>
>>The only character I can think of who started with a clean slate was
>>Wonder Woman and that was a later addition.
>
>Superman more or less had a clean slate after CoIE...until the retcons
>started.
But while many characters had clean slates, and the post-CoIE was
*theorized* as a clean slate, the problems began almost immediately,
to wit: which, if any, past stories are part of these new characters'
continuity, and which aren't? And then the dominoes started to fall:
Black Canary in JLA, Hawkman, etc.
>>> > Earth-One, AFAIK, will be a completely clean slate. So, if it is
>>> > successful may lead to the abandonment of the continuity we have.
>>> ... in favor of one that looks just like it. If we once again clean
>>> the slate so that (for instance) Supergirl doesn't exist, we'll just
>>> have to invent her again.
>>
>>Yeah, but this time there can be one Kara Zor-El/LInda Lee/Danvers not
>>Matrix & Earth-born Angel Linda Danvers & Some brainwashed girl from
>>the future & Kara & et c...
Exactly. Earth-1 was not a clean break for Superman, Batman, and
Wonder Woman, because they were still published between 1951 and 1956.
Earth-One, however, wisely chooses to start with those major
characters (or at least two of them), so what follows *should* be more
ordered.
grinningdemon
<grey.e...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>But while many characters had clean slates, and the post-CoIE was
>*theorized* as a clean slate, the problems began almost immediately,
>to wit: which, if any, past stories are part of these new characters'
>continuity, and which aren't? And then the dominoes started to fall:
>Black Canary in JLA, Hawkman, etc.
To be fair, there wasn't really a problem with hawkman until the
hawkworld series several years later...and the black canary problem
was indirectly caused by the wonder woman reboot...as were the
problems with donna troy's origin...if perez had set the WW origin
story in the past (as Byrne did on Superman) instead of making her a
new addition to the DCU, many problems could have been avoided...the
original hawkworld series (which I liked) also should have been set in
the past.
Mike B
> I am not eager for a new revision of any character because that
> sounds to me like an invitation to editorial slackness. "Okay
> Straczynski, this time around the origin of the Metal Men gets
> built around the creation of Bizarro . . . "
As if the eventual revamp of the Metal Men back then wasn't
absurd enough: no scientist can actually create a soul, so the
Metal Men actually have the essences of a bunch of dead
robotocists built into their responsometers.
Duggy
wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:39:01 -0800 (PST),Duggy
>
> >On Dec 12, 3:11 pm, Scott Eiler <sei...@eilertech.com> wrote:
> >> > There was no clean slate after CoIE. In fact, the slate was in many ways messier.
> >> There were a bunch of characters thrown together on the same world,
> >> but most of the characters started with a clean slate at least. But
> >> even that didn't last long.
>
> >The only character I can think of who started with a clean slate was
> >Wonder Woman and that was a later addition.
>
> Superman more or less had a clean slate after CoIE...until the retcons
> started.
Superman didn't.
Superman was vaguely the Earth-1 Superman with possible changes but
they aren't made clear until the Byrnes reboot the following year.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
wrote:
> >Agreed... that Earth One would have to do massively better than
> >continuity for one to replace the other... but I think that CoIE, Zero
> >Hour & Infinite Crisis prove that you don't have to have every time
> >tanking for a universe to be shaken up.
> Well, it's a long way from shaking up the universe to totally
> abandoning it and starting over...the only one that even came close to
> that was CoIE and, as we all agree, that was a long way from a total
> restart.
It's not abandoning it and starting over, it's starting a new universe
and maybe abandoning it later.
I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
just ending the old one becomes viable.
> I would be very surprised to see this Earth One family of titles grow
> much beyond the major "icons"...if it even goes beyond Superman and
> Batman.
It really does depend. Obviously they're not talking beyond Superman
& Batman at the moment and it would be stupid to talk about more until
you see if they work.
But if they are successful, I'd expect to see at least an origin of
most of the silver age icons... and from the success or not of that
we'd see how things expand.
Obviously if this is ruled by the mainstream audience not much beyond
Superman & Batman will get many issues unless other things get films
or TV shows.
> >What I would like to see Earth One do is collect up the dead "icons"
> >so they don't have to be reintroduced in continiuity.
> It's a little late for that, don't you think?
Hell, yeah. That's why I suggested it ten years ago when it would
have been useful.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I wonder if it, given any success, will quickly go the Ultimate
> route of throwing in everyone and every previous story just for the
> sake of saying "Hey, here is the Earth One version of Booster Gold!"
> and "Hey, this is the Earth One version of Matrix!".
Twice yearly OGNs would suggest otherwise, but it would always be a
temptation for the creative and editorial teams.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> >>Yeah, but this time there can be one Kara Zor-El/LInda Lee/Danvers not
> >>Matrix & Earth-born Angel Linda Danvers & Some brainwashed girl from
> >>the future & Kara & et c...
