General DC Relaunch Thread (including FAQ)

[webhead2006]

Dc has released a FAQ on the relaunch:

Why do it? There is a lot of speculation out there, are you “rebooting” the titles?

This is an epic and ambitious initiative that ushers in a new generation of comics for DC Comics and will set the tone for storylines and characters for years to come. With all of the titles starting at #1, our creative teams have the ability to take a more modern approach – not only with each character, but with how the characters interact with one another and the universe as a whole, and focus on the earlier part of the careers of each of our iconic characters. A time when they didn’t have as much experience defeating all their nemeses. A time when they weren’t as sure of their abilities. A time when they haven’t saved the world countless times. It’s this period that is rich with creative opportunity as we show why these characters are so amazing, so iconic and so special.

We think fans will be excited by this approach and The New 52 will provide DC Entertainment an opportunity to aggressively reach the widest possible audience worldwide, through captivating stories and an accessible entry point. We see great opportunities to tell new, contemporary, cutting edge stories building off the best known, classic stories that make up each of the title’s back histories.

DC Comics has had a number of reboots, what makes this one different?

This is not a reboot, it’s a launch. This is a historic initiative for DC Entertainment and the DC Comics characters – and a first in the company’s publishing history. This next era of DC Comics characters will see 52 all-new #1 issues of its super hero titles at the same time AND same-day digital across the board. In addition to the number changes, our talented creative teams are working behind the scenes to create compelling storylines and new costume designs for many of our iconic DC Comics characters.

Why not call it a reboot?

It’s not a reboot. A reboot is typically a restart of the story or character that jettisons away everything that happened previously.

This is a new beginning which builds off the best of the past. For the stories launching as new #1s in September, we have carefully hand-selected the most powerful and pertinent moments in these characters’ lives and stories to remain in the mythology and lore. And then we’ve asked the best creators in the industry to modernize, update and enhance the books with new and exciting tales. The result is that we retained the good stuff, and then make it better.

Does The New 52 undo events or continuity that I’ve been reading?

Some yes, some no. But many of the great stories remain. For example – Batgirl. The Killing Joke still happened and she was Oracle. Now she will go through physical rehabilitation and become a more seasoned and nuanced character because she had these incredible and diverse experiences.

So will all titles be entry points or will you need to know back-story for some?

Each title will read as a #1 issue that will make jumping into the story extremely accessible for all types of readers. The stories are designed in a way that new fans will be able to pick up a book and immediately be drawn into the story, while at the same time existing fans will be engrossed by the new and epic moments that take place.

Do the new #1s mean that the previous stories didn’t take place?

Our creative teams have a firm understanding of the storied heritage of characters and titles. The new #1 issues will introduce readers to a more modern, diverse universe of DC Comics characters, with some character variations in appearance, origin and age. All stories will be grounded in each character’s legend – but will map to real world situations, interactions, tragedies and triumphs.

Overall, DC Entertainment is focused on putting out the most innovative storylines, featuring the most iconic characters, created by the most creative minds within the industry.

Might you just introduce a new DC “Ultimate” line and give it the spotlight for a few months, then have the opportunity to bring back the other continuity? Will this all be put back to “normal” after a few months?

No – this is the new universe of DC Comics characters. This is an epic and ambitious initiative that ushers in the next era of the DC Comics characters and will set the tone for storylines and characters for years to come. This is not an “event,” because events expire.

Why are you changing the costumes?

DC Entertainment is led by some of the biggest fans of comics out there. We know that if Geoff and Jim are excited about the stories and artwork, we’re on to something big. While there may be some naysayers, when we thought about starting the entire DC Comics universe line of comics with #1/first issues we looked at the benefits for the long haul, not just a year or two. Our goal is to create a watershed moment for DC Entertainment – and the industry as a whole – where fans will remember this as a time of innovation while maintaining DC Entertainment’s commitment to creating entertaining and masterfully created stories.

Do you not care about your company’s history? If you do this right, what do you want your legacy to be 75 years from now?

The legacy of DC Entertainment, and DC Comics before it, is based on the creativity of our editors and our creative talent, and our commitment to the best storytelling possible. DC has always been about character development and growth.

Take Batman for example. In the early days he was a vigilante who brandished a gun. Then he morphed into a whimsical character and then in the 1960′s he became more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night. We can all agree that we are glad Batman evolved.

Our goal is to create a watershed moment for DC Entertainment – and the industry as a whole – where fans will remember this as a time of innovation while maintaining DC Entertainment’s commitment to creating entertaining and masterfully created stories.

