Eight Things We've Learned About the "New" DC Comics

[The Darknight Detective]

Plenty of cancelled titles had stellar creative teams on them in the past 3 years. You ar just ignoring the facts to try to push your point, but its not true eat all. I, Vampire had stellar creative talent and sold like ****. Swamp Thing post-Snyder was fantastic, sold like ****. Dial H was a great title, sold like ****. It's more like Dan and the Gang published plenty of books fans REALLY needed to discover.

As I have mentioned previously here at CBR, I believe the economic situation of the industry is the big problem. It was much easier to take a chance on a new title years ago when comics were cheaper in real dollars than is the case today.

[The Darknight Detective]

If they're going to keep doing the same things they've always been doing, they should expect the same results. That's not illogical, either.

Except they're not doing exactly the same things and the sales have improved because of those changes.

[AlexanderLuthor]

If they're going to keep doing the same things they've always been doing, they should expect the same results. That's not illogical, either.

Scott Snyder was on Swamp Thing, Jeff Lemire took up Green Arrow, Jimmy Palmiotti of Harley Quinn fame was on All-Star Western, the new "golden child" Charles Soule was on Red Lanterns (lol) and Swamp Thing - none of them sold. Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

[Cold Water]

Hmm, new 52? Rings a bell?

Look, all I'm saying is: They have the ability to make happy the people wanting characters like Wally West in stories AND the people craving new concepts, new characters and new ideas. Just because some want iconic characters in stories, doesn't mean there cannot be new concepts/new stories.

I want new things, too, AND I want old characters. I want new characters, but I also, sometimes, want that old feeling back in some books. This can be accomplished if they're willing to do it.

[Triple J]

Riiiiiight. They keep hyping up things like "fresh characters" and "new concepts", but as long as the likes of not-so-fresh Superman and hardly-new Batman -- to use your own words -- remain the center of the DCU, all their hype will always be nothing but a load of hot air.

If they REALLY want to emphasize "fresh characters" and "new concepts", let's see them PROVE it. Stop publishing ANY pre-established characters and concepts, and come up with an ALL-NEW universe with ALL-NEW characters and concepts. Put up or shut up.

I didn't say anything about including every pre-established character. I'm just holding Dan and the Gang to their own words. Truth in advertising is the "new concept" they REALLY need to discover.

And if DC does that..will you buy those books?

Some of us might..but most people won't, no matter what good the books are. That's the simple fact.

It's easy for people like us to tell folks at DC how they should run their company (but, taking action - implementing and making profit out of a business is a lot harder than it looks).

This is what fans want but we can't be sure the ones in charge want that.

The effort one puts into Batman should be the same effort that goes into Vibe or Prez or Midnighter. Problem is we have seen too much amateur hour done on some books. Then when that books fails the character gets tossed into limbo instead of someone else getting a shot.

Giving the lesser-selling characters better creative teams is another of those "new concepts" that Dan and the Gang REALLY need to discover. Isn't the idea of all this to get out of the usual Catch-22s??

Plenty of cancelled titles had stellar creative teams on them in the past 3 years. You ar just ignoring the facts to try to push your point, but its not true eat all. I, Vampire had stellar creative talent and sold like ****. Swamp Thing post-Snyder was fantastic, sold like ****. Dial H was a great title, sold like ****. It's more like Dan and the Gang published plenty of books fans REALLY needed to discover.

Like FishboneX mentioned, DC gave a lot of cancelled titles stellar teams, resulting in absolutely awesome books that were cancelled too early because of low sales.

Perhaps what they need to do is spread out the talent a bit more - take the top talent from lower titles and put them in the 'middle ground' (books with average sales).

[cranger]

But why only look for what new readers want, when in reality, you COULD be giving both audiences what they want???

And if they want to make money, you are wrong: They need to appeal to as many people as possible. It would be stupid as hell, for ANY business, in ANY field to forget about long time customers/fans and only focus on new customers/fans. ESPECIALLY when it is completely in their power to make everyone happy.

I know what you mean but I think it is too simplistic of a setup you have here. The difficult part is figuring out what everyone's tastes are. Why are the core 25 titles not appealing to old time readers, or new readers? Why are the new 24 experimental titles not appealing to old readers, or new readers? What exactly is it that old readers want or new readers want?

The problem is you are basing this on these so-called long time and new customers being something that can be defined, or that they all want the same things. The reality is that, no, it is not in DCs power to give everyone what they want. DC could put out 200 comics of every thing you can think of to make everyone happy and, never mind the fact that most people will not be happy because their character got stuck with a crappy creative team, never mind that most of them would be canceled within a few months because there will not be enough people to support them each, but, there would still be someone out there who is still not happy because nothing in the lineup is exactly what they want. They would still have some complaint. There would still be something they would want to see done differently and some feeling DC was not addressing their wants.

[mathew101281]

Anyone find it funny that the company that has spent the last two decades and more( Ever since Kingdom Come) using nostalgia as its major selling point, is now complaining about the fans living in the past to much? All-star Superman John's run on JSA (Heck Johns run on anything), anything with Crisis in the name, all of them are pretty much selling on nostalgia. Then their is new Frontier which is essentially Nostalgia in comicbook form. You have a lot of fans that like nostalgia, and you only have yourself to blame, because that's essentially what you've been selling for the last 25 years.

[True Herald]

Thank god you aren't running the company. Ok, let's get rid of the most popular superhero ever so that we can have "truth in advertising".

You're missing the point.

My point is the same as it is on another current thread: Be Careful What You Say. They're not really interested in "fresh characters" and "new concepts" at all, because if they were, we'd be seeing completely new characters and ideas. So, instead of claiming that they are, they should be saying that they're sprucing up their pre-established characters.