> Exactly. Earth-1 was not a clean break for Superman, Batman, and
> Wonder Woman, because they were still published between 1951 and 1956.
> Earth-One, however, wisely chooses to start with those major
> characters (or at least two of them), so what follows *should* be more
> ordered.
If this is handled correctly.
This is a good idea under Dan... and a lot of good ideas under Dan
have been executed horribly.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> To be fair, there wasn't really a problem with hawkman until the
> hawkworld series several years later...and the black canary problem
> was indirectly caused by the wonder woman reboot...as were the
> problems with donna troy's origin...if perez had set the WW origin
> story in the past (as Byrne did on Superman) instead of making her a
> new addition to the DCU, many problems could have been avoided...the
> original hawkworld series (which I liked) also should have been set in
> the past.
Setting new origins in the past isn't a clean slate.
You have to set new origins in the "present".
Which is why "Earth One" looks like a clean slate, but most other
restarts haven't.
===
= DUG.
===
Lilith
<bai...@coastalnet.com> wrote:
Wasn't Ultimate supposed to be "what Marvel would look like if we
started it today" kind of story? So it doesn't surprise me that
they're bringing out the old characters into newer story lines. If
you're talking about how the hero would be written you'd have to look
at how his/her foes would be written.
--
Lilith
Billy Bissette
41cb5b...@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
Two graphic novels is certainly room enough to explode either the
Bat or Superman families with new incarnations, as well as time to
revisit at least two stories if not more.
Ultimate X-Men at times seemed almost to be in a race with itself
to "reinvent" as many mutants as possible as fast as possible. And
to retell as many stories as possible.
grinningdemon
I considered post-crisis Superman as starting with Byrne's reboot.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 12:44 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com>
>wrote:
>> >Agreed... that Earth One would have to do massively better than
>> >continuity for one to replace the other... but I think that CoIE, Zero
>> >Hour & Infinite Crisis prove that you don't have to have every time
>> >tanking for a universe to be shaken up.
>> Well, it's a long way from shaking up the universe to totally
>> abandoning it and starting over...the only one that even came close to
>> that was CoIE and, as we all agree, that was a long way from a total
>> restart.
>
>It's not abandoning it and starting over, it's starting a new universe
>and maybe abandoning it later.
Semantics...it would amount to the same thing...and I just really
can't see it ever happening.
>I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
>success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
>be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
>just ending the old one becomes viable.
The thing is, without a plan on DC's part, it is extremely unlikely
that the earth one books would ever rise to that level of success.
>> I would be very surprised to see this Earth One family of titles grow
>> much beyond the major "icons"...if it even goes beyond Superman and
>> Batman.
>
>It really does depend. Obviously they're not talking beyond Superman
>& Batman at the moment and it would be stupid to talk about more until
>you see if they work.
>
>But if they are successful, I'd expect to see at least an origin of
>most of the silver age icons... and from the success or not of that
>we'd see how things expand.
Oh, I'm sure there will be tons of characters to get the earth one
treatment if the books are a success...but I doubt there will be many
ongoing titles beyond Superman and Batman even if it is
successful...despite the success of Marvel's Ultimate line, it has
never grown beyond 3-4 ongoing titles at any one time.
>Obviously if this is ruled by the mainstream audience not much beyond
>Superman & Batman will get many issues unless other things get films
>or TV shows.
>
>> >What I would like to see Earth One do is collect up the dead "icons"
>> >so they don't have to be reintroduced in continiuity.
>> It's a little late for that, don't you think?
>
>Hell, yeah. That's why I suggested it ten years ago when it would
>have been useful.
Oh well...what's done is done.
grinningdemon
I wasn't suggesting it would have been a clean slate...but it would
have been a better way to handle things post-crisis...a line-wide
reboot never would have worked because certain titles (some of which
were very popular) would not have been able to exist for quite a while
afterward.
grinningdemon
And, as a result, it was, by far, the worst of the Ultimate books.
Daibhid Ceanaideach
Even then, he stops having a clean slate very early on. There's the MOS
mini, and then it goes "And that was five or so years ago. Since then (or
possibly between issues, we'll sort that out later) he's met many other
heroes, including the Justice League and may or may not have joined, but
was probably involved in any pre-Crisis JLA story he had a significant
role in. But *not* most of his own pre-Crisis stories, because they
feature characters who we're about to introduce for the first time. Oh,
and for added fun, lets cross over with Shadow War of Hawkman, and
*really* screw things up..."
--
Dave
People say nothing rhymes with orange, but it doesn't.
Duggy
There was a period between CoIE & MoS that had a non-clean-slate
Superman.
When MoS reintroduced Superman it caused problems with post CoIE
references that were no longer possible.
Thus, initially, the Post-CoIE Superman did not have a clean slate and
neither did the Post-CoIE universe. The addition of a clean slate
Superman after caused some damage to the CoIE universe.