Specifically why end Action and Detective before they reach their 1,000th issues? Action Comics is the longest running American comic book, followed closely by Detective Comics, the company’s namesake. Isn’t renumbering these series actually a retreat from the love of “comics as comics”?

Our Co-Publishers and editors thought long and hard about this. It was an extremely important decision that was not taken lightly. But executing this unprecedented event meant taking creative risks on every level and pushing forward with big, new ideas. A partial renumbering would not have had the impact we needed to showcase the amazing changes and direction we have planned for the new DC Comics universe of characters. Counting issue numbers is focusing on the past, not the future.

Can this event fix/undo an event I don’t like from the past?/ Can this event bring back a character from the past that I miss?/ Does this event change the status of (insert pretty much any character here)? What would you say to someone whose favorite superhero no longer exists?

Characters are always evolving in the DC universe and part of the evolution means that characters come and go. While not all current characters will be part of the new DC Comics line of books, we are confident the ambitious plan we are creating will introduce a new generation of protagonists and antagonists that will captivate readers.

We are kicking things off with our best and brightest characters and what makes them so compelling and great. Simply because you don’t see a personal favorite in the September launches doesn’t mean your favorites are gone. This is just the beginning.

[thecolorsblend]

I'd forgotten how monotonous evasive boilerplate corporate FAQ's could be...

[Apologist Puncher]

Take Batman for example. In the early days he was a vigilante who brandished a gun. Then he morphed into a whimsical character and then in the 1960′s he became more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night. We can all agree that we are glad Batman evolved.

Doesn't this say it all when it comes to Dan Dildo and his ignorance? In the 60's Batman was "more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night"?? Really?




Fuck you, Dan Dildo, Geoff "Singer-Lite" Johns, and Jim "F Superman And His 70+ Year History" Lee.

[non_amos]

Take Batman for example. In the early days he was a vigilante who brandished a gun. Then he morphed into a whimsical character and then in the 1960′s he became more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night. We can all agree that we are glad Batman evolved.

Doesn't this say it all when it comes to Dan Dildo and his ignorance? In the 60's Batman was "more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night"?? Really?




Fuck you, Dan Dildo, Geoff "Singer-Lite" Johns, and Jim "F Superman And His 70+ Year History" Lee.

Begin Batman TV theme song: Duh duh-dud duh-duh-duh-duh-duh..........

Followed by "ZOWIE!" "POW!" "BIFF!"

Yeah, I'd say Dildo is a retard. Do you suppose he meant the SEVENTIES when they had Denny O'Neill on the Batman titles? Isn't that when they actually started to make batman 'gritty' & 'dark'?!

[webhead2006]

Ya stupid idoit. I wonder what jack wrote the faq.

[thecolorsblend]

A lot of it comes down to what you consider "dark". If you mark that period as the start of the O'Neil/Adams run, sure, that's Detective Comics #395, cover dated January 1970... although at the latest it would've come out in December 1969 and work the issue would had to have begun no later than August 1969. So that much did happen in the 60's.

But apart from that, the Frank Robbins/Irv Novick issues of Batman leading up to the O'Neil/Adams run had been pretty moody up to that point. The stories may or may not have been in the same league of darkness as 1970's stories would be but the majority of the ones from the late 60's took place predominantly at night with a big, full moon in the sky. Very atmospheric stuff (and very underrated, imho).

Certainly the issues of Detective Comics leading up to #395 were relatively serious and (depending on how you define the term) "dark", and had been since about 1968. The Batman cartoon from 1968 was also fairly dark for the time and obviously pre-dated the O'Neil/Adams stuff.

True, Batman's reputation in the 60's is dominated by Adam West but there's a lot more to Batman in that decade than just the West show.

[Apologist Puncher]

True, Batman's reputation in the 60's is dominated by Adam West but there's a lot more to Batman in that decade than just the West show.

Did you miss this?


I would think that if Batman was known more for being "grim & gritty" in the 60's, that a graphic novel collecting stories from that time would reflect it on the cover?

[thecolorsblend]

True, Batman's reputation in the 60's is dominated by Adam West but there's a lot more to Batman in that decade than just the West show.

Did you miss this?


I would think that if Batman was known more for being "grim & gritty" in the 60's, that a graphic novel collecting stories from that time would reflect it on the cover?

That's the thing, he's NOT known for darkness in the 60's era. But from about 1968 on... well, again, it comes down to how you define the term. Plus, before the advent of the West show, it was clear that Batman was going in a new direction. The show interrupted that somewhat but I think you could legitimately argue that the steps taken to darken the character might've occurred sooner but for the West show coming along.

