Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 237
  1. #46
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmySpectre View Post
    BATMAN/CATWOMAN 12 issue maxi-serie by TOM KIN & CLAY MANN continue ongoing BAT/CAT romance.

    https://www.dccomics.com/blog/2019/0...at-cat-romance

    "City Of Bane” Concludes in BATMAN #85,Tom King last issue.
    BATMAN will will return to a monthly schedule starting January 2020.
    I reckon all the other DC twice monthly titles will eventually follow suit and go back to monthly. Superman and Action did when Bendis took over and Green Lantern did with Morrison. The only one I see holding out (at least for a bit longer) is Justice League. It further solidifies those rumours about DC trimming its monthly publications.

    But are they doing it to clear room for another publishing initiative ala New Age Of DC Heroes, or have they come to the conclusion quality is more important than quantity? I don't mind either way. Might actually benefit DC in the long run.
    Last edited by Somecrazyaussie; 05-24-2019 at 10:08 PM.

  2. #47
    Mind Controller Arnoldoaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ten_to_Three View Post
    I don't find it hard to imagine, for the "canonness" of comicbook stories is not a simple canon/non-canon dichotomy, but a spectrum. I wouldn't put it past DC to attempt to both have their cake (placating fans who are invested in the romance and hoping for a wedding) and eat it (maintaining main universe status quo) by declaring what happens in the new series is canon to King's Batman only. Indeed, going for a not completely canon wedding may backfire, but it's possible that some DC higher-ups consider it a good strategy.
    Assuming that the big change is the wedding
    it probably will happen on Batman, not on Batman/Catwoman, at least judging by the interviews.

    what incentive would DC get by making the book non-canon?

  3. #48
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnoldoaad View Post
    Assuming that the big change is the wedding
    it probably will happen on Batman, not on Batman/Catwoman, at least judging by the interviews.

    what incentive would DC get by making the book non-canon?
    Can you please point me to the interviews?

    My understanding of the situation is King's proposed big change is vetoed and will not happen in the main book. (Otherwise why remove King from it in the first place?) And the new series may or may not carry out the original plan.

  4. #49

    Default

    This smells like simple placation. I'm still disappointed in both DC and King. This should never have had to happen.

  5. #50
    Astonishing Member Korath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    2,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pohzee View Post
    I woulda rather seen Jones folded into this, but cool.

    The rest of the Batline is still trash. King's book was heads and shoulders above all the rest of these terrible titles, but here we are.
    Well, that's like, your opinion man.

    Red Hood, Batman and the Outsiders and Batgirl are head and shoulders over Tom King inept run, to me. And considering how boring the current Catwoman solo is, I sure as hell expect nothing of interest from this series. Hopefully whoever comes after it's over will gently fold it back into the closet and won't consider it canon at all.

  6. #51
    Mind Controller Arnoldoaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ten_to_Three View Post
    Can you please point me to the interviews?

    My understanding of the situation is King's proposed big change is vetoed and will not happen in the main book. (Otherwise why remove King from it in the first place?) And the new series may or may not carry out the original plan.
    It was this one: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...orever-1209801


    however I read it again just now and i think I was wrong

    I was thinking this part:
    "It's something that's going to change the character for a generation, or maybe more. Maybe forever," he tells The Hollywood Reporter. "I never thought we'd get this kind of stuff approved; when you're working with a corporate character, you think you're going to have to reset. But this is a change that's going to shake the world of Batman and it's going to leave my mark on the character."
    ...was refering to City of Bane but Its actually not clear

    I definitely dont think that the big change is vetoed
    Nothing really indicates that its the case

  7. #52
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnoldoaad View Post

    I definitely dont think that the big change is vetoed
    Nothing really indicates that its the case
    Thanks for the link.