The Earth-One titles are clean slates in ways that CoIE never was.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:35:53 -0800 (PST), Duggy
> >and maybe abandoning it later.
> Semantics...it would amount to the same thing...and I just really
> can't see it ever happening.
It's not semantics at all. (The following includes pretend dates for
purposes of illustration).
You're saying that the following are exactly the same thing:
Superman: Earth One & Batman: Earth One are first published on
01/01/2011. They become successful and spawn a line of Earth One
titles. The current continuity is phased out over time and officially
ends on 12/31/2020.
The current continuity ends on 12/31/2010. Superman: Earth One,
Batman: Earth One & other titles are the new universe from 1/1/11.
> >I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
> >success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
> >be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
> >just ending the old one becomes viable.
> The thing is, without a plan on DC's part, it is extremely unlikely
> that the earth one books would ever rise to that level of success.
"without a plan" can mean a lot of things.
DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
That may or may not mean success.
> >It really does depend. Obviously they're not talking beyond Superman
> >& Batman at the moment and it would be stupid to talk about more until
> >you see if they work.
>
> >But if they are successful, I'd expect to see at least an origin of
> >most of the silver age icons... and from the success or not of that
> >we'd see how things expand.
> Oh, I'm sure there will be tons of characters to get the earth one
> treatment if the books are a success...but I doubt there will be many
> ongoing titles beyond Superman and Batman even if it is
> successful...despite the success of Marvel's Ultimate line, it has
> never grown beyond 3-4 ongoing titles at any one time.
I can understand that. More than 3 - 4 ongoing titles require a
larger commitment.
With Batman/Superman we're talking 4 GNs a year. There's certainly
room for more GNs set in the Earth One universe... especially since
you can do crossovers as standalone GNs not each issue being part of a
story. I agree that not everything will get "ongoing" GNs... some
characters may just get one or two, some once not twice a year, some
only when a good story is presented. In some ways there is a lot more
room for characters than having 3-4 ongoing series.
> >Hell, yeah. That's why I suggested it ten years ago when it would
> >have been useful.
> Oh well...what's done is done.
True.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> I wasn't suggesting it would have been a clean slate...but it would
> have been a better way to handle things post-crisis...a line-wide
> reboot never would have worked because certain titles (some of which
> were very popular) would not have been able to exist for quite a while
> afterward.
Agreed. It would not have worked at all. People forget that.
The other option is a clean slate that is a new history (Wally West
gets his own title, but he is the first Flash...)
A tangental universe is the best way to start a clean slate, but that
puts pressure on all the titles (can you really have Wally-Flash &
Barry-Flash titles simulateously even in different universes.)
===
= DUG.
===
grinningdemon
Again, I never said otherwise.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 15, 2:08 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:35:53 -0800 (PST), Duggy
>> >It's not abandoning it and starting over, it's starting a new universe
>> >and maybe abandoning it later.
>> Semantics...it would amount to the same thing...and I just really
>> can't see it ever happening.
>
>It's not semantics at all. (The following includes pretend dates for
>purposes of illustration).
>
>You're saying that the following are exactly the same thing:
>
>Superman: Earth One & Batman: Earth One are first published on
>01/01/2011. They become successful and spawn a line of Earth One
>titles. The current continuity is phased out over time and officially
>ends on 12/31/2020.
>
>The current continuity ends on 12/31/2010. Superman: Earth One,
>Batman: Earth One & other titles are the new universe from 1/1/11.
It still amounts to dropping one continuity entirely in favor of
another...that has never happened...even after CoIE.
>> >I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
>> >success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
>> >be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
>> >just ending the old one becomes viable.
>> The thing is, without a plan on DC's part, it is extremely unlikely
>> that the earth one books would ever rise to that level of success.
>
>"without a plan" can mean a lot of things.
I meant "without a plan" to phase out mainstream continuity in favor
of earth one.
>DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
>DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
>That may or may not mean success.
I don't believe they would be talking about dumping current continuity
entirely at the same time they are having such success with such books
as Blackest Night...and certainly not before seeing how well the earth
one books will be received.
>> >It really does depend. Obviously they're not talking beyond Superman
>> >& Batman at the moment and it would be stupid to talk about more until
>> >you see if they work.
>>
>> >But if they are successful, I'd expect to see at least an origin of
>> >most of the silver age icons... and from the success or not of that
>> >we'd see how things expand.
>
>> Oh, I'm sure there will be tons of characters to get the earth one
>> treatment if the books are a success...but I doubt there will be many
>> ongoing titles beyond Superman and Batman even if it is
>> successful...despite the success of Marvel's Ultimate line, it has
>> never grown beyond 3-4 ongoing titles at any one time.
>
>I can understand that. More than 3 - 4 ongoing titles require a
>larger commitment.
