DC Relaunch

[KevinP]

You know, this is not how you reboot a universe or attract new readers. Bear in mind that these #1s are supposed to be FIRST ISSUES, and look at what you have as the so-called start of a new series: a guy who used to be a swamp thing, a guy who’s been kicked out of the Green Lantern Corps, a Legion that’s been “decimated by the worst disaster in its history” (WHAT HISTORY?? This is supposed to be the first issue!), a couple guys who used to be Robin, a woman who used to be Batgirl and Oracle, a Batman who’s dealing with legal ramifications of his Batman International outfit, etc etc. TEEN TITANS looks more like a reboot, but it has one of the ex-Robins and two other characters (Are Starfire and Arsenal established characters in this universe; if so, were there previous incarnations of the Teen Titans team?)  The Silver Age was successful because DC created all-new versions of GA heroes whom new readers could follow from the beginning.

[KevinP]

Now, that said, I decided to give the DCnU a chance and come at it with a clean slate, instead of comparing it to what I knew.  You have to understand that I'm a dinosaur who started reading GA when he was a backup in ADVENTURE COMICS.  Gotta admit I liked GREEN ARROW #1.  Unlike a lot of the DCnU titles, it's a clean relaunch.  This Ollver Queen has NO ties to his past incarnations.  The idea of an industrialist concerned about doing good as well as making profit has always intrigued me; unrealistic as it is (comics are fantasy after all).  I even compared Tony Stark to Siddhartha on my blog ( http://storiesaresignposts.blogspot.com/2008_05_01_archive.html ). This Queen seems more involved with his corporation than Bruce Wayne, and I hope the bits with Emerson aren't a setup for a hostile takeover and a return to streetwise Ollie.  Everything Ollie says about what he is doing and why the villains, er, punks, er, losers are bad reflects my own beliefs of what heroes should be like, without becoming the Dudley Do-Rights the 50s/60s heroes could be (which I still enjoy, but is not going to attract new readers).  Best example is his line to Jax, "I wanted someone designing my weapons who didn't find enjoyment in discovering new ways to hurt people."  Unfortunately that describes too many of today's superheroes.  In a line that includes savage Hawkman, warrior Wonder Woman, Blackwater Blackhawks and bloodyhanded Red Lanterns, GREEN ARROW strikes just the right balance between the Boy Scouts of the Silver Age and the heroes of today.

[narfstar]

A clean relaunch and your recommendation means I may give GA a try.

[John C]

I don't necessarily think that a clean slate is necessary (there's a lot to be said for a "lived in" universe with a history), but I think there's a huge problem that the history of the universe is...pretty much what it was in January, except for the parts they're rewriting.  Which...what's the point, really?

I haven't looked at Green Arrow, and hadn't planned to, since I can't stand the character (Batman clone, smelly Hippie, killer vigilante, gigolo...none of those are appealing), but this sounds actually different.  If they can keep him and Black Canary (who I like even less) apart, this might be a winner.

[John C]

Just to follow up, I spent the afternoon catching up on some of the new books.

Green Arrow, I'm ashamed to say, I approve.  I'm not fond of the in-your-face Apple comparison trying to pose as hipness, and the new costume...eh, but I like the character for the first time, and I get a kick out of his past reincarnations (the whiny liberal and the pissy avenger) working as his interns.

Mister Terrific...it'd be great if it didn't seem to overlap so much with Green Arrow, and I could have done without "look at these integers," which was probably a typo.  But that aside, it's fast-paced and packed with weird ideas, which I haven't seen in a comic in a long time.

Action Comics?  Granted, I had low expectations with Grant Morrison running things, but this is what Superman should've been like for a long time.  The artwork is seriously muddy and I'm sick to death of the "heat vision eyes," but this Superman is "edgy" enough to bring the kids (and Alan Moore-worshipping adults) in without sacrificing Superman as a hero and nice guy.  I hope it's to stay, and the little bit of Jimmy and Lois I see looks promising.  New Luthor, though, stinks.

(However...he's still a newspaper guy?  Seriously?  Is that even really a job anymore...?  I thought everybody just reprinted the AP and Reuters feeds.)

Hawk and Dove is weird.  Bland story and apparently everything's still in continuity for them, but it's got good characterization that's surprisingly true to the Kesels' series, I think.  Then there's Liefeld's art.  It's ugly.  Very, very ugly.  Unspeakably ugly.  But, it's also solidly done.  Everybody may look like they're on steroids and have motorcycle helmets for skulls and bad facelifts, but the craft side of it, the storytelling aspects, are probably the best I've seen of the "new 52" so far, and a million times better than anything I've seen Liefeld do.

And the last I had time for today was Static Shock.  I don't have any familiarity with the character, but I think I like it, for the most part.  The story's straightforward enough to jump right in (and like Mister Terrific, started right in the action), but the dialogue...Scott McDaniel needs to meet some black people, I think, rather than, say, trying to guess what they might sound like by watching Robin Williams pretend to be black.

So, Justice League aside, and granting that I'm only looking at a handful of issues, the revamp actually looks surprisingly good, so far.

