Not signed in (Sign In)

Printheads: DC Comics unleashes a new universe of superhero titles

Bottom of Page

181 to 181 of 181

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. >
    • CommentAuthoricelandbob
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2011
     (9904.1)
    Who says we don't use comics AS porn?
    • CommentAuthornikoboivin
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2011
     (9904.2)
    Some of us d oneed it as much (or more than) porn, and the rise of tablet pcs and micropaiment is a blessing for this field. You start a series (say the walking dead, since they're already using it) at 2$ per issue, it's no big deal, only 2 bucks. You finish it? Buy the next one, even if you're on the bus, in a lunch break, at 2AM at home, it's there, and the one after that is also there. First thing you know, you're up to date (and it just cost you near 200$ worth of comics...)

    And it does not render the paper comics useless, as they can still be bought for the feel of it, and to "convert" others to the media. Plus you'll never go to a con and get your ipad signed... ;)

    And I really hope it would make writers rich, since you guys clearly deserve it for the kind of entertainment you provide us ;)
    • CommentAuthorgzapata
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2011
     (9904.3)
    @Johnjones- Speaking as someone from a younger generation (Gen Y or whatever name we're given) the idea of comics has been drastically reformed. With video games, tv shows and movies, the characters that appear in american comics are a norm and are very much loved. The Walking Dead gets passed around like hotcakes and even women (haha for having to even say it this way) are at the least not adverted to the idea of reading a comic especially when they'll happily watch a movie or tv show based on the same character
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2011
     (9904.4)
    I wish people needed comics like they need porn. We'd all be rich.


    It was never about need, not really. It's not like America suddenly gained a compulsion to whack-off circa 1995 or so. It's that porn became cheap, easily available and anonymous. Suddenly, you didn't have to make the drive of shame to the adult bookstore, hoping to Christ you weren't seen by somebody you knew. Suddenly, you could sit at your desk in the privacy of your home (or job or whatever), send some credit info and get anything you wanted to see right then and there.

    Do that for comics and you may well find that people "need" them a lot more than you thought.
  5.  (9904.5)
    It's that porn became cheap, easily available and anonymous.

    Actually it was that the DOJ effectively abandoned porn prosecutions during the Clinton years and the Bush DOJ found it nearly impossible to convict anyone on porn obscenity charges. That, combined with the internet, created a porn bubble. Which, like the comic and internet bubbles of the 1990s, popped a long time ago. I suspect that if comics went online to the degree porn has many people will still prefer them in the three-and-four panel helpings typical of newspapers.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbrianwood
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2011
     (9904.6)
    Wait, porn was invented in 1995? I think America (and everywhere) can trace that wack-off compulsion back a few thousand years previous.

    And no one will convince me that, even if comics were free and available everywhere, people would develop the same compulsion to consume them as they do porn. Although I wish that were the case. And I know you're talking about digital delivery systems, but comparing the two is absurd.

    @nikoboivin I believe that you might need your comics more than you need porn, but can you tell me you need your comics more than you need orgasms?
    • CommentAuthor256
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2011 edited
     (9904.7)
    @Beamish - cheers

    That's really not the advert I would have made for Fables. Not by a long shot. I also can't think of a single comics title that would be easier to market to a wider-than-comics audience than Fables. It's got an elevator pitch premise, half the characters are iconic, the art is great, it's had some of the best cover art of modern times, and (perhaps best of all) it doesn't have a single one of the genre features that push people away from comics - garish lycra costumes, balloon tits, full-body-snarl postures, etc.

    If that's the best they can do, we're fucked.


    @brianwood
    can you tell me you need your comics more than you need orgasms
    No, but I can tell you which I get more of.


    Sigh.
    • CommentAuthorDC
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2011
     (9904.8)
    @brian-There's always that middle ground provided by nerdgasms.

    ...


    Ok, I'll shup up now and go back to lurking.
  9.  (9904.9)
    I was at the comic book store today, looked at all the DC titles and thought "Why should I even bother? Shouldn't I just wait for all this relaunch nonsense to get started?"

    DC has achieved a supreme amount of buzz all over the web, which I'm sure is one reason they're doing this. Bleeding Cool has about 90% of their stuff covering the relaunch. The remaining 10% surrounds Rob Granito's whereabouts.

    I honestly love Morrison's stuff on Batman Incorporated, but not really a DC fan. I'm way into Marvel's stuff, but hope this "FEAR ITSELF" thing gets done and over with in a hurry. As I said in another thread related to this, I tire of the "big event" comics very, very quickly, even when creators I like are behind them.
    • CommentAuthorGordon
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2011
     (9904.10)
    As comics that drown in continuity just piss me off, I'm happy to see a publisher reboot their titles and start afresh. I just wish DC was doing this in a natural fashion as and when titles demanded it, rather than this 'all in one' headline-and-money-grabber. Wonder how many of these titles will still exist this time next year?
    • CommentAuthorepalicki
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2011
     (9904.11)
    I was at the comic book store today, looked at all the DC titles and thought "Why should I even bother? Shouldn't I just wait for all this relaunch nonsense to get started?"


    Go read this interview with Kelly Sue DeConnick. She answers that question rather passionately.
  12.  (9904.12)
    "Why should I even bother? Shouldn't I just wait for all this relaunch nonsense to get started?"

    Because a lot of these relaunches aren't relaunches. The Green Lantern and Batman books aren't breaking continuity step, for example.
  13.  (9904.13)
    DC done gone and pissed off George Perez.

    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2011/06/22/the-superman-story-that-will-be-published-later/

    Not that it's his fault necessarily, but there's never a dull moment with Bob Harras in charge!
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2011
     (9904.14)
    Also, eat Subway Sandwiches.

    I miss the fruit pie and twinkie ads. Instead of PSAs that tell you not to smoke pot. THAT'S what's ruining comics!
  15.  (9904.15)
    I know...pot and comics are a match made in absolute heaven.

    The wise know this.

    jah bless
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJun 22nd 2011
     (9904.16)
    Because a lot of these relaunches aren't relaunches. The Green Lantern and Batman books aren't breaking continuity step, for example.


    Exactly--so far the only one that looks like is going to get a full-fledged reboot is Firestorm by Gail Simone and Ethan Van Sciver...and you might be able to count Wonder Woman, but the whole point of the Odyssey jacket era was to fix/change the timestream back for her, so I don't know if that counts. Morrison's probably going to do a lot of interesting things with Superman's past with Action, but considering the guy's the king of "continuity as a living organism and everything counts," I don't think it'll fare too badly.

    But yeah, I'm into this--sad that some of my favorite comics, like Secret Six, are being nixed for it, but it looks like they're going to be doing a lot more interesting, varied stuff, including stuff that isn't straight-up super-heroics (which, I haven't read the whole tread, but I'm sure pleases our current Overlord to some extent). It's kinda scary--there's so many new things I want to try, I don't think I can afford it all.
    •  
      CommentAuthormister hex
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2011
     (9904.17)
    So Superman isn't allowed to get kittens out of trees anymore?

    Curt Swan must be rolling in his grave.
  18.  (9904.18)
    That explanation is only slightly less shameful than them killing the story over having Superman talk to brown people.
    • CommentAuthorGordon
    • CommentTimeJun 24th 2011
     (9904.19)
    Brown kittens are really fucked.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJun 24th 2011
     (9904.20)
    Kurt Busiek over at the Comic Book Resources forum, while not scooping any dirt, did give some solid common sense reasoning as to why the cat explanation doesn't work:

    Keep in mind that if there really was a problem with an issue because it opened with a kitten-rescuing scene, it would be easier, less controversial and more cost-effective to redraw the scene than to turf the whole issue.

    And it's not as if the folks at DC don't know that. Redrawing scenes is not a bizarre or unusual idea.

    Turfing an issue over a scene with a kitten, though? It takes a special kind of dopiness for someone who knows much about comics production to buy that explanation -- or try to sell it.

    Particularly in the same breath as they try to sell the idea that DC was so embarrassed at the thought of something as corny as Superman saving a kitten that they replaced it ... with a sentimental story about Krypto the Superdog.

    I'm not going to discuss why the issue was replaced, but I can tell you that it had nothing to do with any kittens.

    I sympathize with Chris Roberson (hey, I've been there), but glad my story finally saw print. I expect his will, too, in time.

181 to 181 of 181

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. >