Comic Pants Podcast #21
The skies darken, the rivers turn to blood, and you know what that means- it’s podcast time with D3 (David Martindale), Nick Budd, Randy Lander, Dave Farabee and Dan Grendell! Our topic this time out is DC’s ‘Trinity’- Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman. What can be done to improve their sales, if anything? Do the characters and plots need work? Is DC doing a good job managing its biggest brand names? Where could it do better? Why is it so hard to get these core characters right? The Panteon has some interesting answers for you in this twenty-first edition of the Comic Pants Podcast.
As always, commentary is welcomed and encouraged. Let us know what you thought of the podcast, and if you have suggestions for future podcast topics, leave us a comment or write in to the show! Listeners who write in could win cool comics with each broadcast! Please drop us a line at comicpantsfeedback@gmail.com to give us some questions or comments for the next show.
Use the podcast feed buttons on the sidebar to subscribe, listen via the flash player below, or directly download the MP3 here:
You considered Brubaker and Lark to revamp Batman, but why not the obvious? Bendis and Maleev, if they were ever to work for DC.
01 Apr 2007 at 9:58 am
QuoteIf DC was smart they wouldn’t let Bendis touch anything they have with all the garbage he’s writing at Marvel right now. Ultimate Spider-Man is still good at times and Powers as well(when it comes out on time) but the rest of his mainstream isn’t very good right now. Granted his Daredevil run was quite good(especially early on) but he’s just not cutting it right now. I can only assume that is why they didn’t mention him. I think it might also have to do with the fact that Brubaker runs circles around him as a writer right now.
Brubaker and Lark sounds good to me. When Lark needs a break let Sean Phillips step in and take over. I also wouldn’t mind seeing David Goyer writing Batman at some point.
Mark Waid should already be writing a Superman book. It’s high time DC finally put him on one of the monthly books. Just bring his partner on his Fantastic Four run Ringo on with him and you’ll have the perfect Superman book.
As far as Wonder Woman goes..I’m not really sure. Nobody can really seem to nail her down(recognizes the irony in saying that). I would have thought Greg Rucka would have been able to do that considering how strongly he rights women characters but his run was disappointing for me. My best guess would be Gail Simone. Not the biggest of names but she’s a damn good writer and I think she would get her right. Artist wise I would say J.G. Jones. His work on The Hiketeia was excellent.
01 Apr 2007 at 10:24 am
QuoteThe Superman books are better then ever. In my entire history I have never purchased a Supes title monthly, but now I am buying Action, Superman, All Star, and Confidential whenever the new issues come out.
01 Apr 2007 at 2:27 pm
QuoteI just got done listening to the Wonder Woman section of your podcast, and I really agreed with you right up until the end. I just wanted to note that as much of a blockbuster as it would be to turn Wonder Woman into a lesbian, that also simultaneously removes a heterosexual female icon from the DC Trinity, which would probably be a major turn off to heterosexual women readers on principle alone for a company that is already struggling with accurate portrayals of women in comics. I feel like DC’s milked that option way too much in the last year or two, what with at least three or four new lesbian couples appearing semi-regularly in a variety of books (Batwoman, Knockout, Scandal, Renee Montoya, Grace, Thunder, etc.). Maybe bisexual would be okay, but even that’s pushing it.
Here’s another option: reboot the book again (I know it sucks, but it’s gotta be done at this point. Multiverse as an explanation, maybe?) telling the story from Diana’s point of view but with a blockbuster writer, using defining elements from the ’70s television show as the setup. In my mind when I think of Wonder Woman icons, my brain first jumps to the old show, and then straight to Justice League Unlimited because both are definitive takes on the character and make good anchors for readers to grab onto when thinking about her. I am also reminded how Diana’s decision to kill in Infinite Crisis distinguished her from Batman and Superman but didn’t seem like a stunt to falsely elevate her to their level. It gave her a determination and commitment that set her apart and made her a force to be reckoned with.
So here’s the pitch: put Wonder Woman back in Washington D.C. and give Diana a new civilian name that doesn’t suspend disbelief as much as “Diana Prince.” Put her to work as an aide for the U.S. military (not an agent), giving her a unique position in the DCU as the “inside woman” for the Justice League. Have Steve Trevor return to her supporting cast as a younger man, or maybe have that role be played by King Faraday like in the Justice League Unlimited cartoon. After Amazons Attack put the Paradise Island embassy back in Washington D.C. so that Wonder Woman’s sudden appearances don’t seem suspicious. The return of the embassy also gives Diana convenient ties to her mythological supporting cast.
This government connection ties Diana into major continuity, allowing her to play key roles in books like Checkmate and Green Lantern, and at the same time she would have a modest Clark Kent-like alias to create fun and controversial story fodder for her own book (and also solve the problem of not having her secret identity just seem like another superhero guise, personality and all). However, distinguish her from Superman in how dangerous and aloof she is perceived as a superhero. Cut all of the feminist icon moralism and let Wonder Woman’s actions speak for her instead, and get rid of all of the trouble understanding man’s world since she’s been here so long. Focus instead on her job as a spy and also on her superhero exploits and tensions being the bridge between the Amazons and the U.S. government. The Heinberg-like popcorn approach can be retained by having Diana’s true personality contrast with her job as, basically, an office lady role. Steve Trevor/King Faraday not knowing her true identity can make for classic secret identity moments, too.
As a heterosexual female comics fan, I wouldn’t object to a story like this at all, and I think it would really let the iconic elements of Wonder Woman shine without sacrificing who she is as a character with another big change.
01 Apr 2007 at 4:24 pm
QuoteMorrison’s two books and Cooke/Sale’s Superman Confidential having me buying some DC books that this Marvel Zombie would have never imagined.
Talk about a double-edged sword in the Confidential books, though - a lackluster creative team (Batman Confidential) will be outta there when the story ends, but the same also applies to the great team of Cooke and Sale. Speaking of which, it seems like we haven’t heard much about the creative teams for the next arcs; not to derail the discussion, but anyone got any info on that?
01 Apr 2007 at 6:09 pm
QuoteI can’t argue with that, Jen; what we were mainly looking at with our suggestion was sales. As we said in the podcast, we don’t know how many women actually buy Wonder Woman regularly. In our shop, it isn’t many. Lacking that data, our suggestion was something we knew would sell. As to how many people it would alienate, I honestly don’t know. It would certainly alienate some, but how many versus the numbers it would bring in? Again, this is a purely sales thought, not taking into consideration years of fan dedication or the readers who identify with Diana exactly because she’s a strong heterosexual female, mostly because we come up with crap on the spur of the moment and lack numbers on how those would affect sales.
I actually like your suggested take, as it gives a bit of everything for everyone but can still manage to make Diana a strong character with a defined role assuming a good writer does it. My only issue is that we’ve had strong runs with great art and writing before, and they didn’t do as well as they should (Perez and Rucka come to mind). It seems like people have written Wonder Woman off as a character, and some stunt is needed to draw their attention to the fact that that talent is on the book, producing.
All that said, your point is taken. I certainly don’t disagree that a classic Wonder Woman can be a great book. The question is how to get people to read it.
01 Apr 2007 at 6:18 pm
QuoteDan, I see what you’re saying about sales being a problem, but really I think we’ve seen that a high profile-enough name can bring in sales on its own steam. I really think after so many lesbians have come out in the DCU recently, another one would just seem superfluous. A bisexual Wonder Woman could work in practice, though, and I believe Greg Rucka mentioned possibly going for that anyway in his run.
01 Apr 2007 at 6:48 pm
QuoteDo you recommend the superman/batman tpb’s ?
01 Apr 2007 at 7:55 pm
QuoteI agree with that in principle, but on Wonder Woman after the Heinberg situation turning into such a mess and Jodi Picoult handing in what to me was an awful first issue (and only staying for six issues anyway), I have to wonder if fans aren’t feeling a little burned in that regard on this particular title. It certainly has worked as a sales magnifier on other titles, I’m simply getting a “once bitten, twice shy” kind of vibe from people regarding Wonder Woman, to where I wonder if DC hasn’t blown that strategy.
