New 52 General Conclusions and the Secret Origin of the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe

I'd been buying DC almost exclusively for the last five years or so but the reboot upset me enough that I stopped buying DC cold-turkey. I was planning to switch to Marvel but have yet to find a title that interests me the same way, say, LSH or Birds of Prey did. I didn't quit DC because of the story and character reboots – with the exception of one that I'll get to in a second. I quit because I was offended over the decision to end Action Comics and Detective Comics (and restarting the numbering to 1 is the same as ending the originals). Action and Detective represented the survival and longevity of print and of comics, and they turned their back on this history for the sake of a buck; this also effectively turned DC's back on the decades of history that you and others contributed to there. And then I heard of the decision to destroy the inspirational Oracle, robbing the disabled of a major role model; after reading on one forum a disabled person's "tearful" (you can't really cry on the Internet) plea for DC not to revert Oracle to Batgirl I decided that was it, I was through. I went from spending sometimes $40 at a shot on DCs to zero, and now I just buy the occasional independent and stuff like Farscape and Doctor Who (and I did buy the recent Star Trek/LSH crossover but that was an IDW comic, not a DC). I try to support my local comic ship by using the money I'm saving to buy things like Sideshow figurines and graphic novels, but it's not the same as it was when I followed about a dozen titles (most of which were cancelled in the reboot).

@KintounKal:

You forgot about the Astonishing Scar-Man! 😀

I believe Atomic Robo (part of Red 5 comics) can eventually pose a threat. They're getting more and more support every year, and quite frankly, they deserve it. It comes quite close to being a superhero comic book, and its the best one out there, hands down.

"Tom Brevoort was definitely talking about me and the Korvac sequel. I have all of his e-mails, including those quoted, and all of mine. He didn't quote the ones of his I found offputting."

Yeah, despite the redactions, it was obvious. As I said in that thread:

"It can't be just anybody in or out of comics. Tom refers to his "many accomplishments in the field", and says "you know as well as anyone that it's the job of the editor to scrutinize the work". He also mentions that it's just an outline, which fits with what Shooter revealed when he went public complaining about Tom criticizing his character work in his outline."

I did ask him to share the original email, but maybe he didn't want to do so without your permission, so unless you decide to share it, we'll probably never know.

Axel Alonso is above Tom Brevoort, as Editor-in-Chief.

What exactly is the current editorial structure at Marvel? From Wikipedia, Tom Brevoort is both "Executive Editor" (since 2007) and "Senior Vice President of Publishing" (since 2011) for "Marvel Comics." Joe Quesada became "Chief Creative Officer" of "Marvel Entertainment" in 2010 but wasn't replaced as "Editor-in-Chief" of "Marvel Comics" until January 2011, by the then-current "Vice President, Executive Editor" Axel Alonso. It sounds like Quesada moved up outside of the comics division but I'm not clear as to whether Brevoort or Alonso holds a more senior position within the comics division now.

Of course it'd be unrealistic to think some higher-up is going to snap his fingers, fire other people and put Jim in charge when he hasn't been working at Marvel in 20 years. But since even the current Marvel fans who are aware of who Jim is seem to regard his work positively, I think any new work he did for Marvel would get a good reception from the readers.

Maybe it could be an "Untold Tales" kind of series that could feature stories from the past of a rotating roster of characters. That could provide a subtle excuse to use a somewhat more "vintage"-looking style. It wouldn't have to interfere with current continuity. I'd frankly not want to have to worry about a series Jim was writing getting pulled into a mega-crossover that might require me to follow what's going on in other titles.

Some more quotes I found on Jim. First one: "Jim Shooter may have ruled with an iron fist, but he made sure that the entire M.U. 'fit' together and that sloppy confusing crap like this did not happen." And this next one from 2008 is a long one that sums up why Jim was responsible for "first rate product" at Marvel that he says they haven't had since at least the '90s.

But then I run across a post bashing Chris Claremont's '80s X-Men comics because of "the need he seem to have to put as many words into one issue as possible." Then there's this opposing point-of-view from an Amazon review of Secret Wars. "Was it as well done as most modern comics? Absolutely not — comics have come a long way in the last 25 years, the writing, art, coloring, pacing, fight choreographay, intensity, level of sophistication, and production values are all dramatically better now — but this was still a fun read. I read both this and the latest Green Lantern collection this weekend (Green Lantern Secret Origin,) and that just highlighted how far comics have come in the last twenty five years (and how much better they are now on so many levels,) but that didn't stop me from enjoying this as well." I believe that noise is the collective readership of this blog's heads banging on the desk in unison. I guess there is a fanbase for modern comics, just much smaller than the one for '80s comics.

Of course, that doesn't entirely contradict what someone quotes Jim as saying in Wizard in 2008. "The art in comics is generally better than ever, the writing is often clever and glib, but in spite of that, Far too many comics are utterly UNREADABLE. Even HARDCORE FANS find many comics daunting to follow! The craft of comics storytelling is all but LOST. A who's who of industry bigshots have PRIVATELY AGREED with me when we've discussed exactly this subject, but it's a tough problem to fix, given the often HUGE EGOS of the CREATORS, general creative ANARCHY and LACK OF TRAINED EDITORIAL PEOPLE." Most of us "old school" types can probably agree there is still good work in the details of comics, but the companies have lost sight of the big picture.

The current fanboys do seem to love the fact that Jim supposedly cancelled the JLA/Avengers crossover because DC insisted that Superman beat Thor and Jim wasn't having ANY of that. If I recall Jim's blog correctly, that wasn't the problem at all, but this seems to be a win for Jim so maybe we should let the legend stick. 😉

Jim, this guy wrote a very nice comment about your work in a thread where he was posting Marvel fan-fiction. He wanted you to read his stuff. It looks like he has 60 posts in that thread with various fan-fiction mixed in (the Marvel forums put posts in reverse order, so the oldest post is on the last page).

This is kind of a strange blog post by Tom Brevoort from 2007 where he says he didn't like mid-'80s Marvel at the time and quit reading all of the books. Then he went back years later and thought they were "entertaining as hell" and better than some later issues. That I agree with, but I can't imagine how he could have disliked the Black Cat and the black costume at the time!

I also found a blog post from Tom in 2009 in which he posted an e-mail that he sent to an "unnamed creator" that some speculated was you, Jim, in regards to the Korvac sequel. No real bombshells there though.

On a side note, I read about a Colossus/Kitty Pryde controversy that I wasn't aware of but is chronicled on Wikipedia. Is it true, Jim, that you disapproved of their relationship because of the age difference and set out to put an end to it in Secret Wars?

Fair nuff. I guess one man's reasonable feedback can be another man's lack of respect; you've mentioned times when you encountered that situation on the other side of the editorial table.

"I don't know why Tom felt he had to treat me like a rookie, even admonishing me to introduce the characters. Me! I learned to introduce characters before Tom could spell his name. Whether he likes my writing or not, I would think that anyone who had read any of it could see that I know the basics."

I recall Tom at the time saying you blew your top at what he characterized as reasonable editorial feedback in your emails with him, and saying something to the effect of "That's not how it works at Marvel, and that's not even how it worked when Jim was in charge."

Jim,

Have you ever thought of putting a book or 6 together and publishing them through Image comics, where you could have complete control of the work?

I think the clarity of storytelling your books bring (when you're overseeing them) is unequaled today and that readers would support the work.

Tom

Jim, thanks for the explanation. There's no need to go any further into detail if it's going to invite any trouble for you. As a fan of your Valiant universe it's difficult to see you come so close to continuing what you started there yet remaining so far time after time. First Unity 2000, then VEI and now the end of Dark Horse's Gold Key titles. Part of me hopes VEI will get their act together or get new people in charge and make you the offer you deserve, but that doesn't sound likely. I'll definitely continue buying whatever other comic projects you work on.

David J., I read the web comic you linked to. It's definitely a nice presentation. What I like about their design the most is that they sized the pages to fit the standard monitor size (1024 x 768 I think). So when I hit the full screen button on my laptop, each page they did just about fills my screen perfectly. I'm not sure why they went double high on pages like this though. I think they should stick to the same size "page" consistently just like a real comic book has to. It also makes for smoother reading when I can click through to each new page and not have to scroll down.

The visual "reveal" on this page and the next of just where their location is was the best storytelling moment they had. This page, however, represents an experimental layout that failed for me. I can't understand what's going on and have to skip this page. But then over on this page they have a creative layout with non-standard panel borders that works splendidly. I can't think of a better way to show the character's movement in that scene. On the next page, though, we could have done with half the amount of panels to show the character's landing. Her landing on the net also needed to show her figure, not just the speed lines. I couldn't tell what was happening in that panel until I went back to look at it 10 minutes later to write this review. The reveal on the next page is very reminiscent of a scene from Back to the Future II, which just reminds me of how brilliant a director Robert Zemeckis can be.

Overall, the art and coloring is clean, crisp and dynamic and the layouts are generally effective. I think the artist needs to work on his facial likenesses more. Some of the characters look like entirely different people from panel to panel and their appearances shift from realistic to cartoony in an uncomfortable way.

Storywise, I don't think they're giving me enough dialogue and character to form a good introduction. What dialogue that's there is pretty generic and the main character's constant smiling doesn't add to the tension. We needed more "acting" like the last panel on this page, which is an effective moment.

In general I think the more fantasy-oriented a story's setting is, the harder the writer needs to work to convince me that the characters are real, thinking, feeling human beings. There's no other way to relate to a story like this other than through the characters. If I don't have that then I'm likely to remain detached from the story and laugh at the concepts in ways the writer didn't intend.

In the '90s, Marvel got the messaged garbled. What with Thunderstrike, Scarlet Spider, Fantastic Force and USAgent, they thought the mandate was to Reproduce the characters.

Fairy Kitsch said…

But we are going through a major paradigm shift. We're moving from the printed page to digital content.

Here's a great example of what CAN be achieved by two solid professionals. Nah, let's rephrase that… This is a hugely enjoyable romp with simply gorgeous art by Rick Burchett.
http://www.ineffableaether.com/2011/07/11/ch01s01-2/
Enjoy.
David J.

Jim, I am sorry Tom Brevoort spoiled the party for you and the rest of us. I clash with him all the time, and am actually in an online fight with him now. He does condescend, not only to old school creators, but to customers. He thinks it's acceptable for him to say Marvel is a business, and profit is the #1 priority, but it's not okay for our reply to be that since that's the way it is, which is fair enough, then we are customers, and better be treated with respect at all times, regardless if we say something to him in a tone that isn't friendly. We're not friends, it's a business/customer relationship. The customer is always right in such relationships, but he expects us to act like friends while himself and Marvel act like a business, and one that we owe them an entitlement! lol

He's had the same issues with John Byrne the first and only time he ever worked with him, where he replaced Byrne's original editor on his 2nd Hulk run and shortly thereafter, fired Byrne. Jim Starlin left Marvel because of Brevoort. He's clashed online with Peter David and Bob Layton because of belittling comments. I don't get it with him sometimes. He grew up in an age when all of you should have been his comic creator heroes, but he doesn't seem to get along with or speak respectfully to enough of you that it raises an eyebrow. He never admits anything wrong he does, and defends unprofessional behavior from other editors and creators when they flat out insult a reader, so it has to make one question some things about his views on professional conduct. Even his professional conduct toward DC has closed that door to him should Marvel ever can him.

I don't dislike him, but he frustrates me. He needs to do some self inventory, which we all need to do from time to time. A change would do him a lot of good!

ja-

Okay then, I'm glad we cleared that up…(I think).

And, it looks like Jim isn't in immediate danger of dying of starvation, and exposure, and possibly predation by hungry mountain lions…

But, I gotta wonder how his irons in the fire will pan out.
This will be most interesting.

Jim,

I have to second Matt's praise of "American Vampire". It's been going for about a year or so and it's pretty good (It's a Vertigo title).
While I'm at it, Red 5's "Atomic Robo" is a good title too (more humor oriented but entertaining in its own way).

JayJay,

I'll be happy to read it, thank you!

But, has Jim posted about the Korvac sequel experience in detail yet? Or the Legion of Superheroes 2008 nonsense?

If not, I know everyone would be interested in reading about it.

Jim,

I'm sorry that you've not been employed, let alone for this amount of time.

The big unfairness about that is that editors will allow any artist with any kind of a name to do pretty much whatever it is they wish to do, because they are perceived to have some sort of 'artistic gravitas'. So they are allowed, even encouraged to do what they wish, the way they wish it. Same with some of the writers, too.

But your status in the industry seems to bristle certain people right out of the gate, as if you're some sort of loose cannon they have to reign in. If you're ever hired, it seems as if people think they – for whatever reason – should run roughshod over you. To 'tame' you, for lack of a better way to say it.

I just did a search for 'Korvac' on your site, and I see that you've eluded to the failed Korvac sequel, but I don't see where you've posted about the full story. I hope you do one day. I'm still looking for the post about your experience with the Legion of Superheroes in 2008.

I do believe you'd be just as bold to speak your mind. It just that as you have, I had a vicarious butt-clenching, knowing that if I ever did anything like that, I'd never get anymore work, ever again.

Mike Richardson is a good man. It sucks that the Gold Key books didn't happen as everybody had hoped they would.

I hope your irons in the fire work out. I especially hope that someone with some serious money recruits you to get a new company going.

Hang in there, Jim. All my good thoughts for you and your endeavors.

And by the way: someone with Jim Shooter's savvy, skill and talent should never be enemployed! Herman Cain to the contrary!

Two things of note.

1) Neal Adams claimed in a CerebusTV interview that he is poised to relaunch his Continuity titles with a company. Not sure if it's going to be a new company or one which already exists. I know you had a short lived stint working at Continuity. Any chance you could mesh your style of writing with Neal's "no boundaries" style of art and work for him again? I know Josh Adams needs a gig and he's got pretty decent art. Seems like a good opportunity to collaborate on something reminiscent of comics in their better days.

2) Any chance of a teaser promote to promote or set the stage for what you will be talking about at NYCC. Some of us (ME!) are very unlikely to trek thousands of miles to listen to your panel.

That all sounds great, JayJay – I look forward to reading it. Keep us posted!

Ja-
"I don't think you did that thinking you were doing anything wrong".

Then simmer down, yikes.

"I was in no way being disrespectful to Jim with my above questions, even though Diacanu has now made it seem that way".

I don't think so, the direction I went is the direction I went, and it's all on my goofy head.
I even mocked myself for it.
I'm not a big "people skills", person, I copped to that, and geez, I can't even cushion it by copping to it, you're still cheezed, to use your word.

I do still write, thanks for asking! I've actually had a few things go pretty well. A while I wrote a screen treatment that had some interest from a couple of places and I wrote the back story for a video game that has not come out yet. I also have a couple of projects that I plan to self publish digitally. I read a lot of independent writers' work on ibooks and kindle and I wanted to try that for myself. I also have written a comic book story for a horror anthology and I'm in the process of drawing it. The big guy helps me out a lot with his editing expertise. Jim, that is. ; )

But we are going through a major paradigm shift. We're moving from the printed page to digital content.

I suspect DC and Marvel get "New Readers" all the time. But they don't touch the physical comics. Instead they get their copies by hitting the latest torrent. Download every release that week all in one bundle. While the main attraction is that it costs the reader nothing, another factor is that it's instant and convenient.

But there's a bigger change on the creation side. The Internet has made it so easy to self-publish that anyone can do it. That's such a liberating concept: Anyone Can Make Comics. If anyone can make a comic, why bother reading stuff from the Big Two? If anyone can make a comic, why not me? Not just liberating but also empowering.

A new player would have to fully embrace the digital aspect: new content regularly, able to read it on any device, back up purchases in the cloud. Trickier to do would be to capitalize on the Anyone Can Make Comics aspect. You'd probably have to take a community approach: supporting and encouraging newcomers, holding discussions that everyone can be involved in. Something where you'd nurture your readers because they might become your creators.

I don't think DC or Marvel have a chance.

JediJones-
Geez, that's too much stuff!
Ahh, I'm effin with ya!
😉

I certainly hope the rumors of Jim's impending death that Diacanu is attempting to start are greatly exaggerated!

I just compiled a list of links of Jim's trade paperbacks available on Amazon. I inserted Jim's affiliate link code so he should get full referral fees if you buy through these links.

Jim, Amazon also has this bibliography page with a form for you to make updates to it. It's missing most of your titles so you might want to update it and then you can link to it here. It might also be worth posting direct graphic links here to the pre-orders for the new Secret Wars I and II trade paperbacks.

Marvel Avengers: The Korvac Saga (Marvel Premiere Classic) (Collects Avengers #167-168, #170-177)

Marvel Secret Wars

Marvel Secret Wars II

Marvel Secret Wars Omnibus (Collects Secret Wars #1-12, Thor #383, She-Hulk #10)

Marvel Secret Wars Omnibus Alex Ross Variant Cover (Collects Secret Wars #1-12, Thor #383, She-Hulk #10)

Marvel 44 Years of the Fantastic Four DVD-ROM Collector's Edition (Collects #1-519, Annual #1-32, with ALL comic pages including all Bullpen Bulletins written by Jim)

Marvel New Universe Star Brand Classic – Volume 1 (v. 1) (Collects #1-7)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 5 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Adventure Comics #340-349)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 6 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Adventure Comics #350-358)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 7 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Adventure Comics #359-367, Jimmy Olsen #106)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 8 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Adventure Comics #368-376, Superboy #147)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 9 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Adventure Comics #377-380, Action Comics #378-387, #389-392)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 11 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Superboy #203-212)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes Archives, Vol. 12 (DC Archive Editions) (Collects stories from Superboy #213-223, Karate Kid #1)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes: Enemy Rising (Collects Vol. 4 #37-44)

DC Legion of Super-Heroes: Enemy Manifest (Collects Vol. 4 #45-50)

Jim, I looked again at the Batman cover and played along with you, looking for clues, and I think we can also see Two-Face and Killer Croc – not sure who the bald-headed guy is (Penguin?), can't make out the guy holding Batman's leg, and it looks like there's a girl squeezed in there with a ponytail?

I was very angry when I finally realized the Flash relaunch I had been trying to make sense of was nothing more than a lead-up to this New 52 nonsense, and I immediately canceled all my DC titles –

However, as to the lack of continuity, there is something in DC history which actually justifies it – I am referring to the Second Kingdom story, the sequel to Kingdom Come. It concluded with an introduction to the theory of hypertime, which means, in an infinite universe with infinite possibilities, it is possible for contradictory lifelines to co-exist (along with Superman's wink, which I've always taken to mean, come on, these are just stories), so along the lines of that theory we can have one book telling the story of nightwing and another telling the story of batman and his many robins – yeesh!

Based on that, I bought Batgirl # 1 and will probably get # 2, but overall I still don't like what they've done. I got JLA # 1 because a year ago I would have snapped it up without question, but I'm not going to buy # 2. (Chief Creative Officer? oh please) Yesterday I picked up LSH # 1, undecided about # 2.

I saw O.M.A.C., with Keith Giffen in charge, and I said, Wow! I've always been a Kirby fan! And I wasn't disappointed. I also thoroughly enjoyed # 2, and can't wait for # 3. It will probably be one of the first books canceled. Or maybe not, since DiDio is writing it. I don't know, I was trying to tell Jim that he should check this one out in his search to find one he likes, but the more I typed the more it seemed like I was giving him reasons to stay away . . .

oh well, make mine marvel

No..I'm..probably wrong.

Jim, since you like Scott Snyder's writing, have you tried American Vampire? The first five issues have back-up stories by Stephen King, to boot.

I'm curious to see what you think of Geoff Johns and Jim Lee's Justice League since it's the flagship book of the launch. Or OMAC by Dan Didio and Keith Giffen. I figure you'll like George Perez's Superman, but maybe you could review one of the newer artists-turned-writers with Flash, Detective Comics, or Batman: The Dark Knight. You of course have history with the Legion of Superheroes, and it'd be interesting to hear what you think of Paul Levitz's return. And given your incisive art critiques, I'd pay money to hear your review of Hawk and Dove.

DC's relaunch will fall apart like all Marvel's 1997 relaunch fell apart in 2001. Once the acclaimed writers finish thir runs on the surviving titles and a less experinced secondary team of writers and artists take over, the books will crash and burn, forcing yet another series of reboots because writers and editors get no guidance from editorial that is either to inexperienced or incompetent to help them.

I find it crazy that over the past 10 years we've seen FOUR new #1 issues for some books like Iron Man, Daredevil, Hulk, Avengers, Wonder Woman and Flash. It's just lazy editing IMO. Instead of toughing out a rough period on a title, editiors just cancel and start over. I remember when publishers would take the time to do some fill-ins until they could find a new creative team that was a good fit for the title. Those fill in issues allowed old readers to keep reading the series and allowed new readers to come in and get started.

In today's world of cancellations and reboots I don't think we'd have an All-New-All different X-men, Micheline/Layton Iron Man, Frank Miller's Daredevil or Todd McFarlane's Spider-Man. Those guys would never get a chance to prove themselves in today's market where acclaimed artists and writers always get top priortity and secondary teams get no support.

Personally I feel Marvel and DC and both need strong leadership in the editorial department to get the ship right. There's nothing wrong with the characters, but thre's no one at the helm with the vision to get writers and artists focused in the right direction, and create content that appeals to a larger audience of readers.

As long as there are readers to keep the sales at the minimums, there will be no need for the industry to change. I've written about this in depth
:http://shawnsjames.blogspot.com/2011/08/sad-state-of-comic-book-fan.html and yeah, the analogy of Lucy with the football is the vicious cycle comic fans endure instead of walking away and forcing the change the industry desperately needs.

We don't need a new 52. DC just needs one good editor to lead the bullpen.

The "New 52" is an exact rehash of the post-Crisis (COIE)era.

Some books restart continuity.
Some books continue continuity.

I'm just as confused right now as I was in 1987. Superman and Wonder Woman restarted completely with no reference to the past. But Batman's continuity all still counted. Worse, the new Justice League and Flash titles featured new characters but stood on the shoulders of the Silver Age continuity–you could not separate the new from the old. (What a headache that the old JLofA stories counted for Green Lantern and Green Arrow, but didn't for Supes, WW.)

The "New 52" reads as if all the old continuity still counts. So I scratch my head asking "why bother?"

The idea that all backstory is 5 years old was tried back with Zero Hour. And it didn't work.

These issues also read like it's another rehash of One Year Later. We've jumped to the middle of a future story and we're waiting for the gaps to eventually be filled in.

It was a yawner then, it's a yawner now.

DC's biggest failure is to admit the problem. They refuse to admit that there's nothing wrong with DC's characters. The problem is the TALENT. For my money, only Geoff Johns understands the characters enough to make them sell. Everybody else seems to need radical changes to garner interest–and that just means they are the WRONG people for the job.

Doh! I stand corrected about the Robin thing. Sorry Jim and readers. I still say the consistancy and quality of books needs to step up though…

OHOTMU Book of the Dead and Inactive II: Marvel Boy to Zuras. <- I cannot even begin to tell how many hours I poured over this issue as a kid, reading and then rewriting my own stories and scribbling my own drawings. I still have it. The cover is tattered and barely hanging on.

Having 4 or 5 former Robins that even longtime readers can't keep track of in a brand new #1 issue sure doesn't sound like an entry point to me.

They probably had the idea of rebooting Superman for a while. Due to the Siegel/Shuster lawsuit, they're at risk of losing the rights to many aspects of Superman's origin. Editing them out of the story now might reduce their "value" and make it easier for them to make a settlement. They can say we don't need the original origin anymore, so you may as well let us have it for cheap, since it'll be worthless to anyone else.

As for why nothing else seems planned out, it's probably WB's fault. It sounds like they dictated that this reboot had to happen to tie into a digital comics push and/or the "Year of the Green Lantern." Of course that timing would have made more sense if the GL movie was a big hit, which it wasn't, but I think they set this in motion before they knew that. In retrospect, it would have made more sense to wait until next year's Batman movie and plan things out better.

There's also a sense of DC being unwilling to take risks and thus making a compromised product that won't please any part of the audience. They're afraid to alienate the old readers by wiping out all the continuity, so they're leaving it vague, not starting at the beginning and saying a bunch of the backstory still exists in some form.

