DC reboot

[SuaveStar]

Yeah Red Hood issue #0 pisses me off big time....am I the only one who now thinks the Joker knows Batman's identity?

It's been said for years, that Joker probably knows Bruce Wayne is Batman. He just doesn't care. That's probably the same with DCnU.

[prez]

That said, I hate the general comic book fan perspective of fearing change or hating something because it's different than the thing you loved before.

Is it OK if I hate it because it's poorly planned, poorly executed and ill-defined, and has destroyed the stories of most of my favorite characters (Wally, Tim, Booster, etc.) because of a self-created crisis and poor leadership?

I'm really not giving a flying fuck about The Rot or The Red or The Green or The Rainbow or The Violet or any of that other shit. I don't like horror books and shock books, no matter how well they're written. In Animal Man #0, they depict a newborn being suffocated in its crib. Not off-panel, but center panel as just another moment. Fuck that shit. What's good about that?

Batman stories are more violent than ever - though I admit Snyder is great.

The Flash as a highlight? That book looks pretty, reads shitty.

Wonder Woman is interesting, I'll give you that.

Aquaman is still on the first real story arc after more than a year and I still don't know what's going on. But it is fun.

You can proclaim you're not a DC fanboy, but holy crap yes you are.

[Donomark]

The only way this makes sense is if Joker knows Bruce Wayne is Batman, knows Leslie Thompkins, and is telapathic. HTF could he guess that Bruce would adopt Jason and make him Robin? What kind of sense does that make?

It's been established in stories pre-New 52 that Leslie is known to be an ally of Batman by the locals, since he's been seen aiding her and her patients repeatedly. It's not illogical to assume that dropping Jason off at the clinic might be a decent way to get him next to Batman. Also, Jason looks a hell of a lot like Dick did. Really, all the Robins and Bruce look eerily alike. It's been implied in the past that Bruce picks his Robins based on the idea that they remind him of himself at a young age, and he wants to help them.

Moreover, the Joker has a decades-long history of figuring out Batman's psyche. Just as Batman can often predict Joker's plots, Joker can in turn deliver some surprising insights into Batman's mind. He understands Batman's psychological need to continue his mission and use the methods he does, just as Joker has his own drive to incite chaos through his own personal methods. It's not illogical to assume that Joker caught on to the fact that Batman keeps the sidekicks around for personal reasons (something Joker's pointed out in pre-reboot stories), and that led him to craft a situation where Jason would become the next Robin.

Scott Snyder's said that his next Joker story will end up involving the entire Bat-family in some way, so perhaps this is actually leading into that.

That's still a large-ass, roundabout way to get those events in motion. None of that's implied in the two or three pages of that story, and even if it were it stinks of "Wouldn't this be cool if this happened" with the Joker. I just know that the only reason for it given when asked why will be "Because the Joker's CRAZY o'course! HERP DERP" which by this point is a lazy as hell reason.

[Dread]

That said, I hate the general comic book fan perspective of fearing change or hating something because it's different than the thing you loved before.

Is it OK if I hate it because it's poorly planned, poorly executed and ill-defined, and has destroyed the stories of most of my favorite characters (Wally, Tim, Booster, etc.) because of a self-created crisis and poor leadership?

I'm really not giving a flying fuck about The Rot or The Red or The Green or The Rainbow or The Violet or any of that other shit. I don't like horror books and shock books, no matter how well they're written. In Animal Man #0, they depict a newborn being suffocated in its crib. Not off-panel, but center panel as just another moment. Fuck that shit. What's good about that?

Batman stories are more violent than ever - though I admit Snyder is great.

The Flash as a highlight? That book looks pretty, reads shitty.

Wonder Woman is interesting, I'll give you that.

Aquaman is still on the first real story arc after more than a year and I still don't know what's going on. But it is fun.

You can proclaim you're not a DC fanboy, but holy crap yes you are.

This.

I will full on admit that I love Dial H (Night Force is good too, but it's not really part of the DCU) but the two books I was reading (GL and Batman Inc,) have submerged into the shitter. All but the main Green Lantern title sucked balls from the get-go. It's been a slow decline since then for that one. All the books I tried (9 of them by my count) were on a scale from less than impressive to "get the fuck out of here" stupid.

Before DCnU, DC was establishing itself as a shared universe worth giving a shit about again. They were trying things with Superman (that didn't work) and Wonder Woman (that was starting to work) and the GL books were a fucking revelation. R.E.B.E.L.S. was one of the best books they published in YEARS.

All of that was wiped off the table for a poorly planned, editorially mandated unneeded overall done specifically for sales. No other reason. How are those sales now? Going back to where they were. Comics are a loss leader now, not a cash cow. So let's not fuck up the good stuff with bullshit publicity stunts that don't work in the long run.

I hope it's okay with you if I use the above reasons for disliking it.

[KnightWing]

Is it OK if I hate it because it's poorly planned, poorly executed and ill-defined, and has destroyed the stories of most of my favorite characters (Wally, Tim, Booster, etc.) because of a self-created crisis and poor leadership?

That "destroyed the stories" thing is partially what I'm talking about. No one's "destroyed the stories" of those characters. They still exist, regardless of whatever new story is being told. That's the thing; this isn't exactly a continuation of the previous universe, it's a new universe that pulled a few things from the past. It definitely would have been a lot better if they'd done a hard reboot, but then they'd risk losing all the fans. Can you imagine if they went back to a point where Dick was Robin and Damian and Tim literally didn't exist yet? It'd be amazing for the sake of the universe and the story, but 99% of fans would cry foul. I'd be the 1% excited for an entirely new universe, but then I'm also a poor college student who can't afford to keep DC in business by myself.

I'm really not giving a flying fuck about The Rot or The Red or The Green or The Rainbow or The Violet or any of that other shit. I don't like horror books and shock books, no matter how well they're written. In Animal Man #0, they depict a newborn being suffocated in its crib. Not off-panel, but center panel as just another moment. Fuck that shit. What's good about that?

Batman stories are more violent than ever - though I admit Snyder is great.

The Flash as a highlight? That book looks pretty, reads shitty.

Wonder Woman is interesting, I'll give you that.

Aquaman is still on the first real story arc after more than a year and I still don't know what's going on. But it is fun.

You can proclaim you're not a DC fanboy, but holy crap yes you are.

You call me a fanboy, yet you're the one citing your own reasons of personal preference for not enjoying the books. If horror books aren't your thing, fine. But that doesn't make them bad. If the stuff in Animal Man was happening in Supergirl, then I'd be pissed. But it's not. And it's not just for shock value; those are damn good stories.

I don't see the problem with Batman's violence thus far. Some of the other bat-books have gotten gross with their violence, but the main Batman book I don't have a problem with.

Flash I'll have to disagree with you on. Sure, it's not an expertly-written book, but plenty good enough to still be enjoyable, and the art pushes it over the edge into highlight territory.

I'm not just pulling these opinions out of my ass; it's not as though the books I listed haven't been cited in countless places as great books. If they're not to your taste, fine. No one's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to read them. But please, don't call me a fanboy just because I use common sense with a tinge of optimism. The way you talk, it's like anyone who disagrees with the "DC is a shithole that deserves to burn in Tartarus" sentiment is an extreme fanboy.

That's still a large-ass, roundabout way to get those events in motion. None of that's implied in the two or three pages of that story, and even if it were it stinks of "Wouldn't this be cool if this happened" with the Joker. I just know that the only reason for it given when asked why will be "Because the Joker's CRAZY o'course! HERP DERP" which by this point is a lazy as hell reason.

Considering that it's only 2-3 pages, and we're on the edge of a Joker storyline (from a great writer) that might explain it in further detail, I think it's fair to let it play out for a little while. And hey, if anyone's going to pull a complicated and deeply ironic scheme like that and somehow make it work despite its unlikelihood, it's the Joker. Herp derp.

[Molly]

Aaron, I say this without a trace of irony: your dedication to DC is amazing.

[Donomark]

Is it OK if I hate it because it's poorly planned, poorly executed and ill-defined, and has destroyed the stories of most of my favorite characters (Wally, Tim, Booster, etc.) because of a self-created crisis and poor leadership?

That "destroyed the stories" thing is partially what I'm talking about. No one's "destroyed the stories" of those characters. They still exist, regardless of whatever new story is being told. That's the thing; this isn't exactly a continuation of the previous universe, it's a new universe that pulled a few things from the past. It definitely would have been a lot better if they'd done a hard reboot, but then they'd risk losing all the fans. Can you imagine if they went back to a point where Dick was Robin and Damian and Tim literally didn't exist yet? It'd be amazing for the sake of the universe and the story, but 99% of fans would cry foul. I'd be the 1% excited for an entirely new universe, but then I'm also a poor college student who can't afford to keep DC in business by myself.

Yes! They should have done that! It would've been honest and not at all half-assed. Why keep 3.5/5 of the Robins when you can start off a true beginning with just one? The in media res style storytelling does.Not.WORK. because you're advertising to "new readers" something that had already occured and for the most part they'll never see.

Post Crisis wasn't at all perfect, but they at least put forth effort in establishing their new universe. We got Man of Steel. We got Year One. We got Perez's Wonder Woman. We got Green Lanter: Emerald Dawn. We got Green Arrow: Longbow Hunters. We had stories establishing the differences in a focused, thought out and concentrated way. Jason Todd's Post-Crisis origin story was done in a three-issue flashback, not in one slap-shod issue. Most other characters like the Flash didn't change as much, so Wally could be the Flash without heavy retcons that took out his time as Kid Flash or a Teen Titan. Compare all of that to this nonsense "wait and see" logic where 12 months later they can't even keep their own new 52 in-house logic consistent. Why do the readers have to put up with that, especially as most of them were reading DC pre-new 52 to begin with?

[prez]

Aaron, I say this without a trace of irony: your dedication to DC is amazing.

No shit. It's like talking to a cult member.

[Molly]

Right up until the reboot, I was a diehard DC fanboy, but this has jaded me to the point that I'm only reading two monthlies: Frankenstein (which was barely effected by the reboot) and Dial H (which is a true, start from scratch reboot of the concept). Anything I was sort of jiving on at the start (Stormwatch, Demon Knights, Batman) has kind of fallen off, and most books, I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

[Molly]

That said, I do intend to give the Animal Man and Jonah Hex trades a glance at some point.

[KnightWing]

Aaron, I say this without a trace of irony: your dedication to DC is amazing.

No shit. It's like talking to a cult member.

Funny; I was just thinking that talking to you guys was like talking to the Superman Revenge Squad.

I'm still slightly puzzled as to how I'm the one with the extreme opinion here. I don't think that the New 52 reboot has been stellar, or even necessarily good on the whole. In its entirety, I'd probably give it a "meh." There's good books, bad books, and stuff in the middle. The universe as a whole isn't in a cohesive place, but at the same time it hasn't yet been screwed over in a way that's permanently damaging yet either. It's in a kind of formless limbo at the moment.

So is my hoping that things work better for DC in the future a sign of my insanity? I'd rather not spend my hours raging at my computer screen over things I can't change; I'd rather stay positive and hope for the best in the meantime until proven otherwise. If my willingness to give DC the benefit of a doubt for now somehow bothers you guys, then that's your problem, not mine.

Can you imagine if they went back to a point where Dick was Robin and Damian and Tim literally didn't exist yet? It'd be amazing for the sake of the universe and the story, but 99% of fans would cry foul. I'd be the 1% excited for an entirely new universe, but then I'm also a poor college student who can't afford to keep DC in business by myself.

Yes! They should have done that! It would've been honest and not at all half-assed. Why keep 3.5/5 of the Robins when you can start off a true beginning with just one? The in media res style storytelling does.Not.WORK. because you're advertising to "new readers" something that had already occured and for the most part they'll never see.

Post Crisis wasn't at all perfect, but they at least put forth effort in establishing their new universe. We got Man of Steel. We got Year One. We got Perez's Wonder Woman. We got Green Lanter: Emerald Dawn. We got Green Arrow: Longbow Hunters. We had stories establishing the differences in a focused, thought out and concentrated way. Jason Todd's Post-Crisis origin story was done in a three-issue flashback, not in one slap-shod issue. Most other characters like the Flash didn't change as much, so Wally could be the Flash without heavy retcons that took out his time as Kid Flash or a Teen Titan. Compare all of that to this nonsense "wait and see" logic where 12 months later they can't even keep their own new 52 in-house logic consistent. Why do the readers have to put up with that, especially as most of them were reading DC pre-new 52 to begin with?

Yeah, a hard reboot would have been epic.

To be entirely fair, though, the Crisis reboot did basically the same thing. New Teen Titans and Batman kept nearly all their continuity (with a few unexplained and sudden alterations), just as Green Lantern and Batman have done with the New 52. The main difference is that the Crisis reboot started with a masterful Superman reboot from Byrne along with 25 years for fans to adjust afterward. There were reboot continuity problems in 1986 and 87, too, but those didn't stand the test of time, and over the next couple of decades most of the kinks got ironed out. No one's still bitching about the fact that certain things still don't make sense post-Crisis because that reboot was so long ago that most readers today just shrug and go "eh, that's the way it's always been."

[SuaveStar]

http://www.huffingto...l?utm_hp_ref=tw

Preview of Talon 0. Looks ok, I'll give the first issue a flip through, then wait for reviews, to help me decide if I should pick it up in trade.

[Stavros]

You want a Batman comic where they take everything back to the beginning? DC's last attempt was All Star Batman, not sure it worked. What they should have done is a proper small scale Ultimate Universe style reboot, that way you get a Batman without Robins yet, an unmarried Superman and hints towards a Justice League. A universe wide hard reboot would have cost them years of investment in characters like Tim and now Damien, but at the same time this selective reboot has been very confusing. Why not just devote 1/3rd of your books to a rebooted universe and leave the rest to run?

[SuaveStar]

So, Batman Inc 0 shows two things, first that Morrison is allowed to not give two shits about the DC reboot, as the credits of Inc have "DC proudly presents before the new 52" and secondly that Morrison should have just stopped writing Batman after Batman and Robin, as this book was just incomprehensible crap, with very pretty art.

[Stavros]

I thought it was fine, if completely unnecessary. Plus the art, whilst pretty, has a staged quality that takes me out of it, especially in the action.

[Donomark]

So, Batman Inc 0 shows two things, first that Morrison is allowed to not give two shits about the DC reboot, as the credits of Inc have "DC proudly presents before the new 52"

That, and the fact that the second page was a panel-for-panel, line for line recreation of the scene in Batman Year One.

[Flashfan1]

I find this quite unsettling and WAY better than the Batgirl cover... It's just creepy with the white eyes and the fact that the face is drooping down at the top and revealing what's behind the "mask"... I just love this new look. There are a bunch of other "die-cut" covers for the Death of the Family event here.

[KnightWing]

This preview of Batman #13 is the first time I've really enjoyed Joker's presence in a comic in a long time.

[Koete]

It's a shame that Bruce's faces on the last page are completely out of place and sour what the previous pages had built up.

[SuaveStar]

Am I the only one who loves the idea of Joker hiding under Gordon's bed at night?

[KnightWing]

What's so scary about it is that I'm pretty sure he's somewhat telling the truth.

[Flashfan1]

holy fuck! (real reveal)

[KnightWing]

Just read Batman #13.

[Missy]

The one thing I took away from Batman #13 is that Batman, Gordon, and the GCPD are pussies. After all the death The Joker has brought, someone would have shot him years ago. More than anything else, this issue pissed me off, because it exposed what a stupid, broken concept a recurring villain like The Joker is. He has killed Jason Todd and Sarah Essen, and crippled Barbara, yet no one has kicked his fucking skull in?

Fuck that.

[Dan]

Hang on, I'm gonna hike up my pants and rage at the kids on my lawn.

This is (one of many, many, many things) what's wrong with comics today. In ye olden times, bad guys were kinda goofy, and the good guys could chase them and catch them, and since all the bad guy did was rob a bank and use the money to build a poorly-functioning death ray that ran on energy provided by hamsters running in wheels and failed to do anything too terrible, you could send him to jail and have him come back later without anyone in the reading audience demanding to know why he wasn't treated more harshly, because his eight-issue stint in the county lock-up was pretty much what he earned.

When a bad guy shoots the daughter of the commissioner of police, sexually assaulting her in the process (best case scenario, he stripped her naked against her will and took pictures, even if he otherwise kept his hands to himself), and then literally eight months later murders a law enforcement figure/the ward of a local billionaire philanthropist (Killing Joke was March 1988, Death in the Family was November 1988), there is absolutely no logical way that bad guy makes it to Christmas. The stakes have been upped exponentially, and that's fine, but the same rules (largely) apply to the good guys that have been in place since the Code days.

I have no problem with violence in comics, I have a problem with inconsistent storytelling. DC can't kill the Joker even if they wanted to because Warner Brothers would go apeshit. The answer is not to come up with flimsy excuses as to why the Joker gets to stay alive, the answer is not to put the reader in the position of having to justify why he has to be kept around.

I don't pretend to have an easy answer, but if DC wants to tell a story that can only logically end in the Joker's death, then they need to fucking kill him.