The Four Color Media Monitor

An article in Canadian Business about how the romance genre of manga is a big success mainly in Japan.

Labels: Europe and Asia, manga and anime

The Colorado Springs Gazette writes a fluff-coated article about writer J.T Krul's assignment to write about 2 recent victims of character destruction and editorial mandate, Green Arrow and Arsenal:

J.T. Krul hopes to hit the bull’s-eye with a couple of new assignments for DC Comics.

Krul is the new writer on “Green Arrow,” starting with this month’s issue No. 31 and a story arc titled “The Fall of Green Arrow.” He’s also the writer of “Justice League: The Rise of Arsenal,” a four-issue miniseries focusing on Roy Harper, Green Arrow’s former sidekick. The first issue just arrived in comic book shops.

Both “The Fall of Green Arrow” and “The Rise of Arsenal” spin out of “Cry for Justice,” a miniseries that saw shocking changes in the lives of the two archers.

Yeah, right. It's long ceased to be shocking. Now it's just revolting, and with the negative reaction these "changes" received, I think Krul stands to miss the mark in audience reception by miles.

Roy was maimed — his right arm torn off — and his young daughter was killed. Oliver “Green Arrow” Queen, rocked by those events and by a devastating attack on his beloved Star City, tracked down and killed the villain responsible, Prometheus.

And he’s not done: Green Arrow is after another bad guy that he blames for the lives lost in Star City.

“I think right now he doesn’t see himself as a hero,” Krul said of the anguished Green Arrow. “I think that he sees he’s doing what needs to be or has to be done, given the circumstances.”

His fellow superheroes don’t view it that way, though — particularly not the Flash, who is as quick to judge as he is quick on his feet.

“They all want to stop him,” Krul said, but the Flash “is a little more black and white about it. He is a police officer at heart.”

And this points to another serious problem coming in the wake of DC's latest ill-advised bloodbath: apparently Prometheus' actions are considered less important than Green Arrow's meting out punishment against him for his evil deeds. It's also very dismaying to see Barry Allen being exploited and shoved into this kind of role, years after his own wife de-facto fell victim to the Reverse-Flash, and Barry finally had to use deadly force to stop Thawne from murdering Fiona Webb.

While Green Arrow is on the hunt — and being hunted at the same time — Roy Harper is embarking on his own dark journey in “The Rise of Arsenal.”

Which would be best avoided too. I'm not sure if he'll return to drug abuse, but it's still likely to be so contrived and forced, it won't have any impact.

Another problem here isn't that these are anguished archers so much as it is a problem of the archers being subjected to angst, something that hurt comics like the X-Men in the 1990s.

Labels: dc comics, Flash, golden calf of death, Justice League of America, msm propaganda, Titans, violence

It's sad to learn that Dick Giordano, one of the most famous inkers/artists and editors, has passed away at 77 years old. While not without flaws, he was one of the better contributors to comics in his time.

Plus, he also expressed regret at his own role in darkening comics.

Labels: good artists

I've complained before about how collectibility for monetary value has long taken priority over the quality of the story, and the Brandon Sun isn't making things much better by furthering that type of fluff-coated stance:

MONTREAL - So you think your pile of comics is going to shoot up in value with the next big comic-book-based movie? Maybe Iron Man really is the Golden Avenger and there's a hunk of green in Green Lantern?

Whoa, Sparky. Rein in those Richie Rich fantasies a bit. Not everything is hitting the astronomical $1-million-plus that a couple of rare comics have fetched recently.

"There's really only certain films which generate interest in characters that have translated into dramatic increases in prices," says Gareb Shamus, founder and CEO of New York-based Wizard Entertainment.

Like Iron Man, for example. His debut issue in 1968 originally cost 12 cents and now goes for $500.

"There's no question the first Iron Man movie really put Iron Man on a blazing path from a collectibility standpoint and an awareness standpoint," Shamus said.

"In comic book circles, he was a popular character but on a worldwide basis most people walking down the street wouldn't know who he is. Now he's a household name."

But nothing's a sure thing.

