Comics are Awesome III

[Dominic]

"Infinite Crisis" brought back the multiverse and back-back-wrote some character origins. I am counting that as a reboot.

Yeah, I know they used to be quite a thing to see, but the name now means "Crisis on Infinite Reboots", and cramming 75 years of Batman stories into 5 years of in-universe realigned retellings, and #1s over and over.

Re-numbering is not inherently bad. Marvel long ago discarded legacy numbering. They typically re-number by run, when creative teams change. Each run is effectivcely a mini-series. With Marvel, each re-numbering is a change in tone and direction. In other words, there is a plan.

(Even changes to plans are handled pretty well. By the end of "Time Runs Out", Marvel had "forgotten" that "Age of Ultron" was supposed to lead in to the reboot. But, Hickman's run is still mostly coherent.)


DC lacks any coherent plans. (Consider how quickly they changed direction with "Convergence", which was only meant to be a place holder. Then there was no follow-up for several months.)

"Earth 2" and "Team 7" are examples of this.

With "Earth 2", DC ran Robinson off mid-run. Taylor replaced Robinson almost seamlessly, until he could not work from Robinson's work. DC apparently wanted "Earth 2" to be a rolling disaster. Then, Taylor went to Marvel (mid-run on "Earth 2") just as DC decided to draw the series in to a big event, which may or may not have been intended to lead in to "Convergence". Now, "Earth 2: Society" has barely gotten out of set-up, and has a new writer. The only reason I am assuming DC has any intention of keeping the series around in the long term is that Dan Abnett is a big name writer. (Of course, DC has not been respecting writers over the last few years.)

"Team 7" not only ended mid-run, it ended with a "to be continued". Not a rushed ending, but a "to be continued".

One of the "Titans" compilations actually had changes made from its single issues.

[JediTricks]

Yeah, I know they used to be quite a thing to see, but the name now means "Crisis on Infinite Reboots", and cramming 75 years of Batman stories into 5 years of in-universe realigned retellings, and #1s over and over.

Re-numbering is not inherently bad. Marvel long ago discarded legacy numbering. They typically re-number by run, when creative teams change. Each run is effectivcely a mini-series. With Marvel, each re-numbering is a change in tone and direction. In other words, there is a plan.

Make sure you don't trip over any roots as you miss the forest for the trees.

[Dominic]

, and #1s over and over.

You included frequent #1's on your list of complaints. Those have nothing to do with DC's problems. Marvel has had at least as many number ones in the last 4.5 years as DC, but far fewer problems.

-edit:
Yes, artificial renumbering was a problem in the 90s. It was meant to keep issue numbers artificially low in a clumsy attempt to boost sales. That was 20 years ago.

The practice has changed over time. Re-numbering now typically signals a change in direction or creative team unrelated to DC's pinballing.

[andersonh1]

, and #1s over and over.

You included frequent #1's on your list of complaints. Those have nothing to do with DC's problems. Marvel has had at least as many number ones in the last 4.5 years as DC, but far fewer problems.

"Hey, go check out Iron Man #15. It's really good!"
"Which Iron Man #15. There are about 8 different Iron Man #15s."
"Uhhhh.... hmmm. I'll get back to you."

Renumbering may have worked for awhile as a temporary sales booster, but in the long run it does little but make the history of characters confusing and hard to follow. Admittedly, that does reveal the priorities of both DC and Marvel when it comes to making back issues easily accessible and understood. No wonder the casual reader is turned off... I would find wading through multiple volumes and first issues much more off-putting than 50 years of issues with consistent numbering.

[Dominic]

Generally, referring to a specific issue means "the one that shipped recently". Beyond that, anybody who cares enough to recommend or seek a specific issue will probably know to do so by run.


Marvel and DC do not care about back-issues. They already sold those. If nothing else, the big two want new readers to pick up either the current series or to buy back-issues as compilations (likely not even at a comic store).


The history of the characters is made convoluted by endless back-writes and stuff getting undone.

[Sparky Prime]

"Infinite Crisis" brought back the multiverse and back-back-wrote some character origins. I am counting that as a reboot.

It is a reboot, but it didn't undo CoIE. If anything, it was a follow-up to CoIE, using the same storyline as a means to enact another reboot.

Renumbering may have worked for awhile as a temporary sales booster, but in the long run it does little but make the history of characters confusing and hard to follow.

Yeah, I'd have to agree. Plus, it used to be a #1 of a series meant something, but the over-use of relaunches has made it trivial.

