Who cares about validation from others? If YOU believe in your pov, who cares what others think? You shouldn't need to have others accept your pov. If people didn't think it was worthy of discussion they wouldn't engage in the first place. That people are willing to have a discussion is validation enough.
And that's one to grow on!:)
Thanks Peter :)
Now that you mention it, I think "validation" was a strong term, but to wit, I was merely surprised that the general consensus here in the forums seemed to be, "get over it you old fan-boy, this is the 21st century and DC knows better than you how to handle the Flash. Comic books NEED more diversity and all that..." etc
So many of the responses at BleedingCool indicated that I was far from the only person who was more than a bit put off by DC's decision. I didn't necessarily agree with all of those that are moaning about DC's decision to change Wally West's ethnicity, but I also realized I wasn't the ONLY Flash fan that wasn't exactly rejoicing at the news either. It was interesting how the ratio was quite the opposite here.
Much less bitching & moaning and much more "meh, it is what it is" over here.
Yeah, my opinion being respected, that's what I felt when I read this.
Nope, you're right. I wasn't being respectful there. Sorry about that. For what it's worth, I generally do respect your opinions and have clicked "Agree", "Like" and "Awesome" more than once to a comment you've made on these forums.
To paraphrase Rick Pitino:
"The negativity on social media sucks. An uncool Aquaman isn't swimming through that door, folks. An unarmored, married Superman isn't fly through that door. Barbara Gordon isn't wheeling through that door. And if they are in the comic books, then they're going to be back issues. The sooner people realize there's no return to the OldDCU, the quicker we can move on."
And I have moved on. On and away from DC, since they're now producing so danged few books worth my time, so many that are so badly executed and have completely rewritten once-interesting characters into twisted and ofttimes depressing caricatures of themselves. I'm just waiting the New52 out; they may not go back, but sooner or later they're going to change everything again. Maybe it'll get better next time.
Funny, I think @chuck_melville and I think about it like changing channels with the remote. Eventually there has to be something worth watching. Until then we just keep on clicking by channels. And channel 52 is not a winner.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
M
I'm not a Flash reader so I have less skin in the game on this one. I think that part of the point that @Mr_Cosmic is making isn't specifically regarding this iteration of Wally West, but rather being vocal regarding negative reaction to the New52 as a whole. I'm very much a DC guy and have been for years, but they have managed to make me lose interest in almost all of the titles that I have been reading that are currently still being published or have cancelled or announced the cancellation of the titles that I might otherwise still be reading.
Not buying the title for a while can be all well and good, but it can also lead to missing out on the nuggets of goodness that may occasionally rise to the surface. I dropped the Legion titles shortly after Zero Hour and ended up paying more from the Legion of the Damned and Legion Lost storylines than I would have spent continuing to buy the series through all of the bad.
I do agree with you regarding being negative about something before it happens or, even as it happens. Certainly I was tentatively OK with the New52 - "Surely they wouldn't do something like this without having a plan, would they?" so I held my tongue about any trepidation I felt.
Now, over two years later, it seems pretty clear that the plan either wasn't well developed or was incredibly poorly executed. Personally, given editorial and many of the creative team choices I think that it was a combination of the two. At this point, it seems very appropriate to be vocal about what is and isn't working and why my dollars that used to be spent on DC titles are now going to other publishers.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
M
I'm not a Flash reader so I have less skin in the game on this one. I think that part of the point that @Mr_Cosmic is making isn't specifically regarding this iteration of Wally West, but rather being vocal regarding negative reaction to the New52 as a whole. I'm very much a DC guy and have been for years, but they have managed to make me lose interest in almost all of the titles that I have been reading that are currently still being published or have cancelled or announced the cancellation of the titles that I might otherwise still be reading.
Not buying the title for a while can be all well and good, but it can also lead to missing out on the nuggets of goodness that may occasionally rise to the surface. I dropped the Legion titles shortly after Zero Hour and ended up paying more from the Legion of the Damned and Legion Lost storylines than I would have spent continuing to buy the series through all of the bad.
I do agree with you regarding being negative about something before it happens or, even as it happens. Certainly I was tentatively OK with the New52 - "Surely they wouldn't do something like this without having a plan, would they?" so I held my tongue about any trepidation I felt.
