TF Views

Cumbersome titles are an annoyance. Nobody likes them. They make it harder for stores to order the right comics. Readers have a harder time keeping track of what is out. And, non-comic stores are even more confused.

(If I were not planning to read all 3 of the TF comics due out next year, I would expect this sort of confusion to become a problem.)

Why wouldn't a reader who was interested by a story they might want to find for themselves do a little research to figure out which title it was in exactly? Maybe not in O6's case, but it's not reasonable to assume every reader would be so indifferent as you suggest here.

Because most people do not want to do *research* when reading fiction. If nothing else, how many people even have the time?

which implies Vertigo was ever a seperate universe (it really wasn't, I don't give a damn what anyone says) and includes Wildstorm (who cares?)

It all depends on how you define "Vertigo". I am still trying to reconcile vampire biker sluts with Superman.

Well, the good news is that this arguably wipes out "Countdown", which presented Wildstorm as a distinct timeline.

He got retained because, surprise, Batman books sell.

Damien will be toast before the next bat-movie franchise starts. Mark my words.


Dom
-still behind on comics.

Dominic wrote:Because most people do not want to do *research* when reading fiction. If nothing else, how many people even have the time?

They do when they want to find a particular book they heard about and want to read themselves. Have to actually have the fiction first to be able to read it Dom. And seriously, how hard would it be to research whether the story in question took place in Venom or Anti-Venom? *Googles Marvel's Solicitations for September 2011* Huh, look at that, there is no Anti-Venom title, just Venom. And the description matches the described story. Didn't even take me 5 minutes. Course I already knew where to look but still, it's that easy.

Again, you're using a different criteria. The original question was "is there a book about Anti-Venom with his name on it?" the answer is yes. It happened as part of Amazing Spiderman, but it still happened and saying that there's no ongoing isnt' going to change the fact that it happened. And googling Marvel's September solicitations isn't going to negate it. And neither is proving that there's no ongoing title which we were never debating to begin with. I mean, saying you don't count it just because it's not ongoing is like saying Ironhide never happened because it wasn't ongoing. Or subsequently that Last Stand of the Wreckers or Drift or Bumblebee all never happened because they weren't ongoing titles.

I totally agree with you about Barnes and Noble and will go one step further and say that if you go in asking for a book about Anti-Venom you're as likely to be directed to books about curing snake bites as comic books. Store employees are morons which is why I never even bother asking for help at a retail chain anymore.

DC has been compressing their timeline for some time anyway. Prior to Zero Hour, Hal Jordan had been Green Lantern for about 15 years, according to the early issues of GL vol. 3. He was clearly meant to be a veteran in his 40s, hence the grey hair and general thoughtful air of experience that was given to the character. They Zero Hour set everything in a 10 year timeframe, and now we've got a mostly five year timeframe, with a few exceptions.

I'll give DC credit for using a well-publicized story to change the timeline both times, even if it makes a mess of some things. At least it's somewhat planned, even if we don't know what counts and what doesn't, which is what mainly irritates me.

Shockwave wrote:Again, you're using a different criteria. The original question was "is there a book about Anti-Venom with his name on it?" the answer is yes.

No, O6 had originally asked in response to 138 Scourge's comments about the most recent Venom book "Or was this in Anti-Venom?" The answer is Venom, because there isn't an Anti-Venom book (right now).

It happened as part of Amazing Spiderman, but it still happened and saying that there's no ongoing isnt' going to change the fact that it happened. And googling Marvel's September solicitations isn't going to negate it. And neither is proving that there's no ongoing title which we were never debating to begin with. I mean, saying you don't count it just because it's not ongoing is like saying Ironhide never happened because it wasn't ongoing. Or subsequently that Last Stand of the Wreckers or Drift or Bumblebee all never happened because they weren't ongoing titles.

...What? Not counting a mini-series as a character getting their own title is not like saying it didn't happen. Of course the story happened, but it's just a limited side story with a focus on that character, and that's not really what I'd count as a character getting their own title.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Shockwave wrote:Again, you're using a different criteria. The original question was "is there a book about Anti-Venom with his name on it?" the answer is yes.

No, O6 had originally asked in response to 138 Scourge's comments about the most recent Venom book "Or was this in Anti-Venom?" The answer is Venom, because there isn't an Anti-Venom book (right now).

Ah. I forgot. And was apparently too lazy to go back and look. My mistake.

Sparky Prime wrote:

It happened as part of Amazing Spiderman, but it still happened and saying that there's no ongoing isnt' going to change the fact that it happened. And googling Marvel's September solicitations isn't going to negate it. And neither is proving that there's no ongoing title which we were never debating to begin with. I mean, saying you don't count it just because it's not ongoing is like saying Ironhide never happened because it wasn't ongoing. Or subsequently that Last Stand of the Wreckers or Drift or Bumblebee all never happened because they weren't ongoing titles.

...What? Not counting a mini-series as a character getting their own title is not like saying it didn't happen. Of course the story happened, but it's just a limited side story with a focus on that character, and that's not really what I'd count as a character getting their own title.

Which is kind of absurd really. I mean, what percentage of comic book characters ever wind up getting their own ongoing series? I'm guessing it's pretty low. Most characters are only going to get a miniseries if even that and not to count that as getting their own title is...

Ah screw it, I literally don't have time for this. I'm not mad (cause I know that previous statement probably sounds otherwise), but we're just using different standards. Agree to disagree.

Shockwave wrote:Which is kind of absurd really. I mean, what percentage of comic book characters ever wind up getting their own ongoing series? I'm guessing it's pretty low. Most characters are only going to get a miniseries if even that and not to count that as getting their own title is...

I think you'd be surprised how many characters get an ongoing actually. But they tend to be short lived because they don't sell.

Ah screw it, I literally don't have time for this. I'm not mad (cause I know that previous statement probably sounds otherwise), but we're just using different standards. Agree to disagree.

Alrighty then.

Onslaught Six wrote:The Wildstorm bit reminds me heavily of how Charlston was assimilated into the mainstream DC universe in the 80s. Frankly, given its success, I'm surprised DC didn't try to shoehorn fucking Watchmen into it. We could have gotten WatchmeX!

I think Watchmen is one of the last Sacred Cows DC's got. Don't get me wrong, it's inevitable that it'll get folded in eventually. If Wildstorm and Swamp Thing and Kingdom Come and those fucking Archie Comics heroes can get jammed into the regular DCU, they'll do it to Watchmen one of these days too. But they'll probably give it a while longer, maybe wait until Alan Moore dies.

Dominic wrote:Damien will be toast before the next bat-movie franchise starts. Mark my words.

I dunno, isn't Morrison still God of Batman over at DC? And that guy loves Damien. Plus I know Batman: Friday Knight Lights is getting ready to come out soonish here, and Damien's doing okay. It'd be monumentally stupid to make the effort to keep him around after a universe-wide reboot just to off him less than a year later. Yeah, 'monumentally stupid' doesn't exactly disqualify DC from doing it, but still.

I don't think Dom is saying "Damien will be dead by the time Dark Knight Rises comes out." I think Dom is saying, "Damien will be dead by the next Batman film reboot happens." Which Dom is probably assuming will happen 3-4 years after TDKR.

Shockwave wrote:I totally agree with you about Barnes and Noble and will go one step further and say that if you go in asking for a book about Anti-Venom you're as likely to be directed to books about curing snake bites as comic books. Store employees are morons which is why I never even bother asking for help at a retail chain anymore.

My girlfriend just started working at Macy's. You'd think it'd be a pretty easy job, knowing where things are, yeah? No. You know why? They don't tell you. They just drop you into the job and say, here you go! If you don't make an extra effort (on top of actually doing the job) to memorize the fucking detailed layout of the store, you won't know shit.

Given how large a B&N is, I really can't expect them (realistically) to know much more than generic placement. IMO, if it's not on the shelf it's not there. (I barely buy books at retail chains anyway--Amazon is way cheaper.)

I used to work at Blockbuster a long time ago and, while that is a much smaller store, I still knew just about every inch of the place. At the very least I think store employees should be aware of things unique to their store. Like I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Toys R Us employees to be familiar with their exclusives. I would also expect that at a store like B&N there should be employees who are at least familiar with specific sections. That way, if you walk in and the employee doesn't know they can at least ask someone who does.

Sparky, I do need to apologize for, or at the very least explain my earlier comment. I was posting that from work on my break and my break was minutes from being over but at that point I realized that we were actually arguing the semantics what one should consider a fictional character getting their own title. I generally find arguing semantics to be pointless anyway. Then add to that as a side effect of my recent purge from various fictional fandoms I am now finding it equally pointless to argue shit that happens in fiction. Now add those two together and the whole argument just seemed to be a big ginormous ball of pointless. I mean, I guess I just realized at that moment that I don't want to waste my life debating whether or not a ficitional character who does not, will not and could not ever exist has got his own title or not. On a side note, when O6 asked about an Anti-Venom book couldn't you have just said something like "Dude, you're thinking of this (and linked to the amazing spiderman thing)"? That would have completely bypassed the whole semantics argument to begin with. Anyway, I just wanted to apologize if I sounded like a dick earlier and also felt that I at least owed you an explaination of what prompted it.