• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DC's Fundamental problem...

Started by Wally's Comics,

108 posts in this topic

The_Captain

The_Captain

Posted
Posted

That is some great writing!

 

I have to admit that I am torn with the "extreme justice" point Chris makes. It is something I could see super powered vigilantes do -as again, Marvel has "realistically" been doing for ages although not directly concentrating on it (Wolverine kills a heck ton of people in every story)- although it almost never occurs in DC books (unless a Batman foe appears). I don't want or need extreme justice in every DC story, but I am not necessarily opposed to it within a "reasonable" extend.

 

Chris does sum up DCs identity problem pretty accurate, though :golfclap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jaylam

Jaylam

Posted
Posted

Personally I thought the DC multiverse was a unique and clever plot device and had no problem with it. It most certainly was scientifically plausible and forward looking to consider a spectrum of vibrational frequencies and they tied it in with the Flash's powers and mythos quite well. I always felt their attempt to contract all this in the "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was a mistake. I actually thought the story was really good, but how it ended was bad. They had a chance to vindicate the use of the multiverse and embrace it as their identity and shove it Marvel's face, but blew it instead. They had it going, but instead of looking at it as a strength of their product, mistakenly thought it was a weakness. How cool of a twist would it have been if the end of Crisis would have reasserted the multiverse instead of losing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FineCollector

FineCollector

Posted
Posted

Good article, but a minor gripe: in the early 2000's, Marvel had flushed all its old readers by putting all its eggs in the Ultimate universe, and by letting Bendis dismantle the history and tradition of the Avengers. DC countered with great stories, and an amazingly coherent universe, including Identity Crisis, a title the author singles out. DC was king until they shot themselves in the foot with Countdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jools&jim

jools&jim

Posted
Posted

 

This about the best and most amusing summation of the O'Neil and Adams GL-GA series I've ever heard:

 

Peter Parker deals with campus riots over housing for low-income students, goes through hard economic times and watches Harry Osborn take acid in Amazing Spider-Man, so DC sends a space cop with a magic wishing ring and a Robin Hood cosplayer on a trip across the country because one of them didn’t know racism existed and the other didn’t know drugs existed, and the result is one of DC’s most highly regarded stories.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
I think they both copy each other. DC has plenty of "firsts" that have become norm for both publishers at this point. Not that it's a good thing.

 

+ 1

 

Even the whole counter-character approach demonstrates how both companies track each other's content and market response to these characters.

 

- Namor (1939) vs. Aquaman (1941)

 

- Swamp Thing (1971) vs. Man-Thing (1971)

 

- Deathstroke (1980) vs. Taskmaster (1980) vs. Deadpool (1991)

 

- Plastic Man (1941) vs. Elongated Man (1960) vs. Mr. Fantastic (1961)

 

- Catwoman (1940) vs. Black Cat (1979)

 

- Brainiac (1958) vs. Ultron (1968)

 

- Cheetah (1943) vs. Tigra (1972)

 

- Captain Boomerang (1960) vs. Boomerang (1966)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davenport

Davenport

Posted
Posted

It's an interesting article, but mainly wishful thinking based on a false premise. And it requires he retcon history. Like this:

 

"So in 1961, Kirby and Lee take a gamble and put out Fantastic Four #1, a new kind of superhero comic…"

 

Really? It's fairly well documented, both in live interviews and print, that the revamps, revitalization and innovation was coming out of DC Comics. They were consciously changing course under Julius Schwartz and Marvel was both watching their lead and throwing things at the wall in hopes something would stick.

 

L.A. Times 2004

"Inspired by the Flash's success, Schwartz began resurrecting and updating other DC superheroes, including Green Lantern, Hawkman, the Atom and the Justice Society, the superhero team that was renamed the Justice League of America.

 

The great success of the Justice League of America, which Schwartz considered his "greatest achievement," spurred rival Marvel Comics to follow suit with its own successful superhero team, the Fantastic Four.

 

"I have a standard gag," Schwartz said, "that the Justice League not only saved DC Comics, it saved Marvel Comics too."

 

And not taking anything away from Marvel, the chances they took or the stride they hit. But look at Fantastic Four # 1. He put up it against Action Comics to illustrate it's radical genius for the time. But look again, the masthead could easily be swapped to any of Marvel's other "monster" titles they were churning and it would be typical. No costumes, big monster, another strange tale. Not a giant risk-taking, but more of a poke-n-hope tryout concept.

 

Again, not to take anything away from Marvel. I just don't think history supports his premise.

 

"Allegedly, it was a golf course boast by DC honcho Jack Liebowitz to Marvel Comics owner Martin Goodman, about sales of Schwartz-edited comics, that led to the creation of The Fantastic Four. Before long, sales were up all around, and superheroes were once again comics' dominant genre." Don Markstein's Toonopedia

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted
It's an interesting article, but mainly wishful thinking based on a false premise. And it requires he retcon history. Like this:

 

"So in 1961, Kirby and Lee take a gamble and put out Fantastic Four #1, a new kind of superhero comic…"

 

Really? It's fairly well documented, both in live interviews and print, that the revamps, revitalization and innovation was coming out of DC Comics. They were consciously changing course under Julius Schwartz and Marvel was both watching their lead and throwing things at the wall in hopes something would stick.

 

L.A. Times 2004

"Inspired by the Flash's success, Schwartz began resurrecting and updating other DC superheroes, including Green Lantern, Hawkman, the Atom and the Justice Society, the superhero team that was renamed the Justice League of America.

 

The great success of the Justice League of America, which Schwartz considered his "greatest achievement," spurred rival Marvel Comics to follow suit with its own successful superhero team, the Fantastic Four.

 

"I have a standard gag," Schwartz said, "that the Justice League not only saved DC Comics, it saved Marvel Comics too."

 

And not taking anything away from Marvel, the chances they took or the stride they hit. But look at Fantastic Four # 1. He put up it against Action Comics to illustrate it's radical genius for the time. But look again, the masthead could easily be swapped to any of Marvel's other "monster" titles they were churning and it would be typical. No costumes, big monster, another strange tale. Not a giant risk-taking, but more of a poke-n-hope tryout concept.

 

Again, not to take anything away from Marvel. I just don't think history supports his premise.

 

"Allegedly, it was a golf course boast by DC honcho Jack Liebowitz to Marvel Comics owner Martin Goodman, about sales of Schwartz-edited comics, that led to the creation of The Fantastic Four. Before long, sales were up all around, and superheroes were once again comics' dominant genre." Don Markstein's Toonopedia

 

 

Apart from being a team group I don't see how Justice League of America was that different from anything else that DC was putting out at the time.

 

The FF was a completely different matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted

This about the best and most amusing summation of the O'Neil and Adams GL-GA series I've ever heard:

 

Peter Parker deals with campus riots over housing for low-income students, goes through hard economic times and watches Harry Osborn take acid in Amazing Spider-Man, so DC sends a space cop with a magic wishing ring and a Robin Hood cosplayer on a trip across the country because one of them didn’t know racism existed and the other didn’t know drugs existed, and the result is one of DC’s most highly regarded stories.

 

 

Indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davenport

Davenport

Posted
Posted
It's an interesting article, but mainly wishful thinking based on a false premise. And it requires he retcon history. Like this:

 

"So in 1961, Kirby and Lee take a gamble and put out Fantastic Four #1, a new kind of superhero comic…"

 

Really? It's fairly well documented, both in live interviews and print, that the revamps, revitalization and innovation was coming out of DC Comics. They were consciously changing course under Julius Schwartz and Marvel was both watching their lead and throwing things at the wall in hopes something would stick.

 

L.A. Times 2004

"Inspired by the Flash's success, Schwartz began resurrecting and updating other DC superheroes, including Green Lantern, Hawkman, the Atom and the Justice Society, the superhero team that was renamed the Justice League of America.

 

The great success of the Justice League of America, which Schwartz considered his "greatest achievement," spurred rival Marvel Comics to follow suit with its own successful superhero team, the Fantastic Four.

 

"I have a standard gag," Schwartz said, "that the Justice League not only saved DC Comics, it saved Marvel Comics too."

 

And not taking anything away from Marvel, the chances they took or the stride they hit. But look at Fantastic Four # 1. He put up it against Action Comics to illustrate it's radical genius for the time. But look again, the masthead could easily be swapped to any of Marvel's other "monster" titles they were churning and it would be typical. No costumes, big monster, another strange tale. Not a giant risk-taking, but more of a poke-n-hope tryout concept.

 

Again, not to take anything away from Marvel. I just don't think history supports his premise.

 

"Allegedly, it was a golf course boast by DC honcho Jack Liebowitz to Marvel Comics owner Martin Goodman, about sales of Schwartz-edited comics, that led to the creation of The Fantastic Four. Before long, sales were up all around, and superheroes were once again comics' dominant genre." Don Markstein's Toonopedia

 

 

Apart from being a team group I don't see how Justice League of America was that different from anything else that DC was putting out at the time.

 

The FF was a completely different matter.

Justice League of America was different in that it sold, and sold big. FF became something special fairly quick, but it wasn't launched because Marvel was being so fiercely radical.

 

Marvel created magic, no way around it. But DC wanting to be Marvel for the past 50 years? Please. Schwartz knew exactly where he wanted DC to go (science fiction) with its heroes, took the lead and the industry followed his sales results. Ditto Jenette Kahn when she purposefully innovated later down the line.

 

It's a decent article, Marvel did wonders. I just think he has to ignore a lot of actual history to take readers where he wants to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing