Layoffs at DC?

[iron chimp]

Personally speaking, I have zero problems with different approaches to the concept of hero or antihero. Even, or especially, when some of the most disturbing aspect of heroical personalities are shown. However, I don't think that we'll see new, original characters created by European creators interacting with classic DCU heroes, but rather original interpretations of classic characters. Like All-Star Superman or Black Orchid.

I dont either and DC readers have proved time and time again to support genuinely new quality retoolings of characters be in denny o'neil, frank miller, moore or whoever. Hopefully this is what we will see from across the globe and jim lee has proved time and time again to be able to work with comics 'complicated creatives' at wildstorm.

[iron chimp]

That page is kind of obsolete. I think Jim Lee was speaking in general, not literal, terms.

In the old DC ratings,

Teen meant 12+
Teen Plus meant 15+

And DC covers all used to be marked Teen or Teen Plus.

They announced a change maybe 1.5 years ago, but it took time to filter down to things like comic covers. The covers were still saying Teen and Teen Plus even a few months ago, but not anymore.

The current system has been described on the first page of DC Previews (now called DC Connect) for a long time. That system is:

DC Graphic Novels for Kids - Intended for readers ages 8-12
DC Graphic Novels for Young Adults - Intended for Readers ages 13+
DC - Intended for readers ages 13+
Black Label - Intended for readers ages 17+

("DC" refers to the monthly printed comics.)

And finally, DC comics do now all say 13+ on the covers.

You can see the ratings in the current DC Connect #3 located at:

https://www.dccomics.com/sites/defau...Oct_comics.pdf

By the way, before the line renames, DC Zoom was rated 8-12, while DC Ink was rated 13-18. So the only change is the Young Adults are now rated 13+.

I never noticed whether individual comic issues were labelled Teen vs. Teen Plus, or if it was just applied as a blanket to a particular title. Presumably writers were given guidelines of some kind, or the books were rated afterwards by the editors or other in-house experts.

So in theory by setting all comics at 13+, the formerly Teen (12+) comics are more mature, while the formerly Teen Plus comics (15+) have been made less mature? I haven't actually noticed any change.

The justification for the change in definitions was to align their age ratings with the MPAA ratings system.

In practice there probably isn't a real change. Unless they do very non-obvious things like apply some different limits to the number of panels with blood or other kinds of violence, and have altered the allowed counts slightly. (That's the sort of thing the MPAA does, though I think the exact criteria they use remains a secret.)

It is interesting that DC and DC Graphic Novels for Young Adults have the same 13+ rating. The YA books actually often deal with more mature, or at least more charged, themes, applicable to young adults. And many of them have explicit language that you will never see in a "DC" labelled comic (where such words are replaced with the usual $%^&$# kind of stuff).

Some books still don't quite fit, like Superman Smashes the Klan, which originally appeared in 3 little books rather than one YA book, rated E for Everyone. DC still does put out some E books from time to time. So, while they definitely DO have this current system, there are still exceptions - which I'd guess are mostly books written before this system was established. I think their intention was to eventually transition everything to this rating scheme.

But now, who knows. DC barely gets one set of standards in place before it is already switching to another.

BTW if you've ever wondered if it was your imagination that at least some Marvel was written for a younger audience, consider that their T rating means:

T – Appropriate for most readers, but parents are advised that they might want to read before or with younger children.

Spider-Gwen / Ghost-Spider is rated T, so if you ever read that title and wondered why it seemed kind of .... young, now you know why!

Thank you for that. Very informative analysis.

I pulled out issue 21 of catwoman which has teen+ and was beyond confused looking at the dc ratings link someone posted above thinking surely they cant think this is for ages 15 and up.

Theyve been all other the place with some of their characters then. Took all their properties out of vertigo into the main universe (which was teen+ but really was 13+) then put them back in to their version of vertigo with young animal (which was mature 17+) then presumably taking them back out again if they are moving away from new 'mature content' back into 12+ / 13+. But the doom patrol tv show is rated 15+ (here in uk).

[Restingvoice]

That page is kind of obsolete. I think Jim Lee was speaking in general, not literal, terms.

In the old DC ratings,

Teen meant 12+
Teen Plus meant 15+

And DC covers all used to be marked Teen or Teen Plus.

They announced a change maybe 1.5 years ago, but it took time to filter down to things like comic covers. The covers were still saying Teen and Teen Plus even a few months ago, but not anymore.

The current system has been described on the first page of DC Previews (now called DC Connect) for a long time. That system is:

DC Graphic Novels for Kids - Intended for readers ages 8-12
DC Graphic Novels for Young Adults - Intended for Readers ages 13+
DC - Intended for readers ages 13+
Black Label - Intended for readers ages 17+

("DC" refers to the monthly printed comics.)

And finally, DC comics do now all say 13+ on the covers.

You can see the ratings in the current DC Connect #3 located at:

https://www.dccomics.com/sites/defau...Oct_comics.pdf

By the way, before the line renames, DC Zoom was rated 8-12, while DC Ink was rated 13-18. So the only change is the Young Adults are now rated 13+.

I never noticed whether individual comic issues were labelled Teen vs. Teen Plus, or if it was just applied as a blanket to a particular title. Presumably writers were given guidelines of some kind, or the books were rated afterwards by the editors or other in-house experts.

So in theory by setting all comics at 13+, the formerly Teen (12+) comics are more mature, while the formerly Teen Plus comics (15+) have been made less mature? I haven't actually noticed any change.

The justification for the change in definitions was to align their age ratings with the MPAA ratings system.

In practice there probably isn't a real change. Unless they do very non-obvious things like apply some different limits to the number of panels with blood or other kinds of violence, and have altered the allowed counts slightly. (That's the sort of thing the MPAA does, though I think the exact criteria they use remains a secret.)

It is interesting that DC and DC Graphic Novels for Young Adults have the same 13+ rating. The YA books actually often deal with more mature, or at least more charged, themes, applicable to young adults. And many of them have explicit language that you will never see in a "DC" labelled comic (where such words are replaced with the usual $%^&$# kind of stuff).

Some books still don't quite fit, like Superman Smashes the Klan, which originally appeared in 3 little books rather than one YA book, rated E for Everyone. DC still does put out some E books from time to time. So, while they definitely DO have this current system, there are still exceptions - which I'd guess are mostly books written before this system was established. I think their intention was to eventually transition everything to this rating scheme.

But now, who knows. DC barely gets one set of standards in place before it is already switching to another.

BTW if you've ever wondered if it was your imagination that at least some Marvel was written for a younger audience, consider that their T rating means:

T – Appropriate for most readers, but parents are advised that they might want to read before or with younger children.

Spider-Gwen / Ghost-Spider is rated T, so if you ever read that title and wondered why it seemed kind of .... young, now you know why!

I think there was a case where the individual issue can be rated upwards, but I don't remember
Most of the time, it's by series.
New 52 Nightwing is rated T for bloody violence and make-out session
New 52 Batwoman is rated T+ for an onscreen covered lesbian sex scene in 2011
New 52 Detective Comics is rated T+ for cutting off Joker's face but I don't remember if that rating remains because subsequent arcs get tamer
Black Label Batman is rated M for a mutilated corpse in a church and Bruce Wayne's silhouetted dick

Anyway, if everything is slammed to 12+ then it's gonna be bloody violence and mild sexy times without onscreen mutilation or covered sex scene

[iron chimp]

Personally speaking, I have zero problems with different approaches to the concept of hero or antihero. Even, or especially, when some of the most disturbing aspect of heroical personalities are shown. However, I don't think that we'll see new, original characters created by European creators interacting with classic DCU heroes, but rather original interpretations of classic characters. Like All-Star Superman or Black Orchid.

Thats exactly what you'll see according to the Jim lee interview for hollywood reporter

"You’ll definitely see more international content. You’re going to see more digital content. When you talk about growing our business, both physical and digital, to me the opportunities are global. That’s what we’ll be focusing on. Sometimes that takes the form of content that we take here and translate and sell in other marketplaces, but we want to partner with creatives in various territories and unlock stories that feel authentic to their marketplaces with characters that they can embrace as their own, and look for opportunities to take those characters and seed them throughout all our mythology."

Thats why i raised the problems you could have with 'authentic to their marketplace' vs dcs corporate ideology and blanket rating going forward (it sounds a blanket rating as jim leed says 6-11 and 12+)

[iron chimp]

I think there was a case where the individual issue can be rated upwards, but I don't remember
Most of the time, it's by series.
New 52 Nightwing is rated T for bloody violence and make-out session
New 52 Batwoman is rated T+ for an onscreen covered lesbian sex scene in 2011
New 52 Detective Comics is rated T+ for cutting off Joker's face but I don't remember if that rating remains because subsequent arcs get tamer
Black Label Batman is rated M for a mutilated corpse in a church and Bruce Wayne's silhouetted dick

Anyway, if everything is slammed to 12+ then it's gonna be bloody violence and mild sexy times without onscreen mutilation or covered sex scene

So they had main universe books rated 13+ and 15+ or t and t+

Jim Lee's quote is "organizing, broadly speaking, in content that is for kids 6 to 11 and then 12 to 45"

Does that mean all books going forward are 12+ or 12+ and 15+. Who knows...

Obviously we only have rumours to go off but i dont think this is clear cut at all that content might not change.

[Flash Gordon]

2. Regional content produced in that region. Ok thats interesting but
A. I can guarantee any regional content produced in UK will totally take the piss. Britain has zero history of superheroes beyond creating obnoxious dicks like zenith, paradax etc. 2000ad recently had a story where superheroes were disembowelled so if they are thinking they are going to green lantern in a bowler hat drinking tea
.. then no... no you wont.

B. What do you do in say yr Eire office when someone writes about IRA creating an uberman to attack uk (or vice versa ) or in korea if someone creates a japanese war crimes hunter or in nigeria someone takes a sideswipe at sharia... etc etc. This seems a potentially very inflammatory idea no matter how laudable it also seems.

This is the best news.

A Franco-Belgium Superman or Aquaman book would be killer.

[Restingvoice]

So they had main universe books rated 13+ and 15+ or t and t+

Jim Lee's quote is "organizing, broadly speaking, in content that is for kids 6 to 11 and then 12 to 45"

Does that mean all books going forward are 12+ or 12+ and 15+. Who knows...

Obviously we only have rumours to go off but i dont think this is clear cut at all that content might not change.

Sounds like he's just speaking broadly that there will be a kids line and a mainline, since the mainline never goes down below T I think...

[Flash Gordon]

Personally speaking, I have zero problems with different approaches to the concept of hero or antihero. Even, or especially, when some of the most disturbing aspect of heroical personalities are shown. However, I don't think that we'll see new, original characters created by European creators interacting with classic DCU heroes, but rather original interpretations of classic characters. Like All-Star Superman or Black Orchid.

Same.
I'd prefer different approaches, honestly. My interest in these characters comes from the pulpier material, I don't care for superheroes. At least superheroes in the sense of upper middle class US "values".

[Ascended]

I think we might need to differ between the "trades omnibuses" and the "trade OGNs" when looking at DC's output. The trade omnibuses are rather cheap to make, especially if they cut down on the amount of bonus materials in them (which I think they will do, given that there won't be a specific department within DC that will be responsible for them anymore).

I think we might have to re-define a lot of our terminology going forward, if other formats and "trade collections" become a bigger aspect of DC's product line. Will we need to differentiate between a digital trade and a floppy collection, etc? Right now everything is mostly floppy, and the handful of exceptions are obvious and not really worth their own terminology but after this? We might need some new words.

I suggest "flizzelbulp."

But I think no-one really has figured out digital comics yet, while the trade OGNs are pretty much a solved problem marketing-wise. That's why they talk a lot more about digital.

Probably. I have a hard time picturing anyone saying "Well, trades/OGN's outsold floppies for the first time ever last year despite struggling against Scholastic, let's start half-assing it now!" but DC has made poor choices often enough for me to be more than a tad cynical.

I'm not sure it will happen. The first extension to 70 years was spearheaded by Germany due to some obscure reading of the copyright of Mein Kampf, but it received a lot of pushback after the fact, and those alliances for copyright reforms and limitations have only gotten stronger.

Unless those alliances can out-bribe the giant corporations that don't want to share their toys, I don't see it happening. But who knows? I'm pretty sure the deadline is coming up real soon, but with everything else happening in the world (and country) it could easily slip under everyone's notice. We'll have to keep an eye out.

I'd be hard pressed to see how it'd work in practice with Franco-Belgian B.D really.

But if they do create "Europeans" Comics, i just hope that they'll avoid the pitfalls of : guns everywhere, U.S. vision of vigilantism and all-Europe teams for the sake of teams. We are a very divided continent and in recent years the EU did next to nothing to mend those divisions (I'd say it has exacerbated them even). It needs to be reflected in the comics.

I feel like every continent is a divided one these days. But yeah, if DC pushes into international waters I hope they do it right; get creators from those regions, let them change and adjust whatever they need to so the IP fits the culture, etc. I feel like the legal hurdles will be far bigger than any creative ones. Creatively it should just be a matter of hiring the right people and then staying out of their way.