Now, over two years later, it seems pretty clear that the plan either wasn't well developed or was incredibly poorly executed. Personally, given editorial and many of the creative team choices I think that it was a combination of the two. At this point, it seems very appropriate to be vocal about what is and isn't working and why my dollars that used to be spent on DC titles are now going to other publishers.
I get it, but after 3 years should we still be complaining about the New52? I do understand being upset about the current state of a character. Complaining about how Superboy is currently written makes sense. I also recall Superman Blue & Red didn't stay the status quo. Adamantium-less Wolverine didn't last either. I can see characterization changing before everything.
When I read Batman, I had to buy & read some crappy stories. I always knew the next story or writer had potential to be better.
How far out should the plan had been? Five years? Ten? Maybe low selling titles factored into a grand plan, but got canceled.
I understanding the dissatisfaction, but it just feels more like whining when people complain the old DCU isn't coming back. Did they complain after Crisis? After Zero Hour? Kingdom Come? Infinite Crisis? all were essentially relaunches. Things changed after each. Characters died, reborn, or lost. Characters gained powers, lost powers, or split characters.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues. Companies have been known to respond to negative criticism and make positive changes.
I think there is a difference. Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
M
I'm not a Flash reader so I have less skin in the game on this one. I think that part of the point that @Mr_Cosmic is making isn't specifically regarding this iteration of Wally West, but rather being vocal regarding negative reaction to the New52 as a whole. I'm very much a DC guy and have been for years, but they have managed to make me lose interest in almost all of the titles that I have been reading that are currently still being published or have cancelled or announced the cancellation of the titles that I might otherwise still be reading.
Not buying the title for a while can be all well and good, but it can also lead to missing out on the nuggets of goodness that may occasionally rise to the surface. I dropped the Legion titles shortly after Zero Hour and ended up paying more from the Legion of the Damned and Legion Lost storylines than I would have spent continuing to buy the series through all of the bad.
I do agree with you regarding being negative about something before it happens or, even as it happens. Certainly I was tentatively OK with the New52 - "Surely they wouldn't do something like this without having a plan, would they?" so I held my tongue about any trepidation I felt.
Now, over two years later, it seems pretty clear that the plan either wasn't well developed or was incredibly poorly executed. Personally, given editorial and many of the creative team choices I think that it was a combination of the two. At this point, it seems very appropriate to be vocal about what is and isn't working and why my dollars that used to be spent on DC titles are now going to other publishers.
I get it, but after 3 years should we still be complaining about the New52? I do understand being upset about the current state of a character. Complaining about how Superboy is currently written makes sense. I also recall Superman Blue & Red didn't stay the status quo. Adamantium-less Wolverine didn't last either. I can see characterization changing before everything.
When I read Batman, I had to buy & read some crappy stories. I always knew the next story or writer had potential to be better.
How far out should the plan had been? Five years? Ten? Maybe low selling titles factored into a grand plan, but got canceled.
I understanding the dissatisfaction, but it just feels more like whining when people complain the old DCU isn't coming back. Did they complain after Crisis? After Zero Hour? Kingdom Come? Infinite Crisis? all were essentially relaunches. Things changed after each. Characters died, reborn, or lost. Characters gained powers, lost powers, or split characters.
M
3 years later? Probably too long for the people that have been complaining the entire time. For the people that quietly waited to see if there was a plan? I suppose that depends on the expiration date on their patience. I'm probably not the right person to ask - I can still go off on a tirade on the cinematic flatulence that was Starship Troopers (such a good book, such a hatchet job of a movie!).
Batman (or, in my case, Legion), agreed. How long do the stories have to not live up to that potential to result in a venting of frustration? How often do creative teams have to be replaced with '90's Marvel creators or air dirty laundry about editorial interference before that frustration starts getting vocalized? Again, I don't have the answer. I just know that as soon as Tom DeFalco took over Legion Lost, I could smell bad '90's stories and started looking forward to either a creative change or an end to the book.
The plan? Hard to say, but, bringing it back around to the topic, is it fair to say that strong diversity wasn't really all that important to the plan? At the onset of the New52 there were how many minority characters? I can think of Jon Stewart, Fire, half of Firestorm, Batwing, Voodoo and Cyborg. It's quite possible that the original plan really was contingent on the survival of Frankenstein Agent of SHADE and Justice League International, but I'm skeptical. Certainly there seems to have been a plan within offices, but the most cohesive thing that I've seen (that transcends of any one office) out of them has been the Year Zero stuff which has impacted two of my titles (Batwoman and Green Lantern Corps) and, in all honestly, I would have welcomed as something exciting earlier in the reboot process.