    Beyond that — and this is recent — I've been talking to, not just DC, but Warner Brothers and AT&T. What we're going to do for the last 15 issues is something no one's ever seen for the character. It's something that's going to change the character for a generation, or maybe more. Maybe forever. I never thought we'd get this kind of stuff approved; when you're working with a corporate character, you think you’re going to have to reset. But this is a change that's going to shake the world of Batman and it's going to leave my mark on the character.
    According to King, the big change was planned to occur between #90 and #105. Considering King's run will end at #85, and assuming it's too late to alter the City of Bane arc significantly at this point, I can't see how his big change shouldn't be considered vetoed, regardless of it being a wedding or something else. I should clarify that by "vetoed" I mean "not allowed to happen in the main book". What King can and will do in the new series is a whole different thing.

  8. #53
    Mind Controller Arnoldoaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ten_to_Three View Post
    According to King, the big change was planned to occur between #90 and #105. Considering King's run will end at #85, and assuming it's too late to alter the City of Bane arc significantly at this point, I can't see how his big change shouldn't be considered vetoed, regardless of it being a wedding or something else. I should clarify that by "vetoed" I mean "not allowed to happen in the main book". What King can and will do in the new series is a whole different thing.
    got it, but thats a pretty big difference though
    "IT", whatever that is, happening on the main book or not shouldnt rest it importance
    kinda like how Batman & Robin is not less important than Batman during Morrison, quite the opposite.

    I know some might say that it should be less important now because its not on Batman, but it really will depend of what else will happen in Batman
    If they are just going to have some placeholder writer doing something until issue 99 then I doubt people are going to care less

  9. #54
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnoldoaad View Post
    got it, but thats a pretty big difference though
    "IT", whatever that is, happening on the main book or not shouldnt rest it importance
    kinda like how Batman & Robin is not less important than Batman during Morrison, quite the opposite.

    I know some might say that it should be less important now because its not on Batman, but it really will depend of what else will happen in Batman
    If they are just going to have some placeholder writer doing something until issue 99 then I doubt people are going to care less
    I find it quite interesting a situation, really.

    There seems to be a trade-off between the significance of King's change and its canon validity. Seeing the executives are vehemently against King's leaving his mark on Batman, I can't imagine they will be happy to welcome a change of similar weight happening in another book. As a result, I think there are two paths before DC regarding King's new series: a) allow King to do as he planned, but at the same time deny the story full canon status; and b) ask King to alter his plot in order to lessen its impact on the main universe.

    This is what led me to ask whether we are sure the new series will be considered completely canon in the first place.

  10. #55
    Astonishing Member BatmanJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ten_to_Three View Post
    I find it quite interesting a situation, really.

    There seems to be a trade-off between the significance of King's change and its canon validity. Seeing the executives are vehemently against King's leaving his mark on Batman, I can't imagine they will be happy to welcome a change of similar weight happening in another book. As a result, I think there are two paths before DC regarding King's new series: a) allow King to do as he planned, but at the same time deny the story full canon status; and b) ask King to alter his plot in order to lessen its impact on the main universe.

    This is what led me to ask whether we are sure the new series will be considered completely canon in the first place.
    Mitch Gerads said on twitter that Batman/Catwoman would be "100% in continuity". I would think he's in a position to know.

  11. #56
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BatmanJones View Post
    Mitch Gerads said on twitter that Batman/Catwoman would be "100% in continuity". I would think he's in a position to know.
    Thanks for the reply. I'm aware of Gerads' tweet. Let me say first I'm by no means implying he's untrustworthy or anything, however, considering how sudden and rushed the series of announcements are and the impression of certain finer points may still be up in the air they give, I can't help but feel I need something more concrete and official before becoming fully convinced the new series is completely canon.

  12. #57
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    2,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BatmanJones View Post
    Mitch Gerads said on twitter that Batman/Catwoman would be "100% in continuity". I would think he's in a position to know.
    I think continuity, from the viewpoint of writers and editors, is more something pointing backwards than something pointing forwards, which is the way many readers seems to use the concept. Continuity also is far from binary. Technically, Rucka's Rebirth run on Wonder Woman is in continuity with Azzarello's New 52 run. In reality, it totally retconned and erased it.