[misappear]

As i cruise into week three, i've found only Action, Animal Man, and Maybe Mr. Terrific that I'd even consider reding again.  It takes a boatload of prior knowledge to navigate these first issues.  In my opinion, DC has failed miserably at creating jumping on points for their titles.  The stories are, at best, mediocre.  Considering the hype, these stories should have been, at the very least, compelling.  There's nothing in these books that pulls a reader in and scream "buy me again."

I began reading DC in December, 1962.  I readily admit that the true golden age of comics is 8, but I just can't get excited about what I'm reading.  It would be tragic if the company irritates long-time fans so much that they lose audience, but I fear this may be the case.  I'm only looking at second issues of some of these titles because I'm willing togive them a shot.  I doubt very much there will be any titles in my future past three or four issues. 

In essence, I'm shocked at how mediocre and mundane the stories are.

-Dave

[John C]

I think that's the one nagging problem I really have.  Not that old fans will leave; I don't think we're a big enough market to care about.  What worries me is that, for all the buildup, a lot of this is...just the next issue of what we've seen before, with all the worthless baggage it entails.

I just read "Batgirl," and the only good thing I can say about it is that I like the logo (that's another thing:  again, all this buildup and your graphic artists came up with block letters rotates slightly?).  It's the very worst of every single Batgirl story I remember growing up with.  Faceless villains, moping about the past, irritating supporting cast (though that was traditionally more Supergirl), getting confused for other heroes, and horrific failure due to inaction before the eventual victory.  And now she gets to flash back to "The Killing Joke" every five pages.

I guess it could be worse.  I guess Barbara's recovery could be an unexplained miracle.  Oh, wait...

Green Lantern seemed like a retread of old stories, too, specifically the run during Crisis.

Maybe a smaller launch would've made more sense...

[Yoc]

Well, here's one retailer bemoaning DC's lack of product to meet what sounds like a huge demand by new and lapsed readers -
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=34535

He wonders about DC's same day digital numbers - I too am Very curious what kind of success that was.
ie numbers of digital sales before and after the relaunch.

-Yoc

[John C]

DC is being pretty cagey about the exact digital numbers, which makes me think they're trying to exaggerate it (since precise numbers are trivial with digital sales), but they sound happy:

http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2011/09/12/inside-the-numbers-justice-league-1-is-officially-the-best-selling-comic-book-of-2011/

Interesting, though, that it's become "damned if you do, damned if you don't."  Retailers have been complaining that DC and Marvel aren't pushing out things that people want to buy and under-ordering, now it's bad that they're doing good things and causing sellouts at twice the usual sales numbers.

I wonder how many of those retailers ran out and then pimped the digital sales, though, or if they tried to convince the customer to come back week after week for a later printing.  If the latter, don't expect sales to last too long, since I don't think modern customers appreciate games like that.

(Wait.  "Red Lanterns" sold out?  Was the print run, like, five?)

[narfstar]

My LCS got shorted on a lot of books. How good is it to make customers mad?

[John C]

It's better than sitting on back-stock, at least, so I understand the approach.  And that's my point:  Did they suggest getting the digital book?  That would seem to...if not "solve" the problem, at least lessen the impact better than "come back next week."

[paw broon]

Within the last 3 days I got to a comic shop and the Glasgow Mart.  Comic shop Dave reported selling out on some titles and was doubtful if reorders for next prints would turn up.  There had been more young folk coming in and he was really hopeful that sales on subsequent issues would be, if not be as good as #1's, at least strong.  Punters I spoke to in the shop were all aware of the downloads but wanted paper copies.
Fans at the mart reported one local shop selling out same day but this seems to be the shop that's been cutting back on orders recently. Both dealers and fans presented mixed views, with some of us older blokes confirming our fears that this would be a jumping off point but there were a lot of fans, including some older D.C. nuts who were happy with a lot of the stuff.
As for me, I bought 6 titles, none of which were from D.C. but, as I have friends who run comic shops, I was able to have a good look at some of the new stuff and came to the conclusion that I didn't really want to start loading up with all this new stuff which carries the names of characters I've been following since 1959, when American comics were first distributed in U.K.  My one hope rests with All Star Western next week.

[misappear]

I've read everything for the first three weeks and was unimpressed.  I feel that the stories were sub-par as origins/first issues, and even sub-par as story arcs.  If that's the norm, I'll take a pass.  Curiosity got me reading the titles, but the reason why I quit was stll evident: you don't need a relaunch, you need talented creators.  Nothing stood out at all!  If these offerings are enough to bring in and retain a huge new/lapsed reader base, I'll be the most shocked person around.  I've thought about the long term effects of this gimmick and I think it really doesn't matter.  If it fizzles, they're back to where they were in August,  no big deal.  Who really cares if Action Comics got to number 1000?  It won't stop global warming.

There are, what, a half-dozen Robins running around, two or three Supergirls.  More Green Lanterns than I can count.  They've already screwed up any integrity the continuity might still have, so the hell with 'em.

--Dave

[johndesmarais]

There are, what, a half-dozen Robins running around, two or three Supergirls.  More Green Lanterns than I can count.  They've already screwed up any integrity the continuity might still have, so the hell with 'em.

--Dave

You've seen multiple Supergirls?

[misappear]

Yeah.  Some character named Power Girl, A non-Kara Supergirl, and of course my wife who puts them all to shame.

--David