>
>With Batman/Superman we're talking 4 GNs a year. There's certainly
>room for more GNs set in the Earth One universe... especially since
>you can do crossovers as standalone GNs not each issue being part of a
>story. I agree that not everything will get "ongoing" GNs... some
>characters may just get one or two, some once not twice a year, some
>only when a good story is presented. In some ways there is a lot more
>room for characters than having 3-4 ongoing series.
The Ultimate line is a good comparison because, while there have never
been more than 3-4 ongoing books, there have been mini series and
specials involving other characters...this really isn't all that
different...despite skipping the middle man by going directly to
graphic novel format, the amount of new material created for this line
(even if it is successful) probably won't out-do the Ultimate books by
much...because, as you say, it would require more of a committment
than DC is likely to make...look at the All Star books...both highly
successful and yet the line is essentially dead.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 15, 2:12 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> I wasn't suggesting it would have been a clean slate...but it would
>> have been a better way to handle things post-crisis...a line-wide
>> reboot never would have worked because certain titles (some of which
>> were very popular) would not have been able to exist for quite a while
>> afterward.
>
>Agreed. It would not have worked at all. People forget that.
Still wouldn't...for the same reason...even a gradual phase-out would
still involve an arbitrary cut-off point for many popular books and
character...many of which have taken decades to evolve.
>The other option is a clean slate that is a new history (Wally West
>gets his own title, but he is the first Flash...)
Would anyone really want that?
>A tangental universe is the best way to start a clean slate, but that
>puts pressure on all the titles (can you really have Wally-Flash &
>Barry-Flash titles simulateously even in different universes.)
Forget the different universes...I would rather Barry and Wally each
have their own books in the current continuity...it's certainly
preferably to making them share a single one (as is about to
happen)...these days, the success of books is much more creator-driven
than it ever was...I have no doubt multiple Flash titles could be a
success if they were both given a decent creative push.
Billy Bissette
news:auggi5dh4q5d5pbhf...@4ax.com:
>>DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
>>DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
>>That may or may not mean success.
>
> I don't believe they would be talking about dumping current continuity
> entirely at the same time they are having such success with such books
> as Blackest Night...and certainly not before seeing how well the earth
> one books will be received.
When it comes to worlds, DC likes to have its cake and eat it too,
anyway. They wouldn't replace the current universe with Earth One.
They'd just cross them over. The eventual result should be something
of a train wreck, or pretty much like any other of their universe
splitting/merging/hypertiming events. (Or if Earth One never
becomes big, it will just be something a bit silent.)
Duggy
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:13:50 -0800 (PST),Duggy
> <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
> >On Dec 15, 2:08 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> >> Semantics...it would amount to the same thing...and I just really
> >> can't see it ever happening.
> >It's not semantics at all. (The following includes pretend dates for
> >purposes of illustration).
> >You're saying that the following are exactly the same thing:
> >Superman: Earth One & Batman: Earth One are first published on
> >01/01/2011. They become successful and spawn a line of Earth One
> >titles. The current continuity is phased out over time and officially
> >ends on 12/31/2020.
> >The current continuity ends on 12/31/2010. Superman: Earth One,
> >Batman: Earth One & other titles are the new universe from 1/1/11.
> It still amounts to dropping one continuity entirely in favor of
> another...that has never happened...even after CoIE.
Not at DC, no.
And the dropping would happen organically to suddenly.
> >> >I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
> >> >success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
> >> >be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
> >> >just ending the old one becomes viable.
> >> The thing is, without a plan on DC's part, it is extremely unlikely
> >> that the earth one books would ever rise to that level of success.
> >"without a plan" can mean a lot of things.
> I meant "without a plan" to phase out mainstream continuity in favor
> of earth one.
A plan may not be necessary. If, say, GNs at bookshops become 90% of
the market & singles die out that the current set up will do the job
for them... unless they change the way they publish the current
continuity books...
> >DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
> >DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
> >That may or may not mean success.
> I don't believe they would be talking about dumping current continuity
> entirely at the same time they are having such success with such books
> as Blackest Night...and certainly not before seeing how well the earth
> one books will be received.
I never said they were.
This is all a "could happen" in the current universe fails and Earth
One doesn't.
> The Ultimate line is a good comparison because, while there have never
> been more than 3-4 ongoing books, there have been mini series and
> specials involving other characters...this really isn't all that
> different...despite skipping the middle man by going directly to
> graphic novel format, the amount of new material created for this line
> (even if it is successful) probably won't out-do the Ultimate books by
> much...because, as you say, it would require more of a committment
> than DC is likely to make...
Assuming 6 issues in each GN then twice yearly B:EO & S:E1 are 2
ongoing series. Assume Wondy as a third. Have a Flash Annual & a
Green Lantern Annual as a forth. A each mini-series is another GN.
I think that's maintainable depending on the market and reception.
Another advantage is that unsuccessful "series" can be canceled
instantly.
Another point is, unlike an ongoing series they can easily make B:E1 &
S:EO come out once a year to allow room for, say JLA: EARTH ONE and
SUPERMAN/BATMAN: EARTH ONE. That is, 3 - 4 ongoing series is 6 - 8
GNs, not nec 3 - 4 series of two GNs a year.
