DC To Relaunch 52 Titles in September

Alan Davis and Mark Farmer are one of the best art teams in comics in about thirty years. I loved their work on Clan Destine and Excalibur.

I never liked the current DC Comics logo.

Now they've come up with one that's even worse :

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/dc-entertainment-new-logo-120119.html

Meanwhile Fredric Wertham is alive and well.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/comics/news/a361084/dc-comics-depiction-of-sex-and-violence-slammed-by-fox.html

MLP* wrote:I never liked the current DC Comics logo.

Now they've come up with one that's even worse :

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/dc-entertainment-new-logo-120119.html

Why do they want to give the impression of peeling away / coming unstuck / being flakey?

The new logo is abysmal. It looks bland, clinical and corporate, it says nothing about creativity or fun. What the Hell does it have to do with comics?

You did see the bit where they had different versions of the logo to go with different titles, right?

Lucy McGough wrote:You did see the bit where they had different versions of the logo to go with different titles, right?

Yes, but it only really works with interactive media. As a logo for a print medium, it's abysmal, and comics are still primarily a print medium.

Apparently it's meant to represent duality and secret identities. It's like the logo's wearing a mask.

Lucy McGough wrote:Apparently it's meant to represent duality and secret identities. It's like the logo's wearing a mask.

Which is all very clever, I'm sure. But a logo needs to be eye catching and self explanatory. if you need to have the deeper meaning pointed out, it's failed. This logo does not, in itself, say 'comics' to me. It doesn't really say anything. The old one was at least immediately identifiable, although still not as good as the DC Bullet design in use until 2005.

Yes... it's just change for the sake of change

Much like the entire reboot, as far as I can see...

tony ingram wrote:

Lucy McGough wrote:Apparently it's meant to represent duality and secret identities. It's like the logo's wearing a mask.

Which is all very clever, I'm sure. But a logo needs to be eye catching and self explanatory. if you need to have the deeper meaning pointed out, it's failed. This logo does not, in itself, say 'comics' to me.

#

I guess that's the point. They can see which way the wind is blowing so they are moving away from being a comic book publisher and towards being a "multi-media businesss".

One good thing about the reboot: at least in this continuity Superman will never have had long hair.

I liked the long haired 90's Superman...

Oh. Sorry

Um.... he might grow it again?

Lucy McGough wrote:Oh. Sorry

Um.... he might grow it again?

Sadly, I think its time has passed.
And it was a little strange that nobody noticed Clark Kent suddenly had a ponytail...

It was the nineties. They were probably all on ecstasy.

Lucy McGough wrote:It was the nineties. They were probably all on ecstasy.

That would explain some of the stuff that happened in the stories, too! I never quite understood the 'Electric Superman'...

I didn't understand him, but I liked him. (Actually, I feel that way about a lot of people.)

Lucy McGough wrote:I didn't understand him, but I liked him. (Actually, I feel that way about a lot of people.)

When did you start reading DC, Luce? It's been awhile, hasn't it? How far back have you gone?

I started reading when Grant Morrison was writing the Justice League. Aquaman had a beard and Hal Jordan was the Spectre. Zauriel was around a lot too, but nowadays people seem to have forgotten him

I started reading the Giffen/DeMatteis JLI stuff but then I got a job. Being employed cuts into my reading time, which kind of sucks. And I have to live in Horwich, where there ain't no comic shop.

I suspect that we have seen the last of Zauriel...

I like some of Morrison's work, but I could never get into his JLA. To me, a JLA basically composed of the 'big' characters is just dull, since the writer can never actually do anything interesting with the characters as they all have their own books. With the JLI, the much maligned Detroit League or even James Robinson's League, you never knew what would happen next or who would make it out alive!

Ah, but Mr Morrison's JLA had Plastic Man in it, which automatically made it awesome

Anyway, for me it was more about the team dynamic/interactions than about whether or not someone was going to kick the bucket. And my favourite was J'onn, who didn't have his own title.

Lucy McGough wrote:Ah, but Mr Morrison's JLA had Plastic Man in it, which automatically made it awesome

Anyway, for me it was more about the team dynamic/interactions than about whether or not someone was going to kick the bucket. And my favourite was J'onn, who didn't have his own title.

He did for awhile!

Actually, I always preferred the Elongated Man to Plastic Man. Poor old Ralph seems to have been royally shafted by the reboot, too...

tony ingram wrote:He did for awhile!

I know - I recently bought some issues from eBay. They're waiting for me in Northwich.

tony ingram wrote:Actually, I always preferred the Elongated Man to Plastic Man. Poor old Ralph seems to have been royally shafted by the reboot, too...

Ha, hasn't everyone? Look at what they did to Starfire!

Yes. The term 'shafted' seems particularly appropriate for Starfire, somehow...

It seems all is not well at the new DC. John Rozum speaks here, on the failure of one of the first batch of titles to be cancelled...

http://johnrozum.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-i-quit-static-shock.html

tony ingram wrote:I really don't think this is going to work, long term. It strikes me as a move born out of desperation to attract new readers, which will instead drive away a lot of the older readers who are effectively keeping the company afloat. It will only work if a) the number of new readers outweighs the number of longtime fans who give up on them (and I think a lot will) and b) the new readers then stay on board for the long haul, which is a big gamble.

One they appear to have lost.

tony ingram wrote:Yes. The term 'shafted' seems particularly appropriate for Starfire, somehow...

ewwww, burn!

Found this today and it made me laugh...

Saw that one a few months back...awesome.

Made me laugh too

Spektre wrote:Saw that one a few months back...awesome.

Hello, Spek. How've you been?

Eh, up and down. Health never cooperates, and sometimes sysops don't either.

Tony, You are banned over at CBR now?

Spektre wrote:Tony, You are banned over at CBR now?

Looks like it. Not entirely sure why.

These weak willed moderators are a pretty sad lot.

So, where have you been hiding Spek? I thought you'd forsaken us...

Oh no, not forsaken at all. I don't have anything to contribute on non-US based comics so my conversation here are a bit limited. I have multiple logins at all the standard message boards. It seems to be a necessity.

I was accused of having multiple accounts over on the DCMB yesterday, seemingly just because another guy and I both disagreed with a rather bizarre assertion that Stan Lee stole Peter Parker's name from Pete Ross and Chief Parker in Superboy. One of the oddest conversations I've had in awhile.

Since the implementation of his rules, Tenz doesn't get enough traffic there to be relevant. I'm thinking of hitting the Outhouse and see how it is. They like Herald so....

tony ingram wrote:I was accused of having multiple accounts over on the DCMB yesterday, seemingly just because another guy and I both disagreed with a rather bizarre assertion that Stan Lee stole Peter Parker's name from Pete Ross and Chief Parker in Superboy. One of the oddest conversations I've had in awhile.

I read the post ( not the accusation) and got a chuckle.

I think the guy's insane.

..and anoher chuckle to see the specter of Spektre came up in the selfsame thread lol

Oh, you've made quite an impression, don't worry...

tony ingram wrote:Stan Lee stole Peter Parker's name from Pete Ross and Chief Parker in Superboy

Really? That is just weird. I don't see any reason to think it's true (seems as though this person thinks that having the same name as someone else is stealing. I'll have to tell my dad, since clearly he stole my grandfather's name...) but even if it were, so what? I mean, that's just pointlessly petty.

Sincerest form of flattery, and all that.