So Justice League #1 came out last week and the first batch of #1's were just released. Did any of you end up buying any?
A new, modern continuity, yes. But the Ultimate Comics Universe also messes and alters things from the main continuity. Like in Ultimate X-Men Mojo is an albino reality television producer instead of an alien. Earth One isn't all that significantly different. It's just a new line of ongoing OGN's. But it's still a starting point, so you don't need to be hugely aware of what's come before. Numbers are just numbers. It's honestly not as if Detective Comics #28 and Action Comics #1 are even in continuity any more. The Batman and Superman that debuted in those books are grossly different to their modern incarnations. When you buy a magazine, you don't have to buy previous issues to understand the content in the latest one, do you? The Nightrunner fiasco is hardly as political as some right-wing nutbags made it out to be. The Superman story was just a one-off. Both Marvel and DC tend to avoid politics for the most part because they don't want to segregate their audience. Flashpoint is probably a decent starting point. Although only the first issue is up online despite the second one having come out a few weeks ago. You could also probably read Flash v.3 #9 - #12 because that slightly sets up Flashpoint. But only if you want to. I wouldn't say it's necessary at all.
1)This relaunch is most certainly not attempt to lift from Marvel's Ultimate Comics. In fact the proper purpose is far grander and bigger than simply continuity and story issues. 2) The All Star and Earth One line's are also nothing like Marvel's Utlimate Comics. It's going perfectly well with me. I think it's a brilliant decision and I wholly support it. But this is definitely not a separate continuity. They've stated that already. This is the DC Universe true and proper and it's not starting at Day One. It's a streamlining of characters and continuities where some changes will be minor, some will be major and some things won't get changed at all. This has always annoyed me about people. For someone who seems so actively interested in superhero characters you're basically saying you're too much of a wuss to get into reading about them because you're intimidated by numbers. If you read the wiki's then you obviously have an understand of what's going on. You really don't need a #1 to be a starting point. I think the earliest issue of Detective Comics I have is around #800 and I'm telling you there's no need to read the previous 799... ... but this is a great starting point for anyone so you better follow through on that. See above. Where you could have possibly gotten any political insinuations? Not really, no. This isn't DC concerning themselves with Marvel at all. It's DC concerning themselves with the dwindling comic book market. That's exactly what this is. Comics aren't that expensive, guys. DC's in particular are held at $2.99 (aside from oversized issues like Justice League #1). Here's a list of all the titles DC will be releasing in September - http://www.ifanboy.com/content/articles/The_Definitive_Guide_To_The_DC_Comics_Reboot To find out more about each of them all you have to do is click the Discuss button and there'll be info about what each book is about. And for those wondering about prices and actually reading the comics, this is a link to DC's Digital Store on Comixology - https://read.dccomics.com/comixology/#/dc_comics The prices for all comics are as marked and are fairly cheap in my opinion. With the newer titles the books will be released online at the same time as they sold in comic book stores and will be both be at the same price of $2.99. However the digital comics will decrease to $1.99 after four weeks. If anyone has any questions I'll be more than happy to answer them.
If you're offended; harden the **** up, Princess. Then why feel the need to address it? No one asked how you felt about the topic. This isn't a Marvel vs DC thread, or a thread about Marvel or DC characters. It's simply about Green Lantern. Just leave it at that. They have to release a trailer to generate interest and they had to release it at this time to coincide with the second last movie of the Harry Potter franchise. It really doesn't take a genius to go "oh, they've still got several months in post-production before release. i guess it'll look better toward may/june." Transformer: Revenge of the Fallen wasn't complete until the actual DAY OF the international premiere. Green Lantern is nothing like Scott Pilgrim and it's easy to see in the trailer that's quite obviously not what they're going for. What symbolism? Reynolds spent all the costume scenes during production in a grey/silver mo-cap suit. They are working off of his body. All that movement is him. The CGI was just layered on top of that. Again, then why bother mentioning it? This isn't a topic for that discussion. I'm looking forward to the Captain America movie but I don't feel the need to preface my thoughts with "I'm generally a DC fan but". It's just ****ing dumb. Could you point out the part in that sentence where I was discussing anything else but the special effects in that movie? The comics have everything to do with this because they are the true representation of these characters and Marvel, as a company, is only responsible for three movies with their characters. You're not exactly demonstrating brand loyalty to Marvel when most of the money is going to Fox. So I reiterate: this mentioning of "I prefer Marvel over DC" is wholly ******ed in this thread. I'm just sick of dumbass opinions and stupid statements. Just like things for what they are. Don't preface a comment with useless statement. Don't get all prejudicial based on nothing. Just be open minded and think things through. Simple. ****ing right. You follow creaters which is exactly the right thing to do. I couldn't give a **** about the Hulk but I'm somewhat interested in Jeff Parker and Gabriel Hardman on the book. Marvel and DC don't give a **** about us a people (well maybe DC does care since $2.99), they don't care what we think as long as we buy. Did you ever read Tomasi's Green Lantern Corps?
But it's not something to draw a line in the sand over. I generally like the DC Universe more but I don't feel any sort of extreme tie to the company that I'll refuse to acknowledge anything by Marvel. That's just ridiculous. Just because Superman is my favourite superhero doesn't mean I can't enjoy Thor. You know most the action shots in Superman Returns, they just used Brandon Routh's face with the rest of the body as a CG model. And there's one or two shots in there were it's a complete CG model. By the time the movie is whole and finished, I'm sure the CGI suit will look awesome. I can't tell you how much the "I thought Green Lantern was black" annoys me. Then why feel the need to distinguish yourself if you're not that much of a fan in the first place? That's just stupid. I honestly can't believe how many times I've seen "I'm not much of a DC fan, I prefer Marvel" in this thread. It's just downright dumb considering most of you probably don't even read comics. If you like superheroes, just enjoy superheroes. Who gives a **** where it comes from? Quit acting like kids. And that's enough for you to just throw your hands up and say you don't like Green Lantern? What are you, like 5 years old? I'm actually pretty confident that John gets a cameo as a marine just like in Secret Origin. Guy was in earlier versions of the script but it's been re-written since then. also, screw you, Guy's awesome.
aka you're a ***. Quit making distinctions. You either like superheroes or you don't. ... the movie is not due out until June. The CGI is not done yet. But that stuff about the comic style? Quit talking bullshit. If you're *****ing about the CGI costume then you honestly know nothing about Green Lantern. His suit comes from the ring as you can clearly see in the trailer. It's not and never has been a physical suit in the comics. The ring itself is advanced alien technology and using CGI for the suit is a way of demonstrating that. I'm a huge Green Lantern fan and I, as well as many other fans, completely support the idea of the suit being CGI. It makes sense and it's nice to see them doing something different. Well what do you know? Nothing?
Did you read it? I ended up dropping it several issues in. Now it certainly wasn't terrible but it did nothing to sustain my interest. Yes, I know Gail's fan enjoyed it but I doubt her run will go down next George Perez and Phil Jimenez's stories. But she hasn't been retooled. The story is that the gods have altered her timeline and the premise even starts off with an oracle telling her she has to fix it. Then this is a matter of opinion. I don't mind change. One More Day was strictly Quesada. Yeah, JMS' name is on the cover but the entire story was mandated from on high by Quesada. In fact, I'm pretty sure the only think JMS did was script the dialogue. It's why Quesada is writing One Moment In Time.
There has been no great Wonder Woman story in the five years since they relaunched Wonder Woman. This is about as good as it's been. It was good. It wasn't solely the JMS story. There was a Gail Simone and George Perez story, a Louise Simonson story and Geoff Johns and Scott Kolins prelude to the JMS story. All padded out with pin ups by people like Nicola Scott, Francis Manapul, Jock, Greg Horn and a beautiful two page spread by Phil Jimenez. With stuff like this I don't think fan backlash matters. Wonder Woman has never been a high selling title and no one was talking about her before all this. If everyone complaining about her costume had been buying her book, this wouldn't have happened. JMS knows Superman. That I'm sure. He's made it clear countless times that Superman is his favourite character and that this is the one book he's been dying to write ever since he started in comics. It's hard to fake something like that if you don't understand the character. umm, welcome to superhero comics.