[Shockwave]

Debating whether something is a reboot or not is more or less irrelevant. As a casual outsider looking in, I can tell you that the perception that I have as a possible new reader is that they change shit up and undo stories too often for their stories to be worth me investing any time or money to it. I'm sure as hell not going to jump in with New 52 when I knew damned well that it wasn't going to last long enough to get legacy numbering or and were just going to be etcha sketched a year or two later anyway. If either Marvel or DC wants new readers, they have to just leave shit alone and not try to recapture the lightning in a bottle that happened once over thirty years ago. Knock it off with the gimmicky numbering and the gimmicky cross overing and just let the damn books sell themselves. I mean, honestly, if I thought for one second that the new Superman or Spiderman or whoever book was going to have the staying power and that the stories told were still going to be relevant and part of the narrative for more than just a few years later? Yeah, I might buy in for that. But knowing that whatever I read is going to be worthless or irrelevant in at least a year or less is what's driving me a way and even going as far as to make me not care about characters that I've liked for years. This is a problem! Marvel and DC should be trying to get exactly people like me to buy comics. Why? Well, I'm single, no kids and of an age and income level that allows me to afford things like comics. And I already like some of their characters. Superman is my favorite Super hero. And yet, I have literally 0 Superman comics. DC should be cranking out stuff every month that has me so interested that I have a house infested with Superman comics. But again, their over hyped gimmicky writing, constant reboots and constantly reinventing old characters into new versions that no one cares about and aren't interesting is not the way to do it. Honestly, the industry needs to get back to it's roots. Go back and look at what made the legacy characters last to the point where they became legacy characters and do that again. Quit the endless reboots and the endless and pointless renumbering and just tell good stories with good characters. That's it. That's enough of gimmick in itself and that more than anything could be the biggest success for comics. Anyway, I just thought I would offer my perspective as someone who has a passing interest in comic book characters but is generally an outsider to the hobby. Because I know that if I feel this way as a casual fan, there must be others too.

[andersonh1]

Shockwave, I wish the people running DC understood readers like you. They say they want to expand the readership, but so much of what they do drives the casual reader away, and I don't think they realize that.

Superman is my favorite Super hero. And yet, I have literally 0 Superman comics. DC should be cranking out stuff every month that has me so interested that I have a house infested with Superman comics. But again, their over hyped gimmicky writing, constant reboots and constantly reinventing old characters into new versions that no one cares about and aren't interesting is not the way to do it.

From about 1989 to 1995, I bought all the Superman comics DC put out, which was four interconnected monthly books. I can't imagine doing that now, with the character where he is, and he's one of my favorites too.

Honestly, the industry needs to get back to it's roots. Go back and look at what made the legacy characters last to the point where they became legacy characters and do that again. Quit the endless reboots and the endless and pointless renumbering and just tell good stories with good characters.

Agreed, 100%.

[andersonh1]

Speaking of a more classic version of Superman...

Superman: Lois and Clark #4
This issue continues the series format of presenting both a flashback to Clark, Lois and Jonathan's early years in the New 52 universe, and then moving forward to the present day with the second half of the issue.

- the past: for Lois and Clark's anniversary, they decide to travel incognito to this Earth's Metropolis and see the sights. As usual they note both the similarities and the differences. They buy Jonathan a Superman t-shirt, and after a close call with Jimmy Olsen, they return to their hotel, where Lois reveals that she used her connections as Sam Lane's daughter to obtain the black suit that Superman has been seen wearing since the first issue. She essentially impersonates her New 52 self. He's been wearing out too many clothes in his superhero exploits, so this suit not only allows him to display the S-shield again, but is much more durable.

- the present day: Lois and Jonathan head out to check on Lois's publishing contact, only to find that Intergang has her. It's a trap, and after encountering Bruno Manheim outside the building, Lois is well aware that Intergang now know what she looks like, and will no doubt make another attempt on her life. Jonathan continues to notice the holes in the stories that his parents have been telling him to keep him in the dark about who they really are, so that shoe is sure to drop sooner or later.

Clark is in his Fortress, and he speculates about why he's weaker on this Earth than he was on his, but has no real answer. Blanque has escaped and makes several attempts to kill him, while promising that "that woman and that boy" will be next. He still has Hank Henshaw in tow, and is controlling him mentally. The book ends with Superman buried under a mountain, and Lois and Jonathan on the run from Intergang. And the final page is, again, the alien looking for her weapon, which she has now traced to Earth.

Clark gets supervillains to fight, Lois gets to use her wits and journalism against Intergang, and Jonathan is clearly paying attention and working things out. All three main characters get some good material, and I continue to enjoy reading about them again.

[Dominic]

mean, honestly, if I thought for one second that the new Superman or Spiderman or whoever book was going to have the staying power and that the stories told were still going to be relevant and part of the narrative for more than just a few years later?

Do you really expect stuff to stick for more than a few years anyway? There is plenty of stuff from the last few years that may as well not be counted. That does not mean those comics are inherently bad. But, they are not relevant.

And I already like some of their characters. Superman is my favorite Super hero. And yet, I have literally 0 Superman comics.

You have "zero Superman comics"?

How can you be a Superman fan and not have any comics? If nothing else, what is the point? Have you read "All Star Superman" or "Red Son" (two of the best "Superman" comics ever)? The "triangle number" stuff that Anderson mentions was an ambitious run. "Final Crisis" was heavily focused on Superman as an idea.

You cannot complain that there are no good comics if you are not reading them.