Nope, it sure ain't. And for heaven's sake, what about an increase in people who'd actually like to read the comic books, especially the old ones? Why is money value in discussion here instead of whether anybody's interested in the archives of all these famous figures? It won't surprise me if Wizard's worst editor cares more about money than really promoting any great comics.

And the sad thing is that, despite the success of the Iron Man movie, Shell-head is still far from a true household name if his comics aren't selling the hundred-thousands or millions. The boosts from movies have become increasingly short-term, and rising prices aren't helping.

Last month, Detective Comics No. 27 - Batman's debut in May 1939 - sold at auction for $1,075,500, breaking the record $1 million paid three days earlier for 1938's Action Comics No. 1, which featured Superman's first appearance.

Action had held the record previously, selling for $317,000 in 2009.

Comic collecting became a serious hobby in the 1960s, with book shops and conventions popping up slowly after that.

While there were blips of interest in the hobby with hit movies like 1978's "Superman," it got more attention with a speculation boom in the mid-1980s and the box office and marketing success of 1989's "Batman."

And it collapsed soon after, as this speculator market became more important to the industry than telling good stories, and the market collapsed. They must've been so desperate to sell, without considering that drops in storytelling quality were harming sales, that they didn't even try to fight to keep their products in mainstream bookstores. Or, they didn't even care that much, leading to today's situation.

The price of new comics is around $3.99 on average.

But are they a good investment?

If we're talking DC/Marvel's current output, the answer is no.

"Marvel Comics has been around for 70 years, DC Comics has been around for 75 years and there's a reason for that," he said. "These are great characters and great stories."

Ahem: they are great characters, yes. There's no disputing that. But the stories published in recent years are not great at all. This is because of how the inmates who took over the asylum have long abandoned true interest in both their core audiences and new ones. They're self-interested and have failed to learn their lessons. And that's why, until they ever wake up and smell the coffee, they won't find mass success.

Labels: dc comics, marvel comics, msm propaganda

Robot 6 has a short entry about a miniseries Joe Quesada is writing called O.M.I.T, which is likely intended to be the explanation nobody asked for about why Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson didn't get married in the forced changes Quesada and company made to Spidey's world. The title may even be acronym for "one moment in time".

But all he's providing is a chance for everyone to reject him as a writer just as much as an artist (indeed, I myself am not impressed with his artwork today).

And speaking of editors moonlighting as writers, last time I looked at the sales charts, I saw that when Dan DiDio took over as writer of the Outsiders, the numbers quickly stagnated to as low as 21,000 units. This shows that many store owners realize the chances of turning a buck on DiDio as a writer are close to zero. Let's hope they understand the same about Quesada, because I won't be surprised if the only visitors interested in O.M.I.T are the tumbleweeds rolling around.

Labels: bad editors, dc comics, dreadful writers, marvel comics, Spider-Man

Here's an article on Suite 101 about the upcoming anime/manga convention in Boston, which usually begins in early April.

Labels: manga and anime

BBC Scotland has an article about how horror comics from EC like Tales from the Crypt and The Vault of Horror led to a panic and strict censorship enforcement in the UK during the 1950s, something that almost makes the controversy over the same items in America during that time look very tame by comparison.

Via Robot 6.

Labels: Europe and Asia

The Washington Post has an article about a couple of graphic novels that are aimed at beginners. It's good to see that there's some out there for the younger set.

An article in the Libertyville Review about IDW's editor Andy Schmidt visiting Libertyville High School as part of a writer's series. His own brother Craig is one of the teachers there.

Labels: indie publishers

Now, let's focus a little on DC's side of the Emerald City Comicon too. Editor Ian Sattler slipped by uttering a now cliched line in defense of the awful Cry for Justice:

Sattler said he disagreed with the assessment that the character was “fridged” (i.e. that her death was pointless). Robinson (the writer of the story) quickly added, “The decision has been controversial and one that I know has been greeted with displeasure by some. I'm sorry if it upset people. In all honesty, they wanted to kill Speedy too, and I said no, so give me some credit for that."

It appeared that Robinson was joking about wanting to kill Speedy, although some in the crowd were unsure. Sattler jumped in and said, “I’m proud of the story and stand by it. I'm happy it upset people because it means that the story had some weight and emotion.”

Robinson and Sattler also added that this story needed to be told to get Green Arrow to a specific place story-wise, as the character is going to have a “big” year.

So not only does Sattler fall onto that wobbly comment of how they're glad they upset people, which is actually rather alienating, he clearly subscribes to the "no such thing as bad publicity" school of thought.

And I don't think Robinson was making it any better by joking about killing Speedy (Mia). The joke's long worn thin, and has become insulting by now.

And on the subject of Green Arrow, I can't say I'm surprised how things are turning out, with Ollie now hunted by the League for murdering a monster who'd slaughtered his town. This is another leading problem with Cry for Justice that bothers me, especially in at least one review I'd read of it: as distasteful as Lian's and Star City residents' deaths are, why is it being implied that Ollie's a murderer? That's not the problem and it's stupid to cite it as though it were, given that Ollie already killed enough criminals during Mike Grell's run on GA during 1987-93. What is the problem is how this is the umpteenth example of DC mandating contrived stories with mass deaths in a very short time from one to another. So to brand Ollie a murderer only makes it even more defeatist and trivializes the seriousness of Prometheus's crime, and even the deaths of the victims themselves. It also makes the League look utterly brainless. But that's DC for you, which is clearly more interested in character destruction these days than development.

I won't be surprised if this spells trouble for more of DC's upcoming publications like the relaunch of Birds of Prey. Whether it mentions Cry for Justice when it premieres, it'll be very hard to ignore that Black Canary and Green Arrow's likely breakup was done over such contrived, tasteless circumstances. It may have been a bad idea to take Dinah out of the book's previous volume 3 years ago, but after Cry for Justice and the subsequent bad characterization, it'll be very hard to overlook that either.

Labels: bad editors, conventions, dc comics, dreadful writers, golden calf of death, Justice League of America, misogyny and racism, violence

The Jackson Sun says that comics can encourage children's reading, and that it's worked at a local library.

I just hope whatever they have in store there is suitable for younger audiences, of course.

Labels: libraries

At Marvel's panel discussion at the Emerald City Comicon, Joe Quesada droned away boringly with his usual weak excuses for wiping out the Spider-marriage, among other tired details. But what caught my eye was this discussion that came a little later in their meeting, about the Captain America vs conservative movement case:

The next person to approach the microphone introduced himself as a U.S. soldier who had served two tours in Iraq. The crowd and panelists applauded as he looked to Quesada and asked the following: “I’m here and I’ve brought issue #602 of ‘Captain America.’ As a military serviceman, I’ve signed away my freedom of speech. And I kind of rely on those who have it to use it responsibly. What do you think the responsibility of comic books is when it comes to touchy political subjects, and…this is a great issue. Why did you apologize for it?”

The audience clapped again, and Quesada nodded his head, as he was familiar with the “Tea Bag” controversy from the issue. He then asked the soldier if he had read Quesada’s response to the criticism the issue received. Marvel’s EIC explained, “What I said was that we made a mistake in identifying a group as an actual existing group in America…and that’s really the truth. It’s a complete accident what we did. And if we had used an ACORN or a Moveon.org sign, people from the other side of the spectrum would’ve been offended and it would’ve been just as wrong. So, in that sense, I did apologize, because we made a mistake – we screwed up. And that’s the truth.

“But then…the person who made these claims and said we had nefarious motives behind this claimed that we were calling him a racist and all these sorts of things, and that’s where I really drew the line. I said I think you’ve gone way too far. And I didn’t hear him apologize for those claims, because there’s nothing in that book that says that.

“The truth of the matter is we didn’t mean to single out any particular group. But the thing that upset me was that when the media ran with it, it was like ‘EIC of Marvel Apologizes” but they didn’t read the remainder of the apology.”

Ed Brubaker (the writer of the issue in question) added, “I grew up on military bases, and the first place I bought ‘Captain America’ was at the PX in Gitmo. I grew up in the ‘70s reading ‘Captain America’ comics, where Captain America and the Falcon were always talking about race relations – I don't know if we could do that today with the way the media works. For me, I just try to write the characters the way that I perceive them. I just wanted to show that the mood in the country has shifted this way. That's all I wanted to say.”

Brubaker then signed the soldier’s issue of “Captain America” and shook his hand.

I wonder if that soldier was really some kind of a "plant" in the audience who was helping them to bolster their wretched lefty stances? Whoever he is, I'm quite disappointed that he lent his voice to Marvel's moonbattery. And what's this about signing away his free speech? Doesn't look that way to me; he asked them quite a question. Quesada similarly disappoints with how he fudges everything up: it wasn't the tea-bag picket sign that was the problem: it was how the book was implying that conservatives are one-dimensional racists, and nothing more than "angry white folk", and I don't think that back in the day, Falcon ever came down that hard on white society.

Quesada's main problem is that he won't clearly admit his leftism, and that's what drove them to publish this time-wasting turkey. And as we see, he's even turned to attacking/inciting against the unnamed persons whom he claims are making phony accusations against them.

Brubaker can say what he wants, but really, he's writing the characters as he wants them to be: ultra-leftists. Perception isn't exactly the matter here. His defense that he spent time on army bases doesn't impress me either; there are plenty of people who could live on a military facility and still have negative opinions about them.

All in all, I'd say this is why the comicons are dropping in quality, as the company heads attending become more dishonest and alienating.

Labels: bad editors, Captain America, conventions, dreadful writers, marvel comics, politics

Publisher's Weekly reports that Fantagraphics is the latest American company that's decided to get into manga publishing.

Labels: manga and anime

The Binghampton Press writes about the changes modern comics have undergone while writing about a local comics store:

Today, the majority of regular comic shop customers are men between the ages of 20 and 45, Ryan Fuertsenberg, owner of Chargingstar Comics in Conklin, said. This flies in the face of the traditional idea that "comics are for kids."

And yet it's example 9,990,900 of how too few children read comics today, which isn't good for business in the long haul.

Just like all literary forms, comics have developed and become increasingly sophisticated. Superman, Batman and Uncanny X-Men comics are squarely aimed at adults.

And that's just the problem: they're so far aimed at adults, they're not suitable for children anymore, another reason why so few read them today.

Superheroes no longer face down the red communist threat. Instead, they fight terrorism, drug lords and foil plans to create single world governments.

Oh, do they? I'm afraid that for mainstream products, it's hardly so. Instead, as the recent Capt. America storyline shows, superheroes seem more occupied with fighting conservatives for illogical reasons.

Comics, like television, also have increased in the amount of gore and sexual content.

And that's another problem they've got, especially if they're mainstream. Mainly because the violent and sexual material is so done for the sake of it, that it's got no impact.

Modern comic covers often resemble showroom paintings, like the art of Alex Ross but, as Furstenberg points out, while it's the artwork that first draws a lot of comic book readers to the genre, it's the content that holds them.

"People want to read stories about good conquering evil and characters with amazing abilities," he said. "(They) like the escapism (and) nostalgia."

Ditto, said Doolittle: "I like the escapism. It fuels my sense of wonder."

Connection with characters is very important, Jones said, adding that readers need to feel emotionally invested.

And today's mainstream products have almost none of that. In that case, why no complaints about how the big two are betraying all that for the sake of their limp crossovers and publicity stunts? Probably because it wouldn't make for a good article in the minds of the clowns who published this useless one.

Labels: dc comics, marvel comics, msm propaganda, politics, violence

Oh dear. The overrated Hollywood writer/producer who never added much of anything to Spider-Man last decade has now been assigned to write the sans-adjective Superman - not just the alternate world Earth One title - and also Wonder Woman's series.

I don't expect this to make many waves either, and his run on the Brave and the Bold certainly hasn't done big numbers; it's coming close to cancelation as it is. One of the quotes JMS gives here that really annoys me is:

"Similarly, we plan to bring Superman back to his roots, to really explore who he is…how he sees us, and how we see him, in a much more personal way than we’ve seen in a while. This is part of a larger effort that will have national ramifications, but I can’t say much more about it than that for now. Keep an eye on this website for more information when the time is right…but for now, let’s just say that Superman may be a lot closer in proximity to you, the reader, than you ever guessed."

Given how flat as a pancake his writing on Spider-Man is, and that he once made a similar claim that he was trying to get inside Peter Parker's head and find what makes him tick, I see no reason to expect any better from him now. I won't be surprised however, if his liberal political bent does find its way in though, and will be anything but subtle.

Labels: dc comics, dreadful writers, Superman, Wonder Woman

Wired's Geekdad blog (via Robot 6) has addressed the atrocity of the Cry for Justice miniseries, and even had what to say about Identity Crisis's own atrocities. However, there's something here I have to disagree with simultaneously:

DC’s done some great things. My Comics Spotlight column on Blue Beetle last week showcased one of them. Grant Morrison’s Final Crisis had Superman singing a happy universe in being. (Though DC editorial seems to have forgotten this upbeat possibility.)

First, the problem with the new Blue Beetle is that it was built off the blood of Ted Kord, who'd been slain in a bloody mess in Countdown to Infinite Crisis by Max Lord in a contrived transformation into a real villain. And if that's how they're going to treat the prior generation of even a minor superhero...then it's no more valid a presentation than One More Day is for Spider-Man. Simply put, you don't introduce new generations of superheroes via contempt for the older ones.

Second, didn't Final Crisis kill off Martian Manhunter? In that case, what's so great about that miniseries either?

While we're on the subject, The Weekly Crisis has some previews for upcoming DC/Marvel books, and among them is something called Justice League: Rise and Fall Special, written by the now awful James Robinson with J.T Krul. And what do they say about it:

From the original announcement up until last week, I was incredibly pumped for this storyline to kick off simply because I couldn’t wait to see JT Krul’s take on Green Arrow. Unfortunately, the sheer stupidity of the events of Cry for Justice (Roy Harper losing an arm, Star City being destroyed again, Green Arrow killing Prometheus, and perhaps most idiotic of them all, Lian Harper being brutally killed), I’m not sure if I want to have anything to do with this story. Green Arrow is my favorite non-Bat character in the DCU and this is his biggest storyline in years, but the story leaves such a bad taste in my mouth that I may just avoid it altogether!

Now that's sage advice, I must agree. All those offended by Cry for Justice can now take up the chance to make their opinions clear, by boycotting this special for starters, ditto the upcoming Fall of Green Arrow and the Rise of Arsenal miniseries. Likewise, if Robinson is in charge of writing the Justice League now, all concerned can avoid that too like the plague.

Update: there is now a Facebook group dedicated to campaigning to bringing back Lian Harper and reversing her fate (via Titans Tower Monitor).

Labels: dc comics, Justice League of America, misogyny and racism, violence

In Spider-Man's latest post-OMD non-story, Peter Parker gets fired from the Daily Bugle, just like he did 3 decades ago when he turned to work at the Daily Globe for a short time instead.

When is Quesada going to get his own notice of dismissal already? Seeing Peter Parker in a repetitive state of poverty is utterly tiresome today.

Labels: bad editors, marvel comics, msm propaganda, Spider-Man

Here's an article in the Vermillion Standard of Canada about a lecture and lessons given on the art of comics at the city's library.

Labels: libraries

Well, I guess we all saw it coming. The DiDio era has been capped with a trash can lid by slaughtering Lian Harper, and James Robinson has thrown his credibility to the winds:

Justice League: Cry For Justice #7 is certainly destined to go down as the capstone of the Dan DiDio era of DC Comics. While the pendulum has certainly swung in both directions over the past five years, the DiDio regime's penchant for wanton death, destruction, and outright carnage has never been more evident than in this, the final chapter of James Robinson's post-modern Justice League opus. While issue #5 gained instant notoriety for the fate that befell Roy Harper, what happens to his daughter, his foster father, his home city, and the man responsible for the entire affair will certainly propel issue #7 to the forefront of the market.

In the course of 22 pages, James Robinson deconstructs the entire Green Arrow mythos, killing Lian Harper outright, destroying Star City and decimating it's population, and betraying what few values still remained for Ollie Queen by placing an emerald fletched arrow directly between the eyes of Prometheus. Yes, Oliver Queen is a murderer, and the villain that James Robinson touted as the most credible threat in the DCU is his victim.