> look at the All Star books...both highly
> successful and yet the line is essentially dead.
I think that EARTH ONE is what ALL STAR was meant to be. Once again,
Didio working with great plans and bad execution.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:17:01 -0800 (PST),Duggy
> Still wouldn't...for the same reason...even a gradual phase-out would
> still involve an arbitrary cut-off point for many popular books and
> character...many of which have taken decades to evolve.
I don't know about CoIE, but Zero Hour, Inf Crisis, Battle for the
Cowl and many others have all involved arbitrary cut off points.
And a phasing out doesn't mean that there will be cut off points. How
many of the current titles were around 10 years ago besides Superman,
Batman, Action & Detective? Letting comics die when they die could
pretty much do the job.
> >The other option is a clean slate that is a new history (Wally West
> >gets his own title, but he is the first Flash...)
> Would anyone really want that?
No one would. But it's the only way to have a clean slate at the
point of CoIE without culling successful comics for dead ones.
> >A tangental universe is the best way to start a clean slate, but that
> >puts pressure on all the titles (can you really have Wally-Flash &
> >Barry-Flash titles simulateously even in different universes.)
> Forget the different universes...I would rather Barry and Wally each
> have their own books in the current continuity...it's certainly
> preferably to making them share a single one (as is about to
> happen)...these days, the success of books is much more creator-driven
> than it ever was...I have no doubt multiple Flash titles could be a
> success if they were both given a decent creative push.
Well, you'd have to give each comic their own identity. "The Flash -
Wally West" and "The Flash - Barry Allen" probably isn't enough to
make sep comics work. I'm not saying change Wally's ID... just you'd
have to differenciate the comics somehow. (This even applies to other
universe comics).
Has that sort of thing ever been done (outside of multiple titles for
a single character?)
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote innews:auggi5dh4q5d5pbhf...@4ax.com:
>
> > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:13:50 -0800 (PST),Duggy
> > <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
> >>DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
> >>DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
> >>That may or may not mean success.
>
> > I don't believe they would be talking about dumping current continuity
> > entirely at the same time they are having such success with such books
> > as Blackest Night...and certainly not before seeing how well the earth
> > one books will be received.
>
> When it comes to worlds, DC likes to have its cake and eat it too,
> anyway. They wouldn't replace the current universe with Earth One.
> They'd just cross them over. The eventual result should be something
> of a train wreck, or pretty much like any other of their universe
> splitting/merging/hypertiming events.
Yeah. That's the fear.
> (Or if Earth One never
> becomes big, it will just be something a bit silent.)
True.
===
= DUG.
===
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 16, 2:26 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:13:50 -0800 (PST),Duggy
>> <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>> >On Dec 15, 2:08 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> Semantics...it would amount to the same thing...and I just really
>> >> can't see it ever happening.
>> >It's not semantics at all. (The following includes pretend dates for
>> >purposes of illustration).
>> >You're saying that the following are exactly the same thing:
>
>> >Superman: Earth One & Batman: Earth One are first published on
>> >01/01/2011. They become successful and spawn a line of Earth One
>> >titles. The current continuity is phased out over time and officially
>> >ends on 12/31/2020.
>
>> >The current continuity ends on 12/31/2010. Superman: Earth One,
>> >Batman: Earth One & other titles are the new universe from 1/1/11.
>
>> It still amounts to dropping one continuity entirely in favor of
>> another...that has never happened...even after CoIE.
>
>Not at DC, no.
Has it happened with any other publisher? And I'm not counting stuff
like the Red Circle characters where they change publishers and aren't
published for decades at a time.
>And the dropping would happen organically to suddenly.
>
>> >> >I'm sure there is no planned end-date, however, over time if the
>> >> >success of EARTH-ONE out shines the current continuity that there will
>> >> >be more focus on the current continuity in favour of the new one until
>> >> >just ending the old one becomes viable.
>> >> The thing is, without a plan on DC's part, it is extremely unlikely
>> >> that the earth one books would ever rise to that level of success.
>> >"without a plan" can mean a lot of things.
>> I meant "without a plan" to phase out mainstream continuity in favor
>> of earth one.
>
>A plan may not be necessary. If, say, GNs at bookshops become 90% of
>the market & singles die out that the current set up will do the job
>for them... unless they change the way they publish the current
>continuity books...
Extremely unlikely...releasing books in singles and gn format often
allows them to sell the same material twice to the same reader...plus
you have readers who prefer one format over the other.
>> >DC may have a plan to phase on the DCU over time. We don't know.
>> >DC obviously has a plan with this to target the mainstream audience.
>> >That may or may not mean success.
>> I don't believe they would be talking about dumping current continuity
>> entirely at the same time they are having such success with such books
>> as Blackest Night...and certainly not before seeing how well the earth
>> one books will be received.
>
>I never said they were.
>
>This is all a "could happen" in the current universe fails and Earth
>One doesn't.
The current universe WON'T fail as long as they keep cranking out high
profile projects from high profile creators...again, I think it would
require DC to intentionally run the current universe into the ground
for the purpose of setting up a switch over to the other...they seem
to do that quite often with individual series...they plan some high
profile event or relauch down the line to revitalize a property and
then place sub-par talent on the book to run it into the ground and
justify the eventual relaunch...they've done it with GL, JLA, and
Flash (twice) all in the last decade...and that's just off the top of
my head.
>> The Ultimate line is a good comparison because, while there have never
>> been more than 3-4 ongoing books, there have been mini series and
>> specials involving other characters...this really isn't all that
>> different...despite skipping the middle man by going directly to
>> graphic novel format, the amount of new material created for this line
>> (even if it is successful) probably won't out-do the Ultimate books by
>> much...because, as you say, it would require more of a committment
>> than DC is likely to make...
>
>Assuming 6 issues in each GN then twice yearly B:EO & S:E1 are 2
>ongoing series. Assume Wondy as a third. Have a Flash Annual & a
>Green Lantern Annual as a forth. A each mini-series is another GN.
Which is more or less about the same amount of material the Ultimate
line produces on average.
>I think that's maintainable depending on the market and reception.
>Another advantage is that unsuccessful "series" can be canceled
>instantly.
Is that really an advantage? Wouldn't they still be paying for the
production of just as much material as they would with singles of a
cancelled series?
>Another point is, unlike an ongoing series they can easily make B:E1 &
>S:EO come out once a year to allow room for, say JLA: EARTH ONE and
>SUPERMAN/BATMAN: EARTH ONE. That is, 3 - 4 ongoing series is 6 - 8
>GNs, not nec 3 - 4 series of two GNs a year.
How is that different than with ongoing series that often go on hiatus
or get cancelled in favor of some special event before they resume or
get relaunched?
>> look at the All Star books...both highly
>> successful and yet the line is essentially dead.
>
>I think that EARTH ONE is what ALL STAR was meant to be. Once again,
>Didio working with great plans and bad execution.
I'm not sure about that...the up-side here is supposed to be ultimate
creative freedom but, if they are tied to each other, then that
freedom will be limited...unlike the All Star books...that said, I
have faith that Didio can fuck up anything and everything he touches.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 16, 2:34 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:17:01 -0800 (PST),Duggy
>> >Agreed. It would not have worked at all. People forget that.
>> Still wouldn't...for the same reason...even a gradual phase-out would
>> still involve an arbitrary cut-off point for many popular books and
>> character...many of which have taken decades to evolve.
>
>I don't know about CoIE, but Zero Hour, Inf Crisis, Battle for the
>Cowl and many others have all involved arbitrary cut off points.
Yes, but, as we've said, they weren't total restarts...at least not
line-wide.
>And a phasing out doesn't mean that there will be cut off points. How
>many of the current titles were around 10 years ago besides Superman,
>Batman, Action & Detective? Letting comics die when they die could
>pretty much do the job.
It's not the individual titles that concern me so much as the
characters...DC, as it stands now, has multiple generations of heroes
running around their books...some of the newer creations (such as Tim
Drake and Conner Kent) are quite popular and several generations
removed from the icons...characters like that wouldn't be able to
exist in the Earth One line for many years if not
decades...furthermore, evidence suggests that DC likes publishing
multiple versions of their major characters...usually the mainstream
version tied in to current continuity and subject to change and growth
over the years and fresh, independent versions without all the
continuity baggage...which is why we have been getting a steady stream
of Batman Year One stories (both from books like Batman Confidential
and from minis) for 20 years now and why Superman's origin gets redone
every 15 minutes...I don't think they want choose one over the other
when they can have it both ways.
>> >The other option is a clean slate that is a new history (Wally West
>> >gets his own title, but he is the first Flash...)
>> Would anyone really want that?
>
>No one would. But it's the only way to have a clean slate at the
>point of CoIE without culling successful comics for dead ones.
>
>> >A tangental universe is the best way to start a clean slate, but that
>> >puts pressure on all the titles (can you really have Wally-Flash &
>> >Barry-Flash titles simulateously even in different universes.)
>
>> Forget the different universes...I would rather Barry and Wally each
>> have their own books in the current continuity...it's certainly
>> preferably to making them share a single one (as is about to
>> happen)...these days, the success of books is much more creator-driven
>> than it ever was...I have no doubt multiple Flash titles could be a
>> success if they were both given a decent creative push.
>
>Well, you'd have to give each comic their own identity. "The Flash -
>Wally West" and "The Flash - Barry Allen" probably isn't enough to
>make sep comics work. I'm not saying change Wally's ID... just you'd
>have to differenciate the comics somehow. (This even applies to other
>universe comics).
Possibly one Flash books and Flash Family or All-Flash?
>Has that sort of thing ever been done (outside of multiple titles for
>a single character?)
Not much different from the current set up with GL and GLC...although
I honestly think it's kind of an accident that the GLC book is doing
well...it doesn't feature any high profile characters and it didn't
get any major creators help get it started...I don't think DC expected
it to succeed...they certainly didn't put much effort into Kyle's Ion
book.
Truthfully, I'd be ok with Wally retiring for a while to give the
focus to Barry for the time being (because there are WAY too many
speedsters running around) but, if they are both going to be active,
they should both get their own books.
Duggy
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:26:13 -0800 (PST),Duggy
> >> It still amounts to dropping one continuity entirely in favor of
> >> another...that has never happened...even after CoIE.
> >Not at DC, no.
> Has it happened with any other publisher? And I'm not counting stuff
> like the Red Circle characters where they change publishers and aren't
> published for decades at a time.
Valiant/Acclaim.
Almost at Wildstorm.
> >A plan may not be necessary. If, say, GNs at bookshops become 90% of
> >the market & singles die out that the current set up will do the job
> >for them... unless they change the way they publish the current
> >continuity books...
> Extremely unlikely...releasing books in singles and gn format often
> allows them to sell the same material twice to the same reader...plus
> you have readers who prefer one format over the other.
True. It was illustrative, not predictive. Still, tastes change, you
never know.
If the demand for monthlies drops enough it won't be viable to publish
a small number of monthlies, selling things twice isn't useful if you
lose money on the first sale.
> >I never said they were.
> >This is all a "could happen" in the current universe fails and Earth
> >One doesn't.
> The current universe WON'T fail as long as they keep cranking out high
> profile projects from high profile creators...
Unless the comic-shop market collapses. Could happen. Once again,
not saying it is, but...
> >Assuming 6 issues in each GN then twice yearly B:EO & S:E1 are 2
> >ongoing series. Assume Wondy as a third. Have a Flash Annual & a
> >Green Lantern Annual as a forth. A each mini-series is another GN.
> Which is more or less about the same amount of material the Ultimate
> line produces on average.
Wow... that's exactly what I said.
> >I think that's maintainable depending on the market and reception.
> >Another advantage is that unsuccessful "series" can be canceled
> >instantly.
> Is that really an advantage? Wouldn't they still be paying for the
> production of just as much material as they would with singles of a
> cancelled series?
Depends. Solicitation, lag and story back-log mean that single can be
a bit longer. Plus they have to officially announce. Earth One
titles can just disappear. Also an Earth One title can become an
annual if sales aren't great but still OK, very few comics from DC
come out every two months.
> >Another point is, unlike an ongoing series they can easily make B:E1 &
> >S:EO come out once a year to allow room for, say JLA: EARTH ONE and
> >SUPERMAN/BATMAN: EARTH ONE. That is, 3 - 4 ongoing series is 6 - 8
> >GNs, not nec 3 - 4 series of two GNs a year.
> How is that different than with ongoing series that often go on hiatus
> or get cancelled in favor of some special event before they resume or
> get relaunched?
Because going yearly isn't a relaunch, it's a reduction to 6 issues a
year... or becoming a series of yearly mini-series...
Which may be a better way of looking at it.
The Ultimates 3-4 + minis isn't quite right, Earth One is 6-8 plus
minis a year.
> >I think that EARTH ONE is what ALL STAR was meant to be. Once again,
> >Didio working with great plans and bad execution.
> I'm not sure about that...the up-side here is supposed to be ultimate
> creative freedom but, if they are tied to each other, then that
> freedom will be limited...unlike the All Star books...that said, I
> have faith that Didio can fuck up anything and everything he touches.
High profile creators (not as high, admittedly), new, clean universes,
a supposed iconic version of the characters.
Yes, it's one universe instead of two, but I think that the big
difference is that the creators have more conventional views of the
character... which means that they don't really need to freedom of an
unshared universe.
===
= DUG.
===
Duggy
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:36:16 -0800 (PST), Duggy
> >many of the current titles were around 10 years ago besides Superman,
> >Batman, Action & Detective? Letting comics die when they die could
> >pretty much do the job.
> It's not the individual titles that concern me so much as the
> characters...DC, as it stands now, has multiple generations of heroes
> running around their books...some of the newer creations (such as Tim
> Drake and Conner Kent) are quite popular and several generations
> removed from the icons...
True, but Conner Kent was killed, Kyle doesn't have his own title,
etc, etc. Just because they exist doesn't mean that they'll always
exist or be popular... and as distasteful as it seems to us I wouldn't
put it beyond them to move things around. Jason Todd was skipped as
Robin in B:TAS.
> >Well, you'd have to give each comic their own identity. "The Flash -
> >Wally West" and "The Flash - Barry Allen" probably isn't enough to
> >make sep comics work. I'm not saying change Wally's ID... just you'd
> >have to differenciate the comics somehow. (This even applies to other
> >universe comics).
> Possibly one Flash books and Flash Family or All-Flash?
Possibly, but I think it would have to say something to the casual
reader (which I think EARTH ONE doesn't).
> Truthfully, I'd be ok with Wally retiring for a while to give the
> focus to Barry for the time being (because there are WAY too many
> speedsters running around) but, if they are both going to be active,
> they should both get their own books.
Good point.
===
= DUG.
===
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 16, 3:10�ｿｽpm, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:26:13 -0800 (PST),Duggy
>> >> It still amounts to dropping one continuity entirely in favor of
>> >> another...that has never happened...even after CoIE.
>> >Not at DC, no.
>> Has it happened with any other publisher? �ｿｽAnd I'm not counting stuff
>> like the Red Circle characters where they change publishers and aren't
>> published for decades at a time.
>
>Valiant/Acclaim.
>Almost at Wildstorm.
When did it almost happen at Wildstorm? Are you talking about that
Captain Atom mini?
>> >Assuming 6 issues in each GN then twice yearly B:EO & S:E1 are 2
>> >ongoing series. �ｿｽAssume Wondy as a third. �ｿｽHave a Flash Annual & a
>> >Green Lantern Annual as a forth. �ｿｽA each mini-series is another GN.
>> Which is more or less about the same amount of material the Ultimate
>> line produces on average.
>
>Wow... that's exactly what I said.
Yes...after I said it first.
>> >Another point is, unlike an ongoing series they can easily make B:E1 &
>> >S:EO come out once a year to allow room for, say JLA: EARTH ONE and
>> >SUPERMAN/BATMAN: EARTH ONE. �ｿｽThat is, 3 - 4 ongoing series is 6 - 8
>> >GNs, not nec 3 - 4 series of two GNs a year.
>> How is that different than with ongoing series that often go on hiatus
>> or get cancelled in favor of some special event before they resume or
>> get relaunched?
>
>Because going yearly isn't a relaunch, it's a reduction to 6 issues a
>year... or becoming a series of yearly mini-series...
I'm not seeing a significant difference...a rose by any other name and
all that.
>Which may be a better way of looking at it.
>
>The Ultimates 3-4 + minis isn't quite right, Earth One is 6-8 plus
>minis a year.
6-8 series? Not sure what you mean here.
>> >I think that EARTH ONE is what ALL STAR was meant to be. �ｿｽOnce again,
>> >Didio working with great plans and bad execution.
>> I'm not sure about that...the up-side here is supposed to be ultimate
>> creative freedom but, if they are tied to each other, then that
>> freedom will be limited...unlike the All Star books...that said, I
>> have faith that Didio can fuck up anything and everything he touches.
>
>High profile creators (not as high, admittedly), new, clean universes,
>a supposed iconic version of the characters.
>
>Yes, it's one universe instead of two, but I think that the big
>difference is that the creators have more conventional views of the
>character... which means that they don't really need to freedom of an
>unshared universe.
We'll just have to see what they do with it...I'm only basing this on
the designs (so I could be totally off base), but I'm getting a Batman
Beyond kind of vibe about the Batman Earth One book with Alfred as
Elderly Bruce Wayne...I hope I'm wrong on that because definitely
isn't conventional.
grinningdemon
<Paul....@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>On Dec 16, 5:27 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:36:16 -0800 (PST), Duggy
>> >And a phasing out doesn't mean that there will be cut off points. How
>> >many of the current titles were around 10 years ago besides Superman,
>> >Batman, Action & Detective? Letting comics die when they die could
>> >pretty much do the job.
>> It's not the individual titles that concern me so much as the
>> characters...DC, as it stands now, has multiple generations of heroes
>> running around their books...some of the newer creations (such as Tim
>> Drake and Conner Kent) are quite popular and several generations
>> removed from the icons...
>
>True, but Conner Kent was killed, Kyle doesn't have his own title,
>etc, etc. Just because they exist doesn't mean that they'll always
>exist or be popular... and as distasteful as it seems to us I wouldn't
>put it beyond them to move things around. Jason Todd was skipped as
>Robin in B:TAS.
That was a single character though...and an admittedly alternate
take...it wasn't replacing the existing incarnation of Batman...or
ditching an entire generation of characters...I just can't see DC
throwing them all out like that.
>> >Well, you'd have to give each comic their own identity. "The Flash -
>> >Wally West" and "The Flash - Barry Allen" probably isn't enough to
>> >make sep comics work. I'm not saying change Wally's ID... just you'd
>> >have to differenciate the comics somehow. (This even applies to other
>> >universe comics).
>> Possibly one Flash books and Flash Family or All-Flash?
>
>Possibly, but I think it would have to say something to the casual
>reader (which I think EARTH ONE doesn't).
It's really no different from GL and GLC...I think it would be clear
enough from the covers and content.