DC Unveils All-Star 'Black Label' Imprint

[Wandering_Wand]

So, after further thought I'm actually not super thrilled myself at the launch titles. And if the launch titles don't sell well, then DC will be rethinking how they execute the Black label. They definitely need to expand out and I like what was said above about Joker. Batman's other rogues need some time to shine. There are so many that could easily fit within what this Black label is trying to do. And yet we're given another Joker story.

I'll be honest, at this point in my Batfandom I am actively staying away from Joker stories. I've seen enough of them that I'm just not as interested anymore.

I would also like to see them "retcon" or retro some older titles under this label, like Killing Joke, or Red Son, etc.

[Daniel22]

Ridley's book having political overtones is a certainty, and it isn't going to be subtle. Politically, the book is going to lean left.

Throwing around social justice as pejorative is also largely meaningless, because while his books fit under what people insult as "SJW" books, his books have glaring problems. The original The American Way got disgustingly misogynist when the Joker expy killed the Wonder Woman expy and carried her head around with him to use to masturbate with. The book was full of problems, but if it came out today it still would have been considered "SJW" because it confronts race.

It's a meaningless term when it comes to actually describing books.

I was left disappointed by Ridley's The American Way: TATB, because he brings up a lot of issues and then doesn't do a lot with them. There's a lot to criticize about political books like the ones Ridley has written, but stuff like "social justice nonsense" adds nothing to the conversation.

Is having the Bad Guy commit evil acts problematic? The faux Joker was not a sympathetic character or ever portrayed as anything other than a terrible person. He committed acts of violence against a woman (which isn't the same thing as misogyny, but I understand how you are using the word, I think). Even if we say that he was misogynistic, is it problematic to have the villain act in a villainous manner? I'm honestly asking for your thoughts on this, not doing the "Jeopardy" thing of phrasing my answers in the form of a question.

I agree that a lot of times a work gets labeled something like "social justice nonsense" just because it addresses race/gender/sexuality etc. It almost always comes from the right against left leaning books. It's dismissive and seeks to end a conversation before it starts.

[Wandering_Wand]

I agree that a lot of times a work gets labeled something like "social justice nonsense" just because it addresses race/gender/sexuality etc. It almost always comes from the right against left leaning books. It's dismissive and seeks to end a conversation before it starts.

This is exactly why it's never good to talk politics, because there are so many examples of race/gender/sexuality being used by those who identify on the American political "left" who use that to shut down conversations/debates.

Anyway, I take my leave now since this thread is careening.

[Ra-El]

Is having the Bad Guy commit evil acts problematic? The faux Joker was not a sympathetic character or ever portrayed as anything other than a terrible person. He committed acts of violence against a woman (which isn't the same thing as misogyny, but I understand how you are using the word, I think). Even if we say that he was misogynistic, is it problematic to have the villain act in a villainous manner? I'm honestly asking for your thoughts on this, not doing the "Jeopardy" thing of phrasing my answers in the form of a question.

I agree that a lot of times a work gets labeled something like "social justice nonsense" just because it addresses race/gender/sexuality etc. It almost always comes from the right against left leaning books. It's dismissive and seeks to end a conversation before it starts.

Yes, if I'm not mistaken the bad guy also says the he raped the protagonist's brother after paralyze him and slaughter everyone in the bus. That was a villain who could commit any act of violence to anyone at anytime.

And while I agree that Those Above and Those Below didn't leave to the potential it had, it was still a good story, that show the consequences of the first series in a good way.

[MRP]

I like the idea behind the imprint, but none of these interest me. I also hope that the next round will include a few more unexpected choices - I guess people can't get enough of the Trinity, but c'mon... They mention "The Dark Knight" as an example of this kind of project, but so was the amazing "The Golden Age" - I'd love to see some JSA or The Atom, or The Question, etc.... At the very least Green Lantern and The Flash...

It's interesting that "Other History of the DCU" is out of continuity ... was it always intended to be? I feel it might take away some of the impact of it knowing it doesn't really affect the characters highlighted in the book.