As far as overdoing it with lesbians in the DCU, I can certainly see that, though the impact of Diana being gay would be bigger than all of the others put together. I’d also want it to be done by a creator who would actually do something with it, work it into the character, as opposed to just stapling ‘gay’ to her forehead and then ignoring it. On the other hand, it would need to be done carefully to keep from becoming what defined her.
01 Apr 2007 at 8:18 pm
QuoteI’m not personally a big fan of the Superman/Batman series, but I know a lot of people are digging it. I followed it for the first year or so, then dropped it, mostly because I felt Loeb’s writing was sub-par.
01 Apr 2007 at 8:20 pm
QuoteIt does seem like it’s a little bit too soon to redefine the character with an entirely new high profile creative team, I get that feeling too. Maybe the best option at this point is to put a long term writer on the book for a year or two to work with the current setup, then move in the new direction after the dust’s settled?
01 Apr 2007 at 8:44 pm
QuoteI agree totally. The Superman books don’t need touching at all. If they stay this high quality (especially Busiek/Pacheco on Supes, and Cooke/Sale on Confidential) then I think sales will steadily rise on these books as much as they could possibly at these times anyway. Sure DC could make a sales spike with some gimmicky event but as history repeats itself, a year later after the event, I guarantee sales would be lower than if they just stayed on course.
On Batman : Paul Dini’s Detective stories are some of the best Batman stories I’ve read in a long while. He really gets Batman. He just lets Batman be Batman (the world’s greatest detective, remember?). The rest of the Batman books? Meh. Morrison’s Batman is not terrible, just highly overrated. As much as I have liked some of Morrison’s other works, his style just doesn’t fit Batman that great. Maybe an All-Star Batman. I don’t think I’d like All-Star Superman if it were in continuity now that I think about it. Anyway, I say put Dini on the regular title for a couple of extended arcs. I think Brubaker would work too.
On Wonder Woman : First of all, get the damn book out on time. Trying to rejuvenate one of their biggest characters with a book that has 4 issues in almost a year is the dumbest thing I’ve seen DC let happen in a while. The fact that the story would have been snail-paced even if it came out on time is just further infuriating. A great wonder woman wouldn’t be that hard. How about any combination of Waid, Johns, Simone, Benes, Hughes, Morales?
I mean like, duh? Regardless of the sales (which I don’t think Wonder Woman has ever been thee top seller, and never will be) those would be great.
01 Apr 2007 at 9:02 pm
QuoteFloyd, I agree with you 100% on the Superman and Bat-titles. Superman can do no wrong for me right now and I’m really enjoying the characterization Dini is putting forward in Detective Comics. Morrison’s Batman run would have been a nice Elseworlds excursion, but it doesn’t seem to fit the DCU proper all that well to me.
Also, I wanted to add that as far as a “globetrotting” Batman is concerned, Morrison did recently have Bruce go to Gibraltar and on a skiing trip, but he didn’t really take advantage of the change of scenery for Batman’s purposes. I do think the podcast was spot on about the treatment of the Bat Family, however. The characters themselves can hold their own books, they just need space to do so, with the occasional crossover. And it would be nice if the ladies weren’t all crippled, dead, and insane.
01 Apr 2007 at 9:21 pm
QuoteYes, Wonder Woman doesn’t sell well as a comic, but as a pop-culture property, it’s huge. I see Wonder Woman logos on women’s T-shirts everywhere I go. And when talking about people’s “definitive” version of the character, you overlook the Lynda Carter TV show of the 1970s. When most people think of Wonder Woman, that’s the version they see.
The fact of the matter is that comics featuring female leads tend not to sell as well to the male-dominated, direct-market comics customer base. Mind you, DC does have an upcoming WW project that will appeal to that fanbase: Adam Hughes’s All-Star Wonder Woman. I’m leery of the project and suspect the emphasis will be on cheesecake over character, but it certainly fits the bill for a potentially solid-selling WW title.
02 Apr 2007 at 2:23 pm
QuoteOne thing that I haven’t heard in this podcast is any of you mentioning others take on these icons in other works…. for instance the most interesting Superman story in the last 20 years? Astro City #1…. Alan Moore’s Supreme is another example of someone taking a version of Superman and making him fun and interesting
02 Apr 2007 at 4:41 pm
QuoteWarning, mega-response post ahead.
Jason said:
The Panteon as a group has some pretty far-ranging tastes, but I think one thing you’ll find general agreement on is that Bendis is not doing his best work anymore, which is probably why none of us brought it up. For my part, I don’t really see Brubaker/Lark and Bendis/Maleev as at all synonymous… the former seems to me a far superior creative team. Bendis/Maleev did some good work on Daredevil, but they dropped off in the last few story arcs and I thought some of it (particularly the “Decalogue” story) fell into the all-too-common trap of self-indulgent and dull that Bendis seems to fall into these days.
MCD said:
I like Confidential a lot, and I love All Star. Heck, I’ve enjoyed some of what Johns/Donner are doing in Action and what I’ve read of the Busiek Superman. But… in terms of sales, the books are still nowhere near what a major icon should be selling. Look at Spider-Man, Wolverine, X-Men, or on DC’s side Justice League… Superman and Batman are the big guns, doesn’t it seem like they should be selling near the top twenty on a regular basis?
Granted, All Star sells well, but it also comes out infrequently, which makes it a poor choice for a flagship book. And it’s my ideal for a Superman book, but I don’t think it has the mass appeal of, say, 52 or Civil War or any of the big events, and it seems like Superman should be selling to a decent chunk of that crowd.
Jen said:
Good point on the “she’s a lesbian!” meme going on at DC these days. I gotta say, though it seems a bit overdone now, the end result should be a more diverse universe when all is said and done, and maybe that’s worth the occasional feeling of it being a bit forced. Kind of like if DC just suddenly introduced a dozen new black or asian or hispanic characters… folks would notice, and it might be a bit jarring, but a few years down the road, the result is a more racially diverse, more realistic universe, and I think that’s worth the temporary pain of “Oh, you’re kidding me… another lesbian?”
But your point is well-taken that making Wonder Woman a lesbian would be removing another key component of her character even while adding something else. It does seem that Wonder Woman, for however many weak stories she’s been a part of, has gotten a legitimate place as one of the big guns. And much as I love say Oracle, Black Canary, the new Manhunter, etc. it seems that female characters have a harder time reaching that sort of legitimacy with the fans. Not that new male characters have an easy time becoming that ubiquitous either, but it seems that a strong female character has yet another hurdle to cross.
Let me just say, I like this idea. I especially love the notion of King Faraday as her supporting cast/love interest. But I think the best way to do that would be to do it as a period piece, and have Darwyn Cooke write and draw it. It wouldn’t be the blockbuster sales juggernaut we were hypothetically looking for in the podcast, but I bet it’d be a damn fine comics.
Kiel said:
You know, I haven’t heard anything about it. My biggest fear (and expectation, really) is that these Confidential titles are basically going to go the way of Legends of the Dark Knight, maybe sooner rather than later. Basically B-listers writing average, boring Superman and Batman tales. Superman Confidential has started off well, but if the title is too succeed, they’re going to need a really good second arc, and we don’t have any idea who that might be.
Floyd the Barber said:
See, I don’t think that’s true. I’d love it if the event based storytelling and marketing didn’t work, but it does. Look at Marvel just dominating with Civil War, The Initiative, etc. and capitalizing on the hype to continue to raise sales. It seems like what these icons need is good storytelling and a gimmicky hook to make their splash. The sales pattern on the Superman books right now is trending the same at best, downward more than likely (based on what I see at the shop and the Top 100 sales), and unfortunately “just make good comics” has never worked as a marketing plan. But…
On this we 100% agree. After the way Young Avengers was interesting, than late, than suddenly I didn’t care anymore and the same thing happened with Wonder Woman, I think I’m more or less done with Heinberg’s comics.