Dissatisfaction? For some it may be nothing more than whining. Certainly, there seems to be a certain celebratory air when DC titles show up on the Cavalcade of Cancellations thread (at least by some). Honestly, I don't care if they stay New 52, go to any of the other iterations (with exception of immediate post Zero Hour) or start fresh. If they tell good stories and manage the universe cohesively, I'm going to be happy (or at least mostly happy - I reserve the right to complain if GL drops back to just Kyle or they go back to something like the Threeboot or Jughead (post-Zero Hour) Legion.
I just know that as soon as Tom DeFalco took over Legion Lost, I could smell bad '90's stories and started looking forward to either a creative change or an end to the book.
Dude.
Legion Lost smelled bad from the first press release. DeFalco was just rancid icing on the stale cake.
Complaining because what you thought could be a door to the old universe (presumably) isn't, is more on the reader then the company. The company didn't tangle any notion that it could happen with a character's introduction.
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
M
I quite disagree. Complaining for whatever reason you are dissatisfied is reasonable. Don't like Morrison? Tell your friends, and be prepared to explain why. Don't like the New52? Tell other comic readers! It's what much of society is founded upon (the customer is always right). If I hear that DC is planning to change something I think they shouldn't - why shouldn't I speak up about it? It isn't as though DC has had a winning track record lately. There have been far more letdowns than pleasant surprises from the Distinguished Competition over the last few years, that I am not even willing to bet on them anymore. So when they say we're suddenly going to change the formula for an established icon, I say "why fix what isn't broken?" What's wrong with you DC? It smacks of desperation.
And I have moved on. On and away from DC, since they're now producing so danged few books worth my time, so many that are so badly executed and have completely rewritten once-interesting characters into twisted and ofttimes depressing caricatures of themselves. I'm just waiting the New52 out; they may not go back, but sooner or later they're going to change everything again. Maybe it'll get better next time.
That may be a long wait, but I agree with you.
And I was quite willing line up and give more of my dollars to DC. I have for years, but I felt as though this forum would be the place to express my further dissatisfaction about the upcoming editorial changes and also why I disagree with them. @Mr_Cosmic hit the nail on the head with this response:
I like how if you think a company, that you used to love, is doing a crappy job you're just supposed to keep your mouth shut and read your back issues.
Now that's good sarcasm right there. And I fully agree with him. It isn't that anyone here is able to debate the merits of DC's decision to change Wally's ethnicity, it's just all of the yay-sayers are essentially saying, "sit down and shut up or don't buy it". Like it's a waste of time to voice your displeasure over a complete alteration of your favorite DC character. And YES the Flash has been my favorite DC character for many, many years.
I might agree that complaining about the New52 is pretty much low-hanging fruit at this point, and I have to admit that I've held out some hope Wally might be the "way back", but I guess it's true, you can never go home.
I just know that as soon as Tom DeFalco took over Legion Lost, I could smell bad '90's stories and started looking forward to either a creative change or an end to the book.
Dude.
Legion Lost smelled bad from the first press release. DeFalco was just rancid icing on the stale cake.
I was hesitant at first, but was OK with Nicieza and willing to see where he was going to take the story... the potential was there to see Legion Lost become the Valor "seeder of worlds" for the New52.
...but, bringing it back around to the topic, is it fair to say that strong diversity wasn't really all that important to the plan? At the onset of the New52 there were how many minority characters? I can think of Jon Stewart, Fire, half of Firestorm, Batwing, Voodoo and Cyborg...
Good question! Here are the stats I've compiled that might help to answer:
At the onset of the New52, DC had 6 female led titles, 3 black male led titles (which is unheard of for the Big Two), 1 latino led title, 1 lesbian led title, a team of females, and a mixed race led title (Voodoo).
At the onset of Marvel Now wave one, Marvel had 3 female led titles that were already more or less in existence or that just took over a title (Cpt Marvel, Red She-Hulk, Journey Into Mystery). They also had Female Defenders. That's it. 4 out of 33+.
Since the initial New 52, DC has released other female led titles (Worlds' Finest, Harley Quinn, Sword of Sorcery, Huntress, Phantom Lady, Pandora) and other diversity titles (Katana, Vibe).