[kilderkin]

For the life of me, I can’t understand this commitment to a belief that Batman’s popularity is artificial and that all the other characters are held back to make him look good. No people just like Batman and writers are going to put Batman in cool situation because it brings interest to the book.

Like Batman not doing cool things in Justice League book and being a minor sideline character.... won’t hurt Batman’s popularity. However a bunch of Batman fans are going to read the book and say “lame he’s not really doing anything”, then the sales of that book will slide, while they keep reading the Bat line of books

Totally see what you mean with this

It is an absolute nonsense to suggest any company hamstrings some of their products to promote the best selling one

It's the reverse in practice

They use the best selling to promote the weaker products

No company has ever thought its a good idea to hamstring potential sales deliberately

Batman sells the most, they use that to bump interest in other properties, they keep his profile high in those properties to keep his fans on board

This is exactly the same thing marvel do with Spiderman and at times wolverine

[Myskin]

Meanwhile:
https://bleedingcool.com/comics/jim-...wood-reporter/
https://bleedingcool.com/comics/reme...or-in********/

What can I say? Well...

Look, it doesn't take a genius to know that every organization thrives when it has two leaders. Go ahead, name a country that doesn't have two presidents. A boat that sets sail without two captains. Where would Catholicism be without the popes?

[Korath]

I feel like every continent is a divided one these days. But yeah, if DC pushes into international waters I hope they do it right; get creators from those regions, let them change and adjust whatever they need to so the IP fits the culture, etc. I feel like the legal hurdles will be far bigger than any creative ones. Creatively it should just be a matter of hiring the right people and then staying out of their way.

Finger crossed for some Florent Maudoux's take on the DC Universe. I mean, he created a "comics" where one of the important B-list character is actually Sean Connery who was a hero with his Zardoz movie costume. I want to see him do something with the DC heroes, it could be really fun. Utterly irrelevant, but extremely fun. And probably too flirty/sexual for a company scared by a Bat-penis outline sadly...

[cranger]

But yeah, if DC pushes into international waters I hope they do it right; get creators from those regions, let them change and adjust whatever they need to so the IP fits the culture, etc. I feel like the legal hurdles will be far bigger than any creative ones. Creatively it should just be a matter of hiring the right people and then staying out of their way.

Marvel has already worked with other regional markets to have characters created for them, with stories for them, and also introduce them into the main storyline as seen with Aero and Sword Master.

[Korath]

Marvel has already worked with other regional markets to have characters created for them, with stories for them, and also introduce them into the main storyline as seen with Aero and Sword Master.

Yeah, but it's maybe easier with Asian/African characters (when they bother to choose Asians/Africans creators) because those continents have vast untapped traditions and cultures which are quite different (a Senegalese is not a Masai, for instance) while Europe is a lot closer to the U.S., since the U.S is absically a melting pot of English and Germanic traditions sprinkled with French, Spaniards and etc. Sure customs and sensibilities may differ but they aren't that stark, you know ?

But perhaps I'm really just grumpy and afraid that they'll just give us more of the same far too on the nose named heroes and villains (I fully expect at least one Napoléon something, somewhere) or just femmes fatales, you know ? Nightrunner is probably the one French character who isn't a cliché at DC that I know off... and I can tell that if he was in real France, he'd get a lot of bad rep for using an English nickname but would be trashed even more of he tried it with a French one.

[Ascended]

Finger crossed for some Florent Maudoux's take on the DC Universe. I mean, he created a "comics" where one of the important B-list character is actually Sean Connery who was a hero with his Zardoz movie costume. I want to see him do something with the DC heroes, it could be really fun. Utterly irrelevant, but extremely fun. And probably too flirty/sexual for a company scared by a Bat-penis outline sadly...

Yeah America is weird. We're totally cool with our children watching people get ripped apart in movies, but even the hint of a sex organ and we lose our damn minds and freak out about our kids losing their innocence.

I'm not familiar at all with international talent and know little of the comics situation in other countries, other than some basic things like "Japan has manga for everyone" and such. But if DC starts getting international talent on their characters I hope like hell there's an English translation made available Stateside; I've read a few comics from France (that got reprinted in the States) and a few manga, and I am down with fresh vision applied to DC's roster. And I promise not to freak out like a typical American if there are boobs or penises.