See, I don’t think that just because Wonder Woman has never been a top seller doesn’t mean it couldn’t be. As we noted in the podcast (and Jen, and Don, and others have mentioned in comments), the character has huge pop culture cache. She’s an icon, and there’s no reason that she couldn’t be as big as, say, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which had a phenomenal, Marvel-level opening week with her new comic.
Eric Reanimator said:
Indeed, Superman in particular seems at his best when people are doing thinly-veiled impressions of him. And Busiek did write my favorite Superman in the past few years with Superman: Secret Identity, on top of his take on Samaritan, which explains why he’s doing so well on the real Superman now… he gets the character. It just seems a shame if, in order to write Superman well, you have to write a character who isn’t actually Superman.
And Jakita Wagner (of Planetary) is one of the coolest Wonder Woman archetypes I’ve seen… it’s just a shame nobody can do something that interesting with the actual Wonder Woman.
02 Apr 2007 at 8:12 pm
QuoteHey Randy,
Thanks for the replies. I just really really wish great storytelling was enough without gimmicks. Regardless of their number on the 100 list, I thought Superman books were selling better numbers than they were pre Infinite Crisis? I may be mistaken. Action Comics I would have thought would definitely have seen an increase.
Yeah, Heinberg’s a name I’m gonna run screaming from now. Fool me once, fool me twice….
It’s not that I think Wonder Woman couldn’t be in the top 10 maybe. It would just surprise me greatly if she was ever #1 regardless of who was doing it. Even if they went the gimmick route and killed her or turned her lesbian. Has any female-led comic ever been #1 for any amount of time? ever? Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see it happen, but knowing the general comics audience and history I sure wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
03 Apr 2007 at 12:28 am
QuoteIt saw only a slight bump, not the big boost you’d expect from an “other-media” name. I think that’s down to including a co-writer (perception might be that Johns is doing most of the heavy lifting and Donner’s just lending his name, which didn’t seem to hurt the Dark Tower’s Robin Furth, Peter David and Stephen King trio) and that Donner, for all the love he’s earned thanks to Superman and other flicks, isn’t a big name to a lot of folks buying comics these days.
03 Apr 2007 at 12:38 am
QuoteJust wanted to say I love your podcasts, has me laughing out loud at times (the Wolfman/Byrne joining together to better mankind crack comes to mind) Keep up the good work!
A loyal European fan,
Jef
PS: Why not make Wonder Woman bisexual, seeing as that other gay icon Lucy Lawless (of Xena fame) is rumoured to play WW in the movie?
That move would, at the very least, explain her dubious Moulton Marston coined catchphrase Sufferin’ Sappho).
PPS: Perhaps a subject for future podcasts, I’d love to hear your thoughts on the current 6-issue-arc/writing for the tpb thinking both Marvel and DC seem to be caught in. Is it a passing fad, is it destroying the direct market?
PPPS: Another question: why do people let comic writers/artists get away with such extremely long delays? All Star Batman/Superman - Ultimate Wolverine vs Hulk, Wonder Woman, Young Avengers, Ultimates… each and everyone of them is on hiatus because the creative team ‘needs more time’. It boggles the imagination… In the past, artists could crack out an issue a month, some would even manage two. Nowadays, its almost a given that you can be late. Kirby, Buscema and Romita seldom were, nor were Byrne or Perez and these days Bagley, Romita Jr, Yu and Larocca aren’t either… So, what excuse do ‘artists’ like Frank Cho, Brian Hitch, Frank Quitley and those other tardy pants have? Too much Xbox Live, too little drawing? For shame!
03 Apr 2007 at 4:36 am
QuoteAmen. A job in comics should be like any other job. If you can’t DO your job then you should be fired and someone brought in who is willing/able to. I mean c’mon, if you have such a coveted job and your not even willing to do it, then how much respect do you really deserve? I can understand an artist occasionally being a week or two late. But habitually months at a time? No Way. And I have absolutely no respect for a writer that’s months late at a time. People like Heinberg and Kevin Smith should really have no place in this industry.
03 Apr 2007 at 5:16 pm
QuoteGotta agree totally about the lateness issue that’s so prevalent. I’ve gotten to the point where I just can’t tolerate it if it’s more than a month. It’s just ridiculous on a principle level, but it also really hurts my enjoyment of the story. One series I can tolerate is All-Star Superman, simply because it is that good - but each issue is self-contained, which also contributes to my tolerance. But on something like Ultimates? Forget about it. Seeing every little bit of rubble Hitch can cram into a panel is not worth waiting 7 months for.
The biggest offender, though, was Civil War - it delayed many other titles in the line, and many coming after that too! It was supposed to end in November. November! Doesn’t that seem ridiculous? And then Quesada says that “Watchmen and DKR were also late, but we don’t mention that today, do we?” That’s insulting to the reader, and extremely arrogant to compare your popular (but also fairly criticized) popcorn event to 2 comics that are considered the greatest of all time.
Of course, some artists are perfectionists, but the TV/movie writers who are late….they’re even worse, because they can’t be fully committed to one job. I gotta give credit to JMS here, because, as a former TV writer, he really has devoted himself to comics now (for better or worse :p ).
I’m partly to blame, because I’ve bought many of these comics, but somewhere Marvel and DC have to take responsibility for it. It’s just very unprofessional. If you’re gonna draw like Hitch, or Quitely, or many many other artists, at least don’t solicit it until it’s finished.
Phew. Rant over. I feel better.
03 Apr 2007 at 6:04 pm
QuoteJMS is returning to movies & TV. I think he’s writing the screenplay for Clint Eastwood’s next movie. I think it’s called “The Changeling” but I could be wrong.
Totally with you there but I think it’s a little unfair to include Frank Cho in the late column. Granted he is quite “slow” but he has never pretended otherwise and has never committed to a schedule he can’t keep. He wouldn’t let his Shanna series come out until it was finished (even with the “corrections”) and Mark Bagely is doing the second Mighty Avengers arc so Cho can do the third on time. While there haven’t been many, I can’t remember a late Cho comic (I could be wrong though). He also inks his own stuff unlike most of the other “late” artists mentioned.
I do think lateness in books is really bad, wheter it’s writers or artists, but if more guys were realistic about the amount of work they can get done in a certain time it would go a long way.
04 Apr 2007 at 5:29 am
QuoteMy understanding of Quitely is that he works far more in other media than he does in comics. The comics work that he does is because he gets a kick out of it, and he’s always got guys like Ellis and Morrison hitting him up for work. I can understand the frustration with his being so late, but am totally willing to wait on his work. 5-6 issues from Quitely>12 issues of Bagely. At least for me.
As far as the other guys go, the excuse that I always hear is that the devil is in the details. People want more detailed art and there’s just no way to get it out on a monthly schedule. Just a change in the way that comics look. Also, fill-in artists were far more common in past years. Once they stopped dropping in fill-in stories and artists at a moments notice, things started to slow down. And personally I prefer it this way, too. Like I said above, quality always trumps schedule for me–there are some books that I know not to expect out on time, so it’s not really frustrating when they don’t turn up on a monthly basis. But I get the feeling that I’m in the minority on that one.
04 Apr 2007 at 9:27 am
QuoteAnd getting back to the original question, I’m really enjoying Morrison’s take on Batman. Probably attributable to the fact that I’ve never followed Batman before, so I don’t have a strong preconceived notion of what a Batman monthly should look like.
On Wonder Woman, I’d love to see Darwyn Cooke take a shot. I thoroughly enjoyed his take on the character in New Frontiers, and seems like he could put out a really enjoyable book. Probably wouldn’t hit the sales mark that you guys were talking about, but it would be really enjoyable.