I'm not arguing the 60's stories in general were about the darker Batman. Who could? But by that same token, it wasn't like the series was nothing but bright and cheerful until O'Neil/Adams came along either.

[Apologist Puncher]

That's the thing, he's NOT known for darkness in the 60's era.

Ok, but the whole point that you seemed to be trying to counter is just that. Here is the original quote, and why I posted what I did:

and then in the 1960′s he became more of the gritty, grim avenger of the night.

I'm not arguing the 60's stories in general were about the darker Batman. Who could? But by that same token, it wasn't like the series was nothing but bright and cheerful until O'Neil/Adams came along either.

See above, then explain how what I said in my original post wasn't correct.

I'll be waiting.

[thecolorsblend]

Perception- Adam West
Truth- A bit more complicated than that

[Apologist Puncher]

Perception- Adam West
Truth- A bit more complicated than that

Not even a little bit.

[thecolorsblend]

Retitled this thread so as to broaden the discussion as this item didn't seem to merit a thread unto itself.

It usually takes a week for the best Con gossip to reach me. And right on schedule coms this little gem.

Dan DiDio told retailers a month ago that Nicola Scott had an upcoming project at DC Comics. But word from late night San Diego bar gossip is that the project is with James Robinson (no longer writing the Hawkman relaunch) and it’s the much puzzled over Justice Society Of America.

DC has made it clear that Superman and the JLA are the new DCU’s first superheroes, leaving no room for a World War II team transposed to the present day. It appeared they had been written out of continuity.

But there are plans, it seems, not to abandon it entirely. And they’re coming back. I don’t know how, I don’t know who, I don’t know when. All I’ve been told is Scott and Robinson on JSA…

And could it feature the S.T.R.I.P.E. seen right?

URL- http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/08/01/dc-relaunch-nicola-scott-and-james-robinsons-jsa-1/

I haven't followed every single bit of news that's come down the pipeline here but even I noticed the lack of a JSA book. My hope is that DC isn't trying to set up a continuity wherein the "current" superheroes are the only ones there have ever been, with no place for the JSA in there. Because, frankly, that's more Marvel's bag than it is DC's. DC is all about legacy characters/teams and putting the JSA out to pasture just isn't the answer. By all means, do what SV did and update the JSA's origin to Vietnam rather than WW2. Hell, for that matter, invent a fictional war for them. Feel free to play fast and loose with the timeline. Now's the perfect time for it.

My gut feeling here is that the JSA may be swept off to their own little universe and that's a bunch of horseshit. There's a legacy there that needs to be respected. Starman, Green Lantern, the Flash and the other legacies should transcend whoever's holding those torches now. They need to have a tomorrow... but they really need to have a yesterday.

Plus, SV demonstrated that the JSA brings a lot of potential for stories, characters and conflicts to the table. It's a goldmine for storytelling and it shouldn't be ignored just so DC can fashion their very own little Pepsi Generation out of Superman, Batman, Hal, Barry and all the rest.

[webhead2006]

That is what alot are wondering what's up with jsa and its vast range of characters. When we got some still in action somewhere in the dcnu but what of others. Hopefully they will keep jsa and just go about them in a different fashion.

[thecolorsblend]

That is what alot are wondering what's up with jsa and its vast range of characters. When we got some still in action somewhere in the dcnu but what of others. Hopefully they will keep jsa and just go about them in a different fashion.

What other fashion? I don't need an ongoing JSA book each month. I likely wouldn't buy it anyway... although, hey, if Robinson is writing it...

The larger issue is what they mean to the continuity of the DCU. Even in the Pre-Crisis days, the JSA played the part of elder statesmen superheroes, the guys who'd dealt with everything from alien invasions to government conspiracies to random purse-snatchings. They brought an older, wiser perspective even then but even more after Crisis.

It seems the only documented fact in all this is that Superman and the JLA are the first superhero and superhero team on the record. Sorry but the JSA deserves better than that.

[thecolorsblend]

Some of you may have seen this already but it went right by me until just a minute ago. I'd post the image here but it's HUGE.

http://i.newsarama.com/images/DC_New52_logos_1sheet_R2.jpg

One remark someone made to me was how similar the "lost" part of "Legion Lost" looks like the logo from the TV show, um, Lost. I know little and care less about that series but there you go.

I'm going for some Cocoa Puffs.