Not only does it end in the forced, senseless murder of an infant for violence's sake, it even repeats the same monstrosity performed with Coast City, Hal Jordan's own residential metropolis, when DC's staff totaled the town in 1994 during Zero Hour. Now, they're doing the same with Ollie Queen, and probably because he's on a lesser ranking level than Hal Jordan, so they consider it easier to get away with than with Green Lantern.

The results of his experiment are, however, abominable. The marriage of styles is so jarring that it serves only to make the violence that much more shocking. The death of Lian Harper, in particular, feels hollow and spiteful. While it is mentioned again over the course of the issue, the scene in which Oliver Queen holds her lifeless body feels emotionless and condescending, simply begging for our hearts to skip a beat while refusing to let the moment find resonance, instead moving forward at a throwaway pace while Green Arrow musters the strength to concede that there is no choice but to free Prometheus to save those who still live in Star City. In this moment, Green Arrow shows remarkable but reluctant restraint, thinking for once of the big picture and less about himself and his own emotions.

What comes next, however, flies in the face of all that, as James Robinson seems almost driven to relegate Oliver Queen to the same place that his friend Hal Jordan once occupied after the destruction of Coast City.

After this abomination, Robinson should never be given jobs as a writer again if he was willing to avail himself to brewing up a bloodfest as bad as this has turned out to be. He has clearly lost any and all direction since the time he was writing Starman in the 90s.

Whatever comes next for the JLA or Green Arrow and Roy Harper, if it's going to go by what's set up in this miniseries, must be soundly rejected by the public. This includes boycotting the upcoming Fall of Green Arrow and Rise of Arsenal miniseries, and even the JLA title itself.

And for heaven's sake, why won't network or cable TV news do a story about this?

Update: here's an extra topic about this latest abomination from DC on Mighty God King.

Labels: bad editors, dc comics, dreadful writers, golden calf of death, Justice League of America, misogyny and racism, violence

The blog of In One Ear offers a reminder of Dan DiDio's admitting several years ago that Identity Crisis was "motivated" by 9-11:

Dan Didio spoke heavily of the impact of 9/11, and specifically what we witnessed of the first responders who went into buildings in spite of the risk. The other things he pointed out were the guardsmen with guns lining the streets shortly after 9/11. These are the two things, according to Dan Didio, that led to Identity Crisis, as well as all the “Crisi” that followed. It was the ongoing darkening and coarsening of the universe, which is, certainly a bit different from the 90s which was cheapened grim and gritty. According to Didio, they needed to show how bad things could get, as well as how dangerous it was to be a hero.

So they killed Sue Dibney. Correction, they raped and killed Sue Dibney. And I admit, my love for Due and her husband the Elongated Man drew me into that story, initially. But then I found it troubling. To make a c list Villain a menace, they declared he was actually just “mind-wiped”, he was actually a bad assed villain. Why was he scary and bad ass? He was a rapist. For me, that makes him a low life scum, not a scary villain.

There's even the argument that what we expect from a supervillain is that they be challenging in some way or other to the heroes, not that they be revolting as Identity Crisis made Dr. Light. That aside, what DiDio and his apologists may note have had the courage to admit at the time was how this "vision" of theirs had a negative view of heroism, and even blamed the victims for tragedy, trivializing the rape of Sue Dibny and claiming that one of their own - Jean Loring - was the guilty party, NOT the villains.

Besides the 2005 Newsarama interview, I even found one from 2 years ago where he brought up the 9-11 connections yet again:

6. Touching on the times that we’re in right now – comics, throughout their history, have reflected the world outside, whether it’s something as big as a war, or technological and cultural changes. So are we going to see comics that reflect where we are now, and if so, how do you balance that with the idea of comics being escapist entertainment, as well as the trade and the “perpetual story” being on bookshelves?

DD: You’re talking about the same thing, but two different things. Will comics be reflective of a prevalent time, attitude and feeling in the country and the world? Yes. You’re talking about time stamping something to a larger extent. I don’t want to timestamp something, say, having an issue of Superman where we show the Phillies wining the World Series. That’s a timestamp – and that’s something that we, as a medium should never do, because our characters are timeless.

But what we can do is show our characters evolve with the times around them. You can read a Green Lantern comic from the ‘60s and know it’s form the ‘60s., not just because of how the characters are drawn and what they’re wearing, but because the prevalent feeling of the characters in what they’re reflecting, and how they interact with other people – the generational change aspect...the sense of revolution in that time. The push of the generation gap. Look at our comics coming out of 9-11 – we don’t reference 9-11, but there was a sense of a feeling of dread or anger that permeated that material. That wasn’t just because we were looking to reflect a period of time, but more because the people who create these comics were feeling that. So much of what you’re looking for in terms of comics having the feel of a certain time comes from our creators. They are living and working in this environment, and picking up ideas and stories from seeing what’s going on in the world around them. That’s why it seeps in. I don’t want to timestamp something, say, to show the stock market crash, or show a particular incident in our books. That basically says, “This is the book from 20_ _.” It’s more interesting to me, and to the readers, I think, if the world around the creators affects them so that the stories are reflective of our world. But the stories themselves should be timeless, because it’s true to who the characters are and the events around them.

They may not reference 9-11, but that might be the most dangerously cunning problem about DC and their writers: by keeping everything as metaphorical/allegorical as possible, who would be able to guess it was that deep. But it doesn't matter when it came out, the ideas Identity Crisis embodies would be a stinker at any time, and show that even metaphors can be truly awful.

One more thing DiDio signals here is where some of his positions are drawn from:

So it’s two different things, but the same thing. You can’t timestamp things. When you start to do that, you get into all sorts of trouble. Case in point – when I first came in to work at DC, one of the first things you would see on the wall was the timeline that was put together following Zero Hour - “Ten Years Ago...this happened,” “Twenty Years Ago...this happened.” The problem is that it starts at World War II or World War I, but it’s very clear what periods of time it’s talking about. It’s been on the wall for a few years, and is outdated. The same thing happens when you start time stamping stories – everyone grows and changes, and we have to be able to be flexible with the periods of time in our storytelling, because again, our characters still have to remain, for the most part, timeless.

It's not too hard to guess that he's influenced by Zero Hour, that most distasteful crossover from 1994-95. That, disturbingly enough, is clearly where a lot of the so-called inspiration comes from.

Labels: bad editors, dc comics, misogyny and racism, politics

Spider-Man is still part of the Earth's Mightiest Heroes, proving again that Marvel - and Bendis - don't have enough faith in the mainstay Avengers to carry the books without a megastar on board.

On a related note, the poster caption reads as "I take responsibility for my actions", but I doubt the Mephisto deal is one of them. I'm sure Quesada would still rather blame that on Mary Jane.

Labels: dreadful writers, marvel comics, Spider-Man

In more politics related news, Newsbusters reports that a lefty group has produced a comic book for the purpose of attacking Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.

It's tragic to see today's leftists abusing the art form this badly. Yuck.

Labels: misogyny and racism, politics

Following the recent news that an original Action Comics premiere issue from 1938 was auctioned for $1 million, and Detective Comics #27 for a bit more, The Grand Rapids Press writes about how comic books from the past 20 years have very little value of that kind. But really, whenever I see this kind of talk, it saddens me how the talk of money value overwhelms the talk of story value. And with story value and quality deteriorating come the 1990s, that's one of the reasons why sales sunk, and thus, comics from that time really don't have much value for auction.

Towards the end of this, they say:

Still, he maintained , "comic books tend to be a pretty good investment if you time it correctly and buy and hold." So, what would he most like to see come in the door? A Superman No. 1 or most any comics from 1945-1965.

But there's one book he does not want: The Death of Superman.

"No one is going to retire on Death of Superman," he said.

"When it went on sale 17 years ago, everyone bought it and thought they had a gold mine."

Now, he said, "Everyone who wanted a copy has one."

Not everyone. A book as moot and laughable as that's become is not one I want to own, and I'm glad I don't. The whole story of killing off the Man of Steel was done for little more than publicity stunts, and was nothing more than an insult to Superfans. That's one book we certainly don't need to invest in.

Labels: dc comics, Flash, golden calf of death, marvel comics, msm propaganda, sales, Superman, X-Men