04 Apr 2007 at 9:37 am
Quotewow, yeah superman is cool right now - i’m in love with all star supes, and donner action comics is great too - surprised you guys were down on it. half of your suggestions for batman morisson is trying out right now - the manhbats of london? i know there was something about a son in there too but who noticed…? guess great minds think alike. morrison’s the only reason i collect batman at the mo’, dropped the title after it spiralled downwards on hush
so to me it’s like supes has never been better and batman’s on the up. but wonder woman - i wanted to give the dodson one a try and at first it seemed like it may wor, they even made her lame villains seem kinda cool but then it did what dc does best and became convoluted bull with a million versions of the character and decompressed storytelling, hopefully the adam hughes all star ww will be decent
04 Apr 2007 at 10:19 am
QuotePersonally, I feel that Wonder Woman is a much harder character to connect to. She seems closest in motivation to Superman - a desire to use her power for the betterment of those without such power. But where Superman’s ideals are entrenched in small-town American values, Wonder Woman’s come from an Amazonian code of ethics that is not so instinctively understandable. Without an easy handle on the character (that “Yeah, I’d do that if I had those superpowers and that history”) I don’t ever see her being mainstream.
She’s a classic superhero and can be written very well but just doesn’t connect to people in a way that allows for massive sales.
04 Apr 2007 at 11:02 am
QuoteI think the BIGGEST problem with Wonder Woman is that she’s a poorly-conceived, ill-defined character. This is a point I once heard Scott McCloud make: she’s a warrior, princess, amazon, sex object, with ties to Greek mythology, wearing an American flag-themed bikini, weilding a lasso that makes you tell the truth, acting as an ambassador for peace, promoting women’s rights. How do any of these characteristics complement each other or play off each other? There’s no easy way to explain the character. Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Punisher, Captain America, Wolverine, Plastic Man, Thor, Hawkman, Flash, Green Lantern, etc can all be summed up pretty easily. Wonder Woman, not so much.
That doesn’t mean she needs to be a simple character — she just needs focus.
The same goes for the types of stories told with Wonder Woman. Superman stories should be bright, optimistic, larger-than-life, action-oriented, full of heart, and they should be about defending those that can’t defend themselves. Batman stories should be dark, shadowy, full of crime and mystery, and should be about bringing justice to those that deserve it. Spider-Man stories should be personal, centered on relationships, full of everyday problems, about taking responsibilty while paying the price for it.
What should a Wonder Woman story be about? Nobody knows. Greek mythology? That by itself gets old quickly.
04 Apr 2007 at 11:36 am
QuoteHey guys, I wass surprised you didn’t talk about the recent fill ins on all three DC icons, I would think it would hurt their sales probably more than Marvel’s waiting attitude on their own late titles. What do you think?
Br
Ruben
04 Apr 2007 at 1:49 pm
QuoteUnless a fill-in really really sucks, I definitely prefer those over lateness. In the case of Batman I liked Ostrander’s “Grotesque” fill-in better than Morrison’s issues so far. I know I’m probably in a very very small minority on that but, hey it’s true.
05 Apr 2007 at 1:19 am
QuoteI was really interested to hear your Batman takes and pretty much agreed with all of them. The issue with all of these characters seems to be continuity related. For example, Robin is great for Batman because he presents hope and a chance for Bruce to recover from the tragedy of his parents’ death. The problem is, we don’t really want him to recover, because then the book is over. So it can’t really go anywhere. So, instead, DC keeps giving him new Robins (like the son of Batman) to keep the idea fresh, but ultimately each new Robin is less effective than the last.
When you guys were talking about Marvel’s Ultimate line, it occurred to me that it was best when it was clicking through the continuity that is accepted in the Marvel universe. When Ultimate Spiderman was telling the classic stories (Uncle Ben’s death, Green Goblin, Peter and Mary Jane’s first date), it was great. Once they catch up to current continuity, they slow down, because we don’t really want resolution. We want a tortured Peter Parker, a haunted Bruce Wayne, an angry Wolverine, etc.
And maybe that’s why you are talking about DC’s three icons, they have been around so long, interpretted so many times, that it is just difficult for them to seem fresh.