[webhead2006]

Earth 2 and jsa will be in dcnu after all:
http://www.newsarama.com/comics/fan-expo-new-52-110827.html

[thecolorsblend]

Here's another one.

The Justice Society

Saturday, August 27th, 2011

By Josh Kushins

There’s been plenty of speculation about the Justice Society in The New 52 – and we can now confirm that they will, in fact, be back! As with everything else with DC Comics – The New 52, however, there’s a significant twist. What is it? We’re not saying. Just. Quite. Yet.

“It’s everything you want, but not what you expect,” promises Eddie Berganza, DC Comics Executive Editor.

Stay tuned to THE SOURCE as this develops, as they say.

URL- http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2011/08/27/the-justice-society/

My hunch is that the JSA will be returned to Earth-2. This opens up almost as many doors as it closes. It allows them to keep their World War II roots (which, admittedly, was an important element in their history) and also characters like Superman, Batman and others can be on the team without totally jacking up the mainline continuity.

There's nothing that says they can't visit Earth-1 occasionally though and still serve as a guiding force for the modern heroes.

[webhead2006]

Probably will be that way. Its how early jsa was done right? Well for jsa fans at least they will still have there jsa now question is will they get screwed up some way.

[non_amos]

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=10210#comments

This is rather lengthy & I don't feel like reading it all or copying it all right now but that's the link. There's also a fair number of comments (of course). Anyway, I thought about posting my comments in the Superman section but since this is about the relaunch, I guess this will do, plus my own comments would've made it even longer.

Whether you find this in this particular article or not, it does have to do with the Superman part of the relaunch which I abhor the idea of what I'm reading!

We know the story goes that even though Supes is an alien, nevertheless he was raised by his human parents the Kents. This is where CLARK KENT learned those wholesome American values & also where he developed his morality from. I think it's safe to say that he preferred his human heritage as far as his whole mind-set goes. John Byrne definitely got this right! I think it's safe to say that various forms of Superman media also got it right, even as recently as SMALLVILLE. Yes apologists, even Smallville got that right! And back to Byrne, he let the Kents LIVE for a change! That was awesome! Byrne bucked the system for a change! What do I mean? The whole ideology that the writers have to kill off all of Superman's parents, both biological and adopted. Byrne went directly against that! And later LOIS & CLARK used this idea & let the Kents live too!

But now look at the relaunch. It seems that DC is killing off both Kents in one fell swoop! And it almost seems like CLARK is indifferent because he'd rather be KAL-EL anyway & instead embrace his ALIEN heritage, complete with Kryptonian armor! It's almost like DC is saying that Superman could care less about his human upbringing & values system & instead embrace his Kryptonian heritage head-on full-blast! The Kents?! Who needed them anyway?! He's KAL-EL, conquering son of Krypton!

To me this idea does not sound like the Superman I was raised on AT ALL! This is a fake, a pretender. This is more like Cyborg-Superman or something, or the Eradicator, but not SUPERMAN! John Byrne launched a 'reboot' that was worth reading. Can the same be said for this garbage?!

Anyone see anything wrong with this picture?

[thecolorsblend]

I say all of this as someone who appreciates both the Pre-Crisis (specifically Bronze Age; 1971 to 1986 era) and Byrne Age (1986 to 2006) pretty much equally.

John Byrne brought a lot of thought and care to his reboot. Period. That's where the discussion HAS to start. He took these characters apart, examined them carefully and then put 'em back together from the ground up. The TLC he gave the Superman mythos speaks for itself. If you don't appreciate what Byrne brought to the table, you don't appreciate Superman. That's how I truly feel about it.

That being said (and this isn't bashing on you), Byrne's approach is not the only approach. Think about Superman for a minute. Whether he grew up with powers ever since he was a baby or if he slowly developed them over time, he's simply going to have a different point of view than the rest of us. He can see color spectrums you and I can't even dream of, he can hear a mosquito fart in the Congo from the Daily Planet newsroom, so on and so forth.

Given how much his sensory powers would alter his perspective, I can see him always sympathizing with humanity... but not quite ever identifying with it. I don't mean this from an angsty, alienation point of view (which I usually regard as bush league writing as far as Superman is concerned) but more from a pragmatic standpoint that his human upbringing gives him a fundamentally different set of values from your average Kryptonian while his Kryptonian heritage (as above) gives him a fundamentally different perspective (as above also).

The combination could be said to be what makes Superman Superman. It's why, say, Zod or even Supergirl won't quite identify with Superman's outlook. They don't have the human angle that Superman does.