But, of course, that doesn't garner the same sort of misbegotten buzz that you can get out of misleading buzzwords like "fresh characters" and "new concepts". And we can't have that, can we??

Why are you spewing negativity on this thread? They are doing exactly what you wish - instead of 52 old school superhero books they are trimming that to 25 and trying out new concepts with the rest of the line. Everyone that's been crying for diversity, creator freedom, and new concepts just got exactly what they wanted. So why are the same old folks back complaining about this as well?

"Who's this 'we', Kemosabe??"

This isn't what I wish. What I wish is to get back to the DCU, the one that existed before Dan and the Gang came in and ruined everything, culminating in this ridiculous reboot.

[True Herald]

Scott Snyder was on Swamp Thing, Jeff Lemire took up Green Arrow, Jimmy Palmiotti of Harley Quinn fame was on All-Star Western, the new "golden child" Charles Soule was on Red Lanterns (lol) and Swamp Thing - none of them sold. Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

"Meh" to all. (Even Palmiotti helped Dan DiDio write Superboy into cancellation.)

Where's Peter David?? Oh, wait, Dan pissed him off by badmouthing his Young Justice run while cancelling and replacing it. Good ol' Dan, we can always count on him to ruin a good thing!

[FishboneX]

You're missing the point.

My point is the same as it is on another current thread: Be Careful What You Say. They're not really interested in "fresh characters" and "new concepts" at all, because if they were, we'd be seeing completely new characters and ideas. So, instead of claiming that they are, they should be saying that they're sprucing up their pre-established characters.

But, of course, that doesn't garner the same sort of misbegotten buzz that you can get out of misleading buzzwords like "fresh characters" and "new concepts". And we can't have that, can we??

But again, you are ignoring all of the titles and runs that WERE fresh ideas, characters and concepts to try to push your point. You don't have to ditch the highest selling character and book in the world to also experiment with new ideas, they can and have done both. Fact is, fans haven't supported the fresh and new stuff at all.

[FishboneX]

"Meh" to all. (Even Palmiotti helped Dan DiDio write Superboy into cancellation.)

Where's Peter David?? Oh, wait, Dan pissed him off by badmouthing his Young Justice run. Good ol' Dan, we can always count on him to ruin a good thing!

"Meh" to all of the examples AlexanderLuthor listed, but then you bring up Peter David as if he's a new, cutting edge talent?

[AlexanderLuthor]

You're missing the point.

My point is the same as it is on another current thread: Be Careful What You Say. They're not really interested in "fresh characters" and "new concepts" at all, because if they were, we'd be seeing completely new characters and ideas. So, instead of claiming that they are, they should be saying that they're sprucing up the characters that they own.

But, of course, that doesn't garner the same sort of misbegotten buzz that you can get out of misleading buzzwords like "fresh characters" and "new concepts". And we can't have that, can we??



"Who's this 'we', Kemosabe??"

This isn't what I wish. What I wish is to get back to the DCU, the one that existed before Dan and the Gang came in and ruined everything, culminating in this ridiculous reboot.

What was the last completely new, original character that sold enough books to last as a solo series at either DC or Marvel? I'm sure there is someone, but honestly can't think of one off the top of my head in the last 10-20 years. Harley Quinn is probably the best example, but that was taken from animation. What you ask for is the destruction of the company. When they say "new characters" or "fresh characters" that doesn't have to be the main character of the book. But these titles are by and large completely forgotten or new characters (I assume you'll be checking all of these out):



Bat-Mite
Bizarro
Gotham Academy
Midnighter
Mystic U
Omega Men
Prez
Section 8

[Cold Water]

I know what you mean but I think it is too simplistic of a setup you have here. The difficult part is figuring out what everyone's tastes are. Why are the core 25 titles not appealing to old time readers, or new readers? Why are the new 24 experimental titles not appealing to old readers, or new readers? What exactly is it that old readers want or new readers want?

The problem is you are basing this on these so-called long time and new customers being something that can be defined, or that they all want the same things. The reality is that, no, it is not in DCs power to give everyone what they want. DC could put out 200 comics of every thing you can think of to make everyone happy and, never mind the fact that most people will not be happy because their character got stuck with a crappy creative team, never mind that most of them would be canceled within a few months because there will not be enough people to support them each, but, there would still be someone out there who is still not happy because nothing in the lineup is exactly what they want. They would still have some complaint. There would still be something they would want to see done differently and some feeling DC was not addressing their wants.

And I see your point.

But they have to have some idea of what people want. And they choose to ignore it a lot of the time.

[AlexanderLuthor]

"Meh" to all. (Even Palmiotti helped Dan DiDio write Superboy into cancellation.)

Where's Peter David?? Oh, wait, Dan pissed him off by badmouthing his Young Justice run while cancelling and replacing it. Good ol' Dan, we can always count on him to ruin a good thing!

Whether you liked them or not you asked for top name talent to be on lesser books. I gave you examples that did not sell. And evidently you didn't read Lemire's Green Arrow which was widely considered one of the best runs of the New 52

[True Herald]

And if DC does that..will you buy those books?

Some of us might..but most people won't, no matter what good the books are. That's the simple fact.

It's easy for people like us to tell folks at DC how they should run their company (but, taking action - implementing and making profit out of a business is a lot harder than it looks).

See the response to AlexanderLuthor concerning missing the point.

I'm not actually advocating that they stop publishing Superman, Batman, etc. I'm advocating that they watch what they say and don't be misleading in order to generate cheap buzz. Comics featuring pre-established characters are not "fresh concepts".