You didn't "grow up" with Wonder Woman. I'll be anything you weren't a kid during the '70s. William Moulton Marston was far from that type of person. He was a psychologist and strong supporter of feminism and that's exactly why he created Wonder Woman because he noticed the lack of a strong female icon for young girls to look up to. Her costume wasn't designed for the cheesecake factor, but to evoke the sense that this is a strong and beautiful woman. Not to mention she's an Amazonian warrior. It's an alternate reality storyline so at some point, things will be restored eventually but as far as I'm concerned, this can take as long as it likes. I haven't had the chance to pick up #600 yet, but I'm committed to giving this a shot. I read Allan Heinberg's arc and I thought that was great, but he didn't last. And Gail Simone's run just didn't do it for me. Wonder Woman needs whatever she can get right now and JMS was utterly fantastic on Thor so on Wonder Woman I expect the same level of greatness. And I would not hold One More Day against JMS, that was Joe Quesada. I'm sure that part has already been worked out. JMS is also writing Superman, so I'm sure he has plans that'll allow for this alternate Wonder Woman to work in. I disagree. DC characters are timeless and far, far more versatile. Look at Batman: Brave and the Bold. Try finding a Marvel character to do something like that with and not have it come off as corny and forced. Then look at The Dark Knight. Look at Red Son Superman, then look at normal Superman. You can't do that with Marvel characters, because they're constantly pushing an agenda that updates their characters into be current and edgy. And this is across the line of characters. DC don't need to do that. DC is also far more universal, with Superman being a protector of the entire world and their heroes being spread out everywhere. Marvel is just in New York. I grew up with all the Marvel cartoons, same as everyone on this board. But I've read DC stories, I know DC characters and they are far and above anything Marvel has to offer as far as I'm concerned.
What? Tony's dual identity as Iron Man has been public knowledge amongst citizens in the Marvel Universe since 2002 and it was a decision no one has regretted and one that completely makes sense to the character. The film makers revealing it in the first movie was a great decision and I haven't heard anyone anywhere criticise that decision. Tony Stark in the movie-verse is a narcissist with self-destructive tendencies. Of course he would tell the public he's Iron Man. What greater way is there to gain more fame and publicity than by telling people you're a ****-awesome superhero? Them doing that also allowed for exploration in some great plots that haven't been done before in superhero movies. And let me tell you, they do follow it up rather well. I saw the movie last Wednesday at a staff screening at the cinema I work at. **** was pretty good. A real nice exploration of Tony in the middle of the movie and the chessboard is getting set up for the Avengers movie.
In 1939, Batman made his debut appearance in Detective Comics #27. And if you haven't read any comics, I would probably avoid saying something like that.
Batman is the world's greatest detective. Period.
It was probably just someone saying something that they thought. Heath Ledger's Joker is completely differant to the Jack Nicholson's Joker. Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent is completely differant to Tommy Lee Jones' Harvey Dent. The Batman movies from 1989 to 1997 are their own continuity. It begins and ends there. Batman Begins was a reboot, a complete start from scratch. Not a prequel.
Nolan's Batman movies are not prequel's to the Burton/Schumacher movies. Both series are completely unrelated.
I don't think you quite understand. I'll just clarify again for you: THE 90'S WERE A ****ING HORRIBLE TIME FOR COMICS. NOBODY, and I mean absolutely NOBODY looks back at the 90's with fond nostalgia. Most people would prefer it never existed. ****, things were so bad Marvel was THAT close to bankruptcy. True story. The 90's gave us Carnage and Deadpool. So ****ing bad. 1) Taste is subjective. 2) Who the hell is going to believe that nerd in high school ends up married to the supermodel? Peter is not Bill Gates. He has no money to offset anything. MJ should be banging sure, but not a Heidi Klum. That'd be stretching my suspension of disbelief too much.
tim burton is a hack. here's a tip: he didn't even write or direct Nightmare Before Christmas.
There's no substance to Carnage, other than that he "looks cool". It's just "lol serial killer cletus kasady". Which is boring as all hell and has no place amongst Spider-Man. uhh cos the symbiote also had a conciousness. The symbiote and Eddie were talking to each. Which only works if the symbiote is an alien, and as shown in Spider-Man 3, the coincidence of Pete finding an alien life-form is pretty bullshit. I reiterate: Venom and Carnage are terrible villains, and should be used sparingly at best. They're very, very 90's. And the 90's were a horrible period for comics. Just no. I would prefer the Sinister Six before any symbiotes. Please people, quit giving the studio stupid ideas.
Carnage is a terrible villain and should be kept far, far away. Unless it's Ultimate Carnage, in which case it should only appear for a few scenes and THAT IS IT. see: Ultimate Electro.
Venom, wise cracking? Schizophrenic? What the ****? Can you guys quit pretending you know **** about a character, when you quite clearly don't? Venom's a ****** villain anyway. I love the Ultimate Comics Spider-Man books, so I'm kinda looking forward to this. Really hoping the can touch some of the ultimatised villain's they haven't used yet. Especially Electro. Not too keen to see the Goblins again since that's what the last movies were about, even though I love the Ultimate Goblins. Lizard is someone they really have to do, though.