If that's the angle that DCnU runs with, it's imperative that the Kents perish. (A) It cements both Superman's identity and worldview while (B) proving once and for all that even he has his limits.

Keep in mind, this is not a Superman who's really Clark Kent. This is a Superman who's truly Superman and uses Clark Kent to achieve the goals that Superman can't. Superman can be as big an inspiration as he wants in public but he needs Clark (A) to interface with humanity and (B) do the "world-changing" that Superman has no moral right to impose upon the Earth. This is a Superman who left Clark, as an independent psychological entity, behind long ago, probably around the time the Kents died.

I dig Byrne like I said, but that ain't the only way to skin that cat.

[Apologist Puncher]

Given how much his sensory powers would alter his perspective, I can see him always sympathizing with humanity... but not quite ever identifying with it. I don't mean this from an angsty, alienation point of view (which I usually regard as bush league writing as far as Superman is concerned) but more from a pragmatic standpoint that his human upbringing gives him a fundamentally different set of values from your average Kryptonian while his Kryptonian heritage (as above) gives him a fundamentally different perspective (as above also).

Man, if I could make a "tire screech" sound right now, I would....

This, this is what they are GOING FOR in this refuckup. They are going to try to get the 'Twilight', "emo" losers to start buying Superman comics. They think that THIS is their "untapped market", and are going to bastardize an ICON to get their few measly dollars. The only problem is, it CAN'T WORK.

To these kids, Superman represents what they DON'T want to be. He has been portrayed as a certain way for decades, and it has been ingrained in us all that he is what he is. "Truth, Justice and the American Way". Making him mopey, in a mangled version of his TRUE costume won't bring them out in droves. How did that work for Singerman Peeps again??

The other problem? Superman isn't a sparkly vampire.

[non_amos]

This might give an indication of what's wrong with DC, at least a good assumption anyway. In reference to that link on the other forum, the one about the Jim Shooter blog revealing Marvel's plans to buy DC back in the day. I remember reading a comment that said that 'DC didn't have a clue what to do with their characters'. Keep in mind this was 1984. Not much has changed huh? So if they were incompetent then apparently they're incompetent now. You'd think they'd learn something after a while! For example, in one of the related links that I know doubt clicked on from here, I read that the WONDER WOMAN comic is gonna be a HORROR story! That the costume will look like WW but the story itself will be HORROR! I think this was supposedly a quote from the WW writer, whoever that is.

Like I said, DC is clueless!

[webhead2006]

Non I feel same way. I rather the kents be living. So we got his humanity there more and all that. The whole morals and roots he learns and him being more connected to his human size over kryptonian side. But find a way to balance and honner both sides of his family.

[thecolorsblend]

Picked up Flashpoint #5 and Justice League #1 at a midnight sale my LCS had last night.

Justice League? Not bad. It centers mostly on Green Lantern meeting Batman and then they head over to Metropolis where Superman gets the drop on them.

So. The basic concept here is that Batman has been operating in secret for years while Superman is once again the first superhero... to work in the open.

It's one of those things that works okay, I guess, as long as you don't think about it too much. But if you understand that the decision was made to protect all of Batman's continuity (he's not changing much, if at all), you're left with a lot of questions. If Batman has operated in secret all these years, who the hell do the citizens of Gotham City credit with capturing villains like the Joker? All previous stories are in continuity, right? So that means it was the Joker who shot Barbara (her history is in tact), killed Jason Todd, so on and so on. You also have to account for Dick's stint as Robin, Jason's stint as Robin (and subsequent murder), Batman going solo (and hardcore) for a while, Tim Drake coming into the fold, everything between 1993 to, what, at least 2000 or so (in terms of comics published during those years). That's a lot of shit to cover and I find it hard to believe that could all have been done in secret.

Basically, Green Lantern and Batman have been DC's most reliable performers the past few years. DC would understandably want to protect them during a hard reboot like Flashpoint but partial reboots DON'T WORK. The reason is because it leads to problems like the above.

My beef is not so much that they're doing a hard reboot... it's that they're NOT doing a hard reboot. GL and Batman will stay basically the same... which works okay for their individual titles but it damages the shit out of their place in the DCnU.

Justice League #1 is good unto itself, perhaps, but this rebooted continuity is destined to have as many problems as the previous one did because of the lack of coherence between the titles.

[webhead2006]

I feel yaam if you are rebooting do a full reboot. Helps start things clean and fresh. Then only doing a partial boot which as u said above leads into a series of problems for variety of characters.

[Sponsored content]