Here's the difference between the Golden age and Dark Knight Returns-The Golden Age was critically acclaimed sold, okay, became a trade and went out of print. Occasionally it comes back into print, but it never became an evergreen seller. Dark Knight sold like gangbusters, became a trade when trades were unheard of and has stayed in print since becoming an evergreen seller. I think the business point behind this line is to create more evergreen sellers, i.e. books that stay in print and create a steady stream of revenue over the long haul, and the best bet for that is to focus on the iconic characters who have had a track record of success in becoming evergreen sellers or are in the current zeitgeist that creates the potential to become an evergreen seller. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman all fit that description because all have appeal outside the shrinking hardcore audience of the direct market. Evergreen books sell beyond the direct market and keep selling outside the direct market.

Many of DCs new imprints/initiatives are looking for sales outside the direct market. Ink and Zoom are definitely targeting readers outside the direct market. Vertigo trades, especially Sandman, traditionally sold better in the book trade outside the direct market, so the Gaiman Sandman initiative is looking at that market too, and now Black Label with its push towards books like Dark Knight, i.e. evergreen sellers outside the direct market, is looking there too. The direct market is a shrinking pie with little growth potential these days (it was created to sell comics to people who already bought comics and knew what they wanted by Seuling and company in the 70s, it was never intended to help find new readers), the growth potential for the publishers is in sales outside the direct market. Trade sales have been down in the direct market, but they are holding steady and growing in the book trade outside the direct market.

So, characters like Green Lantern, Flash, et. al have cachet in the direct market, but not quite as much in the world outside the direct market right now, so it's not surprising the focus is on characters who have that cachet outside the direct market with the launch of this line.

-M

[Daniel22]

[QUOTE=Wandering_Wand;3511766]This is exactly why it's never good to talk politics, because there are so many examples of race/gender/sexuality being used by those who identify on the American political "left" who use that to shut down conversations/debates.

Anyway, I take my leave now since this thread is careening.[/QUOTE

Making a statement and then leaving is pretty much the definition of shutting down a conversation, right?

[Daniel22]

Here's the difference between the Golden age and Dark Knight Returns-The Golden Age was critically acclaimed sold, okay, became a trade and went out of print. Occasionally it comes back into print, but it never became an evergreen seller. Dark Knight sold like gangbusters, became a trade when trades were unheard of and has stayed in print since becoming an evergreen seller. I think the business point behind this line is to create more evergreen sellers, i.e. books that stay in print and create a steady stream of revenue over the long haul, and the best bet for that is to focus on the iconic characters who have had a track record of success in becoming evergreen sellers or are in the current zeitgeist that creates the potential to become an evergreen seller. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman all fit that description because all have appeal outside the shrinking hardcore audience of the direct market. Evergreen books sell beyond the direct market and keep selling outside the direct market.

Many of DCs new imprints/initiatives are looking for sales outside the direct market. Ink and Zoom are definitely targeting readers outside the direct market. Vertigo trades, especially Sandman, traditionally sold better in the book trade outside the direct market, so the Gaiman Sandman initiative is looking at that market too, and now Black Label with its push towards books like Dark Knight, i.e. evergreen sellers outside the direct market, is looking there too. The direct market is a shrinking pie with little growth potential these days (it was created to sell comics to people who already bought comics and new what they wanted by Seuling and company in the 70s, it was never intended to help find new readers), the growth potential for the publishers is in sales outside the direct market. Trade sales have been down in the direct market, but they are holding steady and growing in the book trade outside the direct market.

So, characters like Green Lantern, Flash, et. al have cachet in the direct market, but not quite as much in the world outside the direct market right now, so it's not surprising the focus is on characters who have that cachet outside the direct market with the launch of this line.

-M

Nailed it. Great breakdown.

Hardcore fans who buy floppies are saying "Where's Green Lantern" or "a Legion book would be great", but to the vast majority of people a Legion book would be the same thing as a new property and Green Lantern is the guy from that Ryan Reynolds movie they didn't like.

[alton]

This is exactly why it's never good to talk politics, because there are so many examples of race/gender/sexuality being used by those who identify on the American political "left" who use that to shut down conversations/debates.

Anyway, I take my leave now since this thread is careening.

I think that we all have to look at what we are actually doing to encourage openness and dialogue and not hide behind blanket statements like this that show little thought and simply echo alt right propaganda. I too feel that some of the dialogue on both sides has been more strident than communicative. However much I would prefer my comics to remain entertainment first and foremost I realize that we are living in explosive times and all art forms at times will reflect the outside world. The response of many fighting the good fight for gender/racial/ethnic equality have been subjected to violence and even death. We are in the middle no less of a cultural civil war with the robber baron capitalists now in control of the government laughing at all of us while they steal what's left of wealth and resources from the rest of us. My main complaint with the various movements is that they have lost focus on the primary cause for much of the current unrest which is economic disenfranchisement and the hijack of capitalism by the corrupt. When is the last time you volunteered for anything or served the public good in some capacity? If you have then you have the right to complain and I don't mean to just signal you out I put that out as an open challenge to everyone of all persuasions.

[j9ac9k]

I think the business point behind this line is to create more evergreen sellers, i.e. books that stay in print and create a steady stream of revenue over the long haul...

Is this an assumption on your part or is there something in the marketing of this line that indicates this is their priority with these books? How does it differ from their "Earth One" line then?

[CaptCleghorn]

Nailed it. Great breakdown.

Hardcore fans who buy floppies are saying "Where's Green Lantern" or "a Legion book would be great", but to the vast majority of people a Legion book would be the same thing as a new property and Green Lantern is the guy from that Ryan Reynolds movie they didn't like.

I hope most fanboys get this. I know what I'd want to see, but what I want to see isn't always something that DC (or Marvel) would find to be a financial success. The questions "what would you like to see?" and "what should DC actually do?" don't always have the same answers.

I certainly understand why DC's not doing something. That still doesn't mean I don't want to see it, though.

[Daniel22]

I hope most fanboys get this. I know what I'd want to see, but what I want to see isn't always something that DC (or Marvel) would find to be a financial success. The questions "what would you like to see?" and "what should DC actually do?" don't always have the same answers.

I certainly understand why DC's not doing something. That still doesn't mean I don't want to see it, though.

On the Spider-Man boards it's endless "Mary Jane or Gwen" and especially "marriage or no marriage" debates. Everywhere else it's "Mary Jane is the redhead, right?".

I think a lot of us are getting better at understanding not every book is for us, also. Books like Moon Girl and Ms Marvel still get hate but they also get a lot more understanding that not every book is going to be aimed at the old, already established core fanbase. Still a lot of way to go, though.

I think the best we can hope for is that the answers to those two questions have some similar answers. And with all of the different lines and imprints DC is putting out, there has to be something for almost everybody. I still want to see certain things also and can certainly understand when fans get disappointed when they don't get what they want.

[The Dying Detective]

I hope most fanboys get this. I know what I'd want to see, but what I want to see isn't always something that DC (or Marvel) would find to be a financial success. The questions "what would you like to see?" and "what should DC actually do?" don't always have the same answers.

I certainly understand why DC's not doing something. That still doesn't mean I don't want to see it, though.

Some concepts are lightning in a bottle for some reason though I'm not even sure how it works. Martin Goodman then publisher of Marvel had so little faith in Spider-Man he gave him his first story in a failing magazine and then he saw the sales figures. I think it had something to do with the youth culture of it's day but I wonder how does Spider-Man even appeal to youth of today as an adult who is hardly respectable.

[MosSuperman]

None of these interest me. It's just more of the same. I was expecting something like Timm's Gods and Monsters.

[SJNeal]

Is this an assumption on your part or is there something in the marketing of this line that indicates this is their priority with these books? How does it differ from their "Earth One" line then?

I believe there is a Jim Lee is quote in the initial article saying something along those lines. Not that they're blatantly trying to create evergreen titles, but he does mention The Killing Joke, Watchmen, etc...

[Daniel22]

Some concepts are lightning in a bottle for some reason though I'm not even sure how it works. Martin Goodman then publisher of Marvel had so little faith in Spider-Man he gave him his first story in a failing magazine and then he saw the sales figures. I think it had something to do with the youth culture of it's day but I wonder how does Spider-Man even appeal to youth of today as an adult who is hardly respectable.

Not to get too off topic but how is Spider-Man not respectable in your opinion?

It's always crazy to think that so many of these characters started out as random, disposable stories in anthology titles. Although Spider-Gwen had the same beginning, so it does still happen sometimes.