    Will the Bat/Cat title be in continuity with King's Batman run? Certainly. But that says very little on how the Batman title will relate to the Bat/Cat title as they both are ongoing, even less how it will do so after the Bat/Cat series has concluded. I wouldn't be surprised if future Batman writers will simply quietly ignore whatever happened there: maybe not actively contradict it, but certainly not build upon it or bring it up in any way. Much like Wilson's run on Wonder Woman pretty much is a direct continuation of Rucka's run, and pretty much ignores Fontana's, Robinson's, and Orlando's runs.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  13. #58
    Astonishing Member Nick Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Wayne View Post
    No it's not. It sends a bad message to practically everyone that Harras is willing to mess them up if the content somehow doesn't meet his approval (especially when he was just 15 issues from 100). If DC is willing to do that to one of their top creators while keeping Harras's friends around, it pretty much says to potential talent that DC is not a good place to work for.
    Disagree. King is lucky he got this maxi.

    Harris did him a solid.

  14. #59
    Fantastic Member Eto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    305

    Default

    King fans must be happy now.
    If this is in-continuity, then technically he did get to finish his run, just not with the extravazanga issue #100.
    Favourite DC heroes: Flash (Wally West), Red Hood (Jason Todd), Batman.

  15. #60
    Astonishing Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ten_to_Three View Post
    The Batman in all Frank Miller's Bat-works is one single person. Some of his experiences (covered by Year One) constitute a part of the respective lores of both main universe and Millerverse.

    The Snyder story I refered to is Last Knight. This is what he said:

    So, basically, he is saying this work is compatible with and an extension of his Batman stories, but is not in the main continuity (of which his run is decidedly a part).

    What I'm trying to say is, given previous examples, even if a series is by a writer formerly at the helm of a canon-defining book and is described as a continuation of the book, we can't automatically assume it will be universally recognized as canon.
    I think the difference is, Last Knight On Earth is clearly an alternate future, so everything from Snyder's work DID happen in this story, but that doesn't necessarily mean these events will happen. Think of it like the flash forward in Annual #2, the rest of King's story is canon to it, but its relation to the entire mythos is up in the air, which for future stories is okay. From what we know, Batman/Catwoman is almost certainly going to be a present timeline book, so "alt-continuity" seems less and less likely.

    As for the Year One and Miller thing, that's easy, Year One happened in both the main continuity and Miller's continuity, many alternate universe mini-series, from both Marvel and DC, do this where they have selective continuity depending on the story, which works out fine and doesn't mess with canon overall.

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    I think continuity, from the viewpoint of writers and editors, is more something pointing backwards than something pointing forwards, which is the way many readers seems to use the concept. Continuity also is far from binary. Technically, Rucka's Rebirth run on Wonder Woman is in continuity with Azzarello's New 52 run. In reality, it totally retconned and erased it.

    Will the Bat/Cat title be in continuity with King's Batman run? Certainly. But that says very little on how the Batman title will relate to the Bat/Cat title as they both are ongoing, even less how it will do so after the Bat/Cat series has concluded. I wouldn't be surprised if future Batman writers will simply quietly ignore whatever happened there: maybe not actively contradict it, but certainly not build upon it or bring it up in any way. Much like Wilson's run on Wonder Woman pretty much is a direct continuation of Rucka's run, and pretty much ignores Fontana's, Robinson's, and Orlando's runs.
    You can look at all the other Batman books since Rebirth for an example of this too. King and Snyder rarely mentioned the events in each others books, but they're both still equally canon. Metal still happened even if King never made a direct reference to it. So it all depends on A. How big the change ends up being, and B. How much does the new writer want to explore said change. And at this point, we're probably gonna have to wait several months until there's an answer for either.
    Current Reading List: Amazing Spider-Man, Spider-Gwen, West Coast Avengers, Ms. Marvel, Peter Parker: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Avengers, Sonic The Hedgehog

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •