DC to REBOOT???
- Thread starter Professor Zoom
- Start date
- Status
Well, the rule should be to keep things simple; and the new Superman outfit is busy for no reason. Superman is not Batman; he doesn't need special equipment or armor. The belt is okay, but it's more of Jim Lee's "pouches everywhere" crap.
I always go back to the Ultimate DC spread Wizard did years ago:
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?116977-Wizard-s-Ultimate-DC
The rest of the designs are between so-so and not that great (Wonder Woman's is awful), but I believe they "got it" with the Superman design. Superman's costume doesn't need to be complicated.
But it made sense. Going around at high velocity has to be hell on the skin and eyes without some type of protection.
That looks AWFUL. Looks like out of some Tom Clancy video game.
I like the Superman design on that page, except for the Kingdom Come logo, which I've never liked. Take that design and slap on the newer shield, and I think it'd be a decent update.
I'm actually a bit relieved that they aren't messing about with Superman's outfit too much. Even though the new version makes him look like a robot. As for Supergirl's and Superboy's: I give them 12 months and they'll be back to what they had before.
I still think all this is just a temporary thing. Everyone said the "makeover" of Wonder Woman was permanent, except almost immediately it became clear it was a story set in an alternate reality, with images of "classic Wonder Woman" bleeding over.
Same with this thing they got planned. It's essential the mega-crossover on steroids. But they better not change too much or they're going to lose the audience that has kept DC alive for the last 15 years. As I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, I'm personally so disgusted at the apparent decision to restart the numbering on Detective and Action that I might just say screw it to the lot of them. And I buy DC titles almost exclusively these days.
(I'm hoping they instead do the dual numbering thing, where it might say "Action #1" on the outside, but inside it still says Action #905 or whatever.)
Alex
Geoff Johns reinstated Clark-as-Superboy. See Superman: Secret Origin, Final Crisis: Legion of Three Worlds, and Action Comics #900.
Well DC keeps giving me more reasons not to buy their product. As for the new costume, it reminds me of this nightmare:
http://www.writeups.org/fiche.php?id=3235
That doesn't make any sense - either you have some inbuilt ability to protect against running at thousands of miles an hour or you don't and no costume would protect you. Otherwise - why can we see his hair? It would burn off at the speeds he runs without any inbuilt protection*.
* which in the old old comics was an 'aura' and in the newer, the speedforce.
I agree, but I'd like a belt. I know he doesn't need a belt, but I'd like one anyway.
The version of the Flash I always saw had his hair covered.
Where? I'm looking at the image and am just flat missing it.
Same here. After posting my last comment I made the mistake of going onto Bleeding Cool's site and exploring more, and checking out the discussion boards at DC itself. And I think the straw that broke my camel's back was the incredibly sexist (yes, sexist) and Victorian edict regarding the female costuming. Just for the principle of the thing that pissed me off. I remember they tried to do the same thing in the 1980s with Zatanna and Power Girl and a few others and it was as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit. At least with the temporary reimagining of Wonder Woman they kept the "classic" version going in other titles.
Between the incredibly ugly cover for Detective #1, and some of the really bone-headed comments being made, such as "more people buy #1s than #700s" - which means no one should buy #2, #3, #10 - they might as well number EVERY issue #1 by that logic. And with some of the really offensive lack of respect for history I'm seeing in some of the message boards in people's responses to those who are collectors and who are fans trying to explain to children (they must be children) why we should give a damn about maintaining continuity with something that was started 2 years before Hitler invaded Poland. I'm honestly on the verge of indeed making up my mind not to bother with the DC reboots and stick with the independents from here on out (and reprints of pre-reboot DC). I buy $25-30 comics a week some days (more if a graphic novel I like comes out), the majority of which are DC. And there are a lot of guys like me. If too many of us say goodbye, it's gonna be felt, regardless how many iPad files are downloaded.
(I bet the slabbers must be quaking in their books over the downloads. Is it possible to slab a flash drive?)
Alex
Not regardless of how many iPad files are downloaded.
Offended fans always say this when a property that's failing is rebooted, and generally they overestimate how many people agree with them and how influential their purchasing power is. Fans were going to bankrupt Paramount for turning Trek over to J.J. Abrams. In retrospect, the attempt to incrementally modernize Trek via Enterprise was the misguided and failing strategy, whereas kicking over the board and living with the brief surge of outrage turned out to be the way to succeed.
The old paradigm was failing; DC may as well either succeed or go down trying something different.
There's always the possibility that Disney and Time Warner will simply utilize Marvel and DC characters for film, TV and merchandising and largely shut down the publishing side of things. For now Disney is leaving Marvel's publishing alone and Time Warner is making a big push to increase DC's brand visibility across the board, including an expansion in terms of publishing. Comic book fans should be glad of that, even if there they don't agree with all of the editorial decisions.
If they're really fine, then their position will have improved. 
Honestly, would either of these companies be afloat if they actually depended on comic sales as opposed to all kinds of merchandise and use of properties in other media? I suppose DC's firewall is being owned by WarnerBigass Corp.
Honestly, would either of these companies be afloat if they actually depended on comic sales as opposed to all kinds of merchandise and use of properties in other media? I suppose DC's firewall is being owned by WarnerBigass Corp.
Time Warner should add a comics channel to their cable line up. For 14.99 a month you can select DC titles (current and backissue) and read all you want.
- Status
Similar threads