Oh, and one more thing, what are we, as readers, supposed to do about these late books? I guess quit buying them. I’m really torn on what to do when Ultimates 2 #13 comes out. I’ve got the rest of the story, so I’d like to have this issue. But I feel like I’ve been taken advantage of and taken for granted. Frankly, the art isn’t good enough to justify the wait. I can’t remember how long ago Ultimates 2 #1 came out, but it’s completely ridiculous. OK, deep breaths.
Nathan
05 Apr 2007 at 8:33 am
QuoteWonder Woman. In 8-10 years, I want to have a library of Wonder Woman books to give to my niece (who will be 12). That’s my main motivation for supporting WW. I really like Rucka’s use of the Olympians. I wouldn’t mind reading more stories with those characters, most likely with Wonder Woman.
Superman and Batman. I don’t really think about them that much. I think All-Star and Dini’s ‘Tec are good 22pg stories, so I get those, but their other books aren’t on my radar. I figure I’ll find their best stories in collected editions, so I don’t even worry about it.
05 Apr 2007 at 11:05 am
QuoteThat is a very smart observation. I think you’re 100% correct, and especially in applying it to the Ultimate universe. It’s why the Legion reboot a few years ago went off the rails too. Doing the start-up stuff and giving it a fresh spin is always fun, but eventually the character gets to a status quo place, and you can’t get beyond it without basically ending the characters.
Unless you do something bold like Civil War, which can result in basically eradicating the characters in the name of replacing them with someone that has the same name and elements of the same history but doesn’t really seem consistent. I maintain that the best way to keep the Ultimate universe fresh would have been to do the Civil War thing in that universe instead.
But I also believe that it wouldn’t have sold anywhere near as well, even though it certainly still would have been an event. Or worse, it would have sold just as well, but then the Marvel Universe titles wouldn’t have gotten the Civil War/Initiative sales bump and the Ultimates would be top sellers while the rest sank down the charts along with most of DC’s mid-tier books.
Damn it, I hate admitting that Quesada and company are right. But when it comes to Civil War, they probably are. It’s a perfect case of giving the fans what they want.
Or at least, the fans who aren’t me.
05 Apr 2007 at 11:58 am
QuoteI’m at the Joker/Robin car ride bit. I enjoyed that issue. I have no idea what you guys mean by, “[Dini] got Robin wrong.” What part of being tied and gagged is wrong?
05 Apr 2007 at 12:09 pm
QuoteJust to follow-up on this a bit, I think a big mistake creators make is trying to re-tell the classic stories in continuity. The original, classic stories have power, and writers try to recapture that power by having the hero go through the same story a second time. Having Bruce watch Dick Grayson’s parents die was a profound experience and spawned shared understanding between the characters and an effective partnership and friendship. But it was certainly less effective with both Jason Todd and Tim Drake.
Another example is the whole “evil twin” thing with Spiderman. Venom was, initially, a cool character in part because he had the same powers as Spiderman and looked like Spiderman. But then we got Carnage and the clone saga and a bunch of other Spiderman evil twins and the basic theme just lost its power.
So I guess the conclusion is, if you’re going to re-tell the classic stories, do it in some sort of Ultimate/All-Star/Elseworlds format. If you’re writing in continuity, come up with something new.
05 Apr 2007 at 2:31 pm
QuoteThat’s the part. If you’re going to do an issue where Robin spends an entire issue, helpless and watching the Joker murder people, you’ve missed the point entirely.
Unless it’s all part of some angsty Robin suffers from crisis of conscience for two years story. In which case you’ve missed the point and you’re Brad Meltzer.
05 Apr 2007 at 11:55 pm
QuoteI’m with you on both counts, Floyd. I especially liked Ostrander’s story over Morrison’s as it was a simple mystery instead of what Morrison’s is, which I can’t seem to get into. What really got me with Ostrander’s was Mandrake’s art. I consider his Batman as one of the best I’ve seen, right up there with Lark’s.
06 Apr 2007 at 10:23 am
Quote