-
[QUOTE=lilyrose;4370119]This is just so weird. My brother tells me it's unusual that this happens to A-list titles, where the writer isn't allowed to finish their planned run. Especially this close to the freaking ending and out of nowhere, right after all those interviews King did. He thinks it must be some sort of issue with King and the higher-ups that just happened.
Is it possible they didn't like him saying that stuff he said in those interviews? Was that him trying to push something that hadn't actually been approved yet and it pissed someone off at the top?[/QUOTE]
It happened less than a year ago to the Superman and Action Comics writers.
-
[QUOTE=TravelerInTheDark;4370073]DC is a multi-billion dollar company. A rumor like this wouldn't pervade this far this fast with zero denial if it were unfounded.[/QUOTE]I didn't think DC had said [B]anything[/B] one way or the other yet?
So that might be closer to [B][FONT=Century Gothic]no confirmation[/FONT][/B] / [B][FONT=Century Gothic]no denial[/FONT][/B] than just "[FONT=Comic Sans MS]zero denial[/FONT]", which may just be the safer way for DC to play it at the moment.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;4370097][I]Vision [/I]and [I]Mr. Miracle[/I] were more in King's wheelhouse. It's no wonder they're better received.
[I]Batman[/I] seemed fine up even with the vocal detractors right up until the non-wedding issue, which seemed to turn public opinion against King a little. Now, DC is partially at fault for this, but the impact was noticeable in my opinion.
And then [I]Heroes in Crisis[/I] was his [I]Civil War II[/I] moment.
I'd be surprised if Snyder doesn't still have some DC work in the future.
DC also still has Johns and Morrison, if not as frequently as they used to be.
Yeah, I would expect Snyder would still be doing stuff at DC, I just wonder what it could be beyond more Batman, since that's taken up most of his catalogue. And I would put Johns and Morrison up there, but they've been fairly low key lately, while the Big 3 have taken up most of the attention.
[QUOTE]Marvel's A-listers...Aaron, Cates, and Spencer?[/QUOTE]
I'm mostly referring to Hickman and everything going on with Marvel Comics #1000. I saw that as basically their way of showing how many connections they still have and any future possibilities they may decide to pull out at a given notice.
[QUOTE=Jackalope89;4370137]It happened less than a year ago to the Superman and Action Comics writers.[/QUOTE]
I think the difference is, Superman and Action Comics were less than 50 issues in, and they
were basically used as bargaining chips to get Bendis to come over to DC, not because of any wrongdoing on Jurgens and Tomasi's part.
With this situation if we're going by the reports, we're 15 issues before the end, a week out from interviews hyping up said conclusion, and supposedly sudden creative differences result in being shut down early, with no new writer set to replace. So they're fairly different situations.
-
Know I'm late to the party but I wanted to say I'm really glad King may be removed off of this title. His run started of interesting but now all of his books just seem like he is working out his weird personal issues through characters who do not belong to him or even fit the narrative he is trying to run with.
-
[QUOTE=Jackalope89;4370137]It happened less than a year ago to the Superman and Action Comics writers.[/QUOTE]
It's not really comparable. Tomaso/Gleason and Jurgens had no discernable overarching long term plans. The back half of Superman was practically half fill ins. King has had the 100 issue story arc outlined since the beginning.
-
Yeah, something bizarre [I]just[/I] happened over the weekend. But what? And why screw over readers because of it?
-
[QUOTE=lilyrose;4370166]Yeah, something bizarre [I]just[/I] happened over the weekend. But what? And why screw over readers because of it?[/QUOTE]
Lol this is really getting to you
-
[QUOTE=lilyrose;4370166]Yeah, something bizarre [I]just[/I] happened over the weekend. But what? And why screw over readers because of it?[/QUOTE]And don't forget, some Bat-fans don't exactly feel "screwed over".[SIZE=1]
(Unless DC were to do something like let Rob Liefeld take over writing and drawing the book.)[/SIZE]
-
[QUOTE=Yoda;4370164]It's not really comparable. Tomaso/Gleason and Jurgens had no discernable overarching long term plans. The back half of Superman was practically half fill ins. King has had the 100 issue story arc outlined since the beginning.[/QUOTE]
They too had 100 issue story planned out, but were told part way through about the "change up", hence the fill ins.
-
[QUOTE=Jackalope89;4370179]They too had 100 issue story planned out, but were told part way through about the "change up", hence the fill ins.[/QUOTE]
They said they wanted to write.100 issues. That's not the same thing as having a 100 issue story arc. I've never seen anything said that the fill ins were due to editorial changes. Where's that from?
-
[QUOTE=Yoda;4370164]It's not really comparable. Tomaso/Gleason and Jurgens had no discernable overarching long term plans. [/QUOTE]
Why is "overarching long terms plans" somehow necessary? What is wrong with writers just having a good long run with good stories like what Tomasi was doing with Jon and the Superfamily stuff? This mentality we have to shake things up (like with Bendis) or have long drawn out 100 issue arcs (or King) doesn't necessarily lead to good stories as many of the anti-King people would tell you. Sometimes letting the writers just write fun stories like what we got is a formula for success by itself. And the superbooks imo absolutely needed a long run of that sort to shore up the status quo after years of turmoil and creator changes at the drop of a hat.
-
[QUOTE=lilyrose;4370166]Yeah, something bizarre [I]just[/I] happened over the weekend. But what? And why screw over readers because of it?[/QUOTE]
Why not? It's not like they care when they promote the not wedding or every time they kill a character or do a reboot or
-
Good Lord, Dan DiDio is LOVING this!
Wait until next week when everyone starts screeching about the ending of Heroes in Crisis. You'll be giving him fits of orgasmic ecstasy!
-
[QUOTE=Yoda;4370185]They said they wanted to write.100 issues. That's not the same thing as having a 100 issue story arc. I've never seen anything said that the fill ins were due to editorial changes. Where's that from?[/QUOTE]
So does that mean King planned for his run to be mostly filler?
-
[QUOTE=Bruce Wayne;4370190]Why is "overarching long terms plans" somehow necessary? What is wrong with writers just having a good long run with good stories like what Tomasi was doing with Jon and the Superfamily stuff? This mentality we have to shake things up (like with Bendis) or have long drawn out 100 issue arcs (or King) doesn't necessarily lead to good stories as many of the anti-King people would tell you. Sometimes letting the writers just write fun stories like what we got is a formula for success by itself. And the superbooks imo absolutely needed a long run of that sort to shore up the status quo after years of turmoil and creator changes at the drop of a hat.[/QUOTE]
In this context it matters, because there is a set narrative arc being interrupted as opposed to just general character development. I don't generally disagree with your point though.