By rushing out all 52 titles in the first month, they seem to have no faith the popularity will last very long. The confident approach would be to release 1 or 2 new titles a week and believe they're good enough that your readers will stick around for a year to see the universe take shape.

They might have been afraid to go with origin stories because, at the average decompressed pace, they might not have been able to get the superheroes into their traditional costumes for the first few issues. There are ways around that though, like starting the hero in the middle of his first adventure but quickly moving into a flashback of how he got there.

If Marvel did this right, they would definitely outsell DC, thanks to the natural advantage their characters already have. They would need to start all the titles at the very beginning and make some promises, like no more throwing out of established continuity, no more retcons (at least not after a year's time or by anyone other than the writer of the original story), no more renumbering. In fact I'd abandon numbering altogether. If month and year is good enough for Time magazine, it's good enough for comics.

End all the current series with a bang, deaths or other major events, because you rarely get the chance to do that. End the whole world for that matter. Then introduce only 1 or 2 titles a week, which should ensure that many people try every one, and stop at 24 ongoing titles. Limited series and one-shots are options after that. Bring the characters "back-to-basics," no change for the sake of change. Even Hollywood has stopped mucking up the basics of comic characters when brought to film. If you expect them to be faithful to your source material, shouldn't you be? I never understood the Ultimate universe…let's pre-empt bad Hollywood movie adaptations and bastardize our characters with arbitrary changes ourselves before Hollywood gets the chance?

It seems like independent competition for DC and Marvel has a tough road to hoe. All the people who are sick of DC and Marvel have left and probably wouldn't hear about a new universe, unless the startup had a big marketing budget. The comic fans who remain are loyal DC/Marvel fanboys who probably have their budgets maxed out on the massive amount of titles both companies put out.

The only pathway I'd be confident in for a startup would be to publish on the internet and try to get interest going through viral marketing. Print publication can certainly be added on later if online popularity is big enough to justify it.

I love that a group of die hard comic book fans can come together to discuss the DC Universe reboot and even we can't keep all the different Robins straight and how they fit into the now condensed DC Universe.

If we can't understand how it's working what hope do casual/new readers have? I think DC may have overplayed their hand in the dumbing down of DC's history.

DC's biggest mistake with this relaunch was doing it with 52 new titles all at once. It's just too much for most people to process.

They should have started with about 10 core books with a strong and consistent editorial vision. The continuity of all these titles should have been very tightly related and melded into a recognizable and cohesive fictional universe.

For example they could have started with something like….
1. Action Comics
2. Detective Comics
3. Superman
4. Batman
5. Wonder Woman
6. Green Lantern
7. Flash
8. Justice League
9. Nightwing
10. Teen Titans

Then once these books had a chance to gain an audience, they could then start expanding the universe to include more titles.

Also, if they were going to commit to reinventing Superman so dramatically they should have done the same with Batman and the other major characters as well. This should have felt like the re-birth of the entire DCU. Something for new and old fans to get excited about and really be curious to check out.

Unfortunately that is not the case at all. It seems instead that DC is trying to have it's cake and eat it too. It's like they said with Superman… "This is a total reboot. Check it out! We've got Superboy wearing blue jeans and a cape!! The DC Universe is changing, we're reinventing our characters for a new generation and taking everything in an exciting new direction. Come along for the ride."

But with Batman they're saying… "Don't worry, old fans nothing has changed at all. This is the same old DC you've been reading forever. Look here are all four of the Robins you know and love, (that have impossibly existed for only 5 years). So stick around for more of the same old, same old."

It's a very schizophrenic message.

DC is calling it a "soft reboot", but I call it an ill-planned, disjointed mess with no real direction.

Joseph Tages-

The only DC character allowed to think/act that way was Ambush Bug, and because he was a comedy/satire character.

If they were going to fully throw continuity out the window, I would have gone with the more obvious choice: "I'm Batman, I've been around since FDR was president. I was around for Elvis, the Beatles, disco, break dancing, and rap. It's worked for Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny so deal with it. I'm a fictional character just like them and I can act contemporary in ANY era." Been waiting for this approach for ages now.

Earth-2 is the best solution for the generation gap there is between Golden Age and Silver Age characters. Simply working with a JSA without 2nd World War is stupid.
In fact, I