For Marvel Now wave two, of the added 26 new titles, one features a latino character (Ghost Rider), one features a black lead male (Iron Patriot), one Muslim American (Ms. Marvel) and the rest are women led titles (Black Widow, Elektra, She-Hulk, and a revamped Cpt. Marvel). 7 out of 26 new titles. When you count the titles that aren't being pushed back to #1, that means 7 out of a potential 30+ titles.
If I missed any let me know. But to me, DC is at least trying to be more diverse on the shelf. Inner content is one thing, but who people see headlining a book is another.
So it's all about token ethnic quotas now? Is this what's known as "winning" in comic book publishing? Whoever has the most ethnic, minority, or female leading books?
So it's all about token ethnic quotas now? Is this what's known as "winning" in comic book publishing? Whoever has the most ethnic, minority, or female leading books?
Wow. The comics industry is eating itself.
...
This is all still a terrible argument for changing Wally West's ethnicity...
Do you even know how to follow the conversation? Hauberk asked a question, I answered. This doesn't have anything to do with your Wally West diatribe, thanks. And "Token ethnic quotas"? Did you really just write that? What a sorry world you live in.
...but, bringing it back around to the topic, is it fair to say that strong diversity wasn't really all that important to the plan? At the onset of the New52 there were how many minority characters? I can think of Jon Stewart, Fire, half of Firestorm, Batwing, Voodoo and Cyborg...
Good question! Here are the stats I've compiled that might help to answer:
At the onset of the New52, DC had 6 female led titles, 3 black male led titles (which is unheard of for the Big Two), 1 latino led title, 1 lesbian led title, a team of females, and a mixed race led title (Voodoo).
At the onset of Marvel Now wave one, Marvel had 3 female led titles that were already more or less in existence or that just took over a title (Cpt Marvel, Red She-Hulk, Journey Into Mystery). They also had Female Defenders. That's it. 4 out of 33+.
Since the initial New 52, DC has released other female led titles (Worlds' Finest, Harley Quinn, Sword of Sorcery, Huntress, Phantom Lady, Pandora) and other diversity titles (Katana, Vibe).
For Marvel Now wave two, of the added 26 new titles, one features a latino character (Ghost Rider), one features a black lead male (Iron Patriot), one Muslim American (Ms. Marvel) and the rest are women led titles (Black Widow, Elektra, She-Hulk, and a revamped Cpt. Marvel). 7 out of 26 new titles. When you count the titles that aren't being pushed back to #1, that means 7 out of a potential 30+ titles.
If I missed any let me know. But to me, DC is at least trying to be more diverse on the shelf. Inner content is one thing, but who people see headlining a book is another.
I should qualify that my reference to minorities with ethnic/racial only and not gender/orientation-based. That said, I can identify the female, black, and mixed race characters. Who is/was the original latino?
By entirely new character you mean this upcoming Wally West will not be a superhero that appears in comic books published by DC Comics and possess the power of super-speed and won't be the nephew of Iris West? /sarc
The New52 DC is such a mess. If you were ever a fan of characters like Wally, Donna, Dick or any Titan - why bother? They've screwed the pooch with this reboot. No matter how familiar the legacy character's names are, they've been overturned with little concern for anything that came before. Classic DC characters in a corporate creative vacuum that no amount of variant covers will ever fix.
It's like the heads of DC were like "the readers keep demanding we bring back Wally West, so let's send them something with a twist!" But, it isn't that. It's more like "what do you mean CW is including Wally West in the tv series? Well, make sure our Wally West looks exactly like whatever the CW is doing."
The truth is probably somewhere in between these two scenarios.
And there we have it. I had completely forgotten about BB. In all honesty I preferred Ted Kord, but that was only partly character. I really, really disliked the look of the new BB.
He was, I think, a great example of them changing a character to create more diversity, without rewriting an existing character.
So it's all about token ethnic quotas now? Is this what's known as "winning" in comic book publishing? Whoever has the most ethnic, minority, or female leading books?
Wow. The comics industry is eating itself.
...
This is all still a terrible argument for changing Wally West's ethnicity...
Do you even know how to follow the conversation? Hauberk asked a question, I answered. This doesn't have anything to do with your Wally West diatribe, thanks. And "Token ethnic quotas"? Did you really just write that? What a sorry world you live in.
Ignore @Peter, @Bralinator. He doesn't know how to NOT go for the throat.
So it's all about token ethnic quotas now? Is this what's known as "winning" in comic book publishing? Whoever has the most ethnic, minority, or female leading books?
Wow. The comics industry is eating itself.
...
This is all still a terrible argument for changing Wally West's ethnicity...
Do you even know how to follow the conversation? Hauberk asked a question, I answered. This doesn't have anything to do with your Wally West diatribe, thanks. And "Token ethnic quotas"? Did you really just write that? What a sorry world you live in.
Ignore @Peter, @Bralinator. He doesn't know how to NOT go for the throat.
Just for giggles, and because i'm curious. What is my agenda again?
DC's agenda is legacy character eradication.
I think @Peter's agenda is always being right, (or at least thought of that way) - oh, and educating or berating those that don't see it the way he does. Or maybe that's me
And, I'm guessing @random73's agenda is always selecting cool, random avatars.
(is anyone predicting an 'I don't have an agenda' response?)
Comments
"The negativity on social media sucks. An uncool Aquaman isn't swimming through that door, folks. An unarmored, married Superman isn't fly through that door. Barbara Gordon isn't wheeling through that door. And if they are in the comic books, then they're going to be back issues. The sooner people realize there's no return to the OldDCU, the quicker we can move on."
M
And as I said before, isn't there somewhat of a reboot whenever a new writer takes on a character? Don't get me wrong, I was guilty of it for years (insert Morrison rants.) Ultimately, I found its easier just to not buy the title for awhile. THAT would motivate the Big2 more then complaining about it on forums & social media.
I'll probably continue to express skepticism, but going to stop complaining about things yet to even be released. I'm not digging the new ASM movie series. I could complain about everything that's released about the movies I don't like. OR I could just say "its not for me" and move on.
M
Not buying the title for a while can be all well and good, but it can also lead to missing out on the nuggets of goodness that may occasionally rise to the surface. I dropped the Legion titles shortly after Zero Hour and ended up paying more from the Legion of the Damned and Legion Lost storylines than I would have spent continuing to buy the series through all of the bad.
I do agree with you regarding being negative about something before it happens or, even as it happens. Certainly I was tentatively OK with the New52 - "Surely they wouldn't do something like this without having a plan, would they?" so I held my tongue about any trepidation I felt.
Now, over two years later, it seems pretty clear that the plan either wasn't well developed or was incredibly poorly executed. Personally, given editorial and many of the creative team choices I think that it was a combination of the two. At this point, it seems very appropriate to be vocal about what is and isn't working and why my dollars that used to be spent on DC titles are now going to other publishers.
When I read Batman, I had to buy & read some crappy stories. I always knew the next story or writer had potential to be better.
How far out should the plan had been? Five years? Ten? Maybe low selling titles factored into a grand plan, but got canceled.
I understanding the dissatisfaction, but it just feels more like whining when people complain the old DCU isn't coming back. Did they complain after Crisis? After Zero Hour? Kingdom Come? Infinite Crisis? all were essentially relaunches. Things changed after each. Characters died, reborn, or lost. Characters gained powers, lost powers, or split characters.
M
M
Go BuddhaMatt, Go!
M
Batman (or, in my case, Legion), agreed. How long do the stories have to not live up to that potential to result in a venting of frustration? How often do creative teams have to be replaced with '90's Marvel creators or air dirty laundry about editorial interference before that frustration starts getting vocalized? Again, I don't have the answer. I just know that as soon as Tom DeFalco took over Legion Lost, I could smell bad '90's stories and started looking forward to either a creative change or an end to the book.
The plan? Hard to say, but, bringing it back around to the topic, is it fair to say that strong diversity wasn't really all that important to the plan? At the onset of the New52 there were how many minority characters? I can think of Jon Stewart, Fire, half of Firestorm, Batwing, Voodoo and Cyborg. It's quite possible that the original plan really was contingent on the survival of Frankenstein Agent of SHADE and Justice League International, but I'm skeptical. Certainly there seems to have been a plan within offices, but the most cohesive thing that I've seen (that transcends of any one office) out of them has been the Year Zero stuff which has impacted two of my titles (Batwoman and Green Lantern Corps) and, in all honestly, I would have welcomed as something exciting earlier in the reboot process.
Dissatisfaction? For some it may be nothing more than whining. Certainly, there seems to be a certain celebratory air when DC titles show up on the Cavalcade of Cancellations thread (at least by some). Honestly, I don't care if they stay New 52, go to any of the other iterations (with exception of immediate post Zero Hour) or start fresh. If they tell good stories and manage the universe cohesively, I'm going to be happy (or at least mostly happy - I reserve the right to complain if GL drops back to just Kyle or they go back to something like the Threeboot or Jughead (post-Zero Hour) Legion.
Legion Lost smelled bad from the first press release. DeFalco was just rancid icing on the stale cake.
And I was quite willing line up and give more of my dollars to DC. I have for years, but I felt as though this forum would be the place to express my further dissatisfaction about the upcoming editorial changes and also why I disagree with them. @Mr_Cosmic hit the nail on the head with this response: Now that's good sarcasm right there. And I fully agree with him. It isn't that anyone here is able to debate the merits of DC's decision to change Wally's ethnicity, it's just all of the yay-sayers are essentially saying, "sit down and shut up or don't buy it". Like it's a waste of time to voice your displeasure over a complete alteration of your favorite DC character. And YES the Flash has been my favorite DC character for many, many years.
I might agree that complaining about the New52 is pretty much low-hanging fruit at this point, and I have to admit that I've held out some hope Wally might be the "way back", but I guess it's true, you can never go home.
Good-bye and good luck DC.
At the onset of the New52, DC had 6 female led titles, 3 black male led titles (which is unheard of for the Big Two), 1 latino led title, 1 lesbian led title, a team of females, and a mixed race led title (Voodoo).
At the onset of Marvel Now wave one, Marvel had 3 female led titles that were already more or less in existence or that just took over a title (Cpt Marvel, Red She-Hulk, Journey Into Mystery). They also had Female Defenders. That's it. 4 out of 33+.
Since the initial New 52, DC has released other female led titles (Worlds' Finest, Harley Quinn, Sword of Sorcery, Huntress, Phantom Lady, Pandora) and other diversity titles (Katana, Vibe).
For Marvel Now wave two, of the added 26 new titles, one features a latino character (Ghost Rider), one features a black lead male (Iron Patriot), one Muslim American (Ms. Marvel) and the rest are women led titles (Black Widow, Elektra, She-Hulk, and a revamped Cpt. Marvel). 7 out of 26 new titles. When you count the titles that aren't being pushed back to #1, that means 7 out of a potential 30+ titles.
If I missed any let me know. But to me, DC is at least trying to be more diverse on the shelf. Inner content is one thing, but who people see headlining a book is another.
All women, led by a black Storm!
"DC Is trying to be more diverse on the shelf"
So it's all about token ethnic quotas now? Is this what's known as "winning" in comic book publishing? Whoever has the most ethnic, minority, or female leading books?
Wow. The comics industry is eating itself.
More resources for your research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_superheroes#DC_Comics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_superheroes#Marvel_Comics
http://marvel.wikia.com/Category:Female_Characters
This is all still a terrible argument for changing Wally West's ethnicity...
Wally West is dead.*
Retconned out of existence.
This is an entirely new character who happens to share a name and the same approximate power set.
*Dead dead deady-dead-dead!
The New52 DC is such a mess. If you were ever a fan of characters like Wally, Donna, Dick or any Titan - why bother? They've screwed the pooch with this reboot. No matter how familiar the legacy character's names are, they've been overturned with little concern for anything that came before. Classic DC characters in a corporate creative vacuum that no amount of variant covers will ever fix.
It's like the heads of DC were like "the readers keep demanding we bring back Wally West, so let's send them something with a twist!" But, it isn't that. It's more like "what do you mean CW is including Wally West in the tv series? Well, make sure our Wally West looks exactly like whatever the CW is doing."
The truth is probably somewhere in between these two scenarios.
He was, I think, a great example of them changing a character to create more diversity, without rewriting an existing character.
Like it or not, that's what the New 52 was.
A "fresh" start.
Half-assed, bungled from the get-go, perhaps, but a "fresh" start nonetheless.
If you're old enough to remember The Gumball Rally, I give you the First Rule of Italian Driving: "What's behind me is not important."*
*Yes, I know DC's got an Italian driver.
M
DC's agenda is legacy character eradication.
I think @Peter's agenda is always being right, (or at least thought of that way) - oh, and educating or berating those that don't see it the way he does. Or maybe that's me
And, I'm guessing @random73's agenda is always selecting cool, random avatars.
(is anyone predicting an 'I don't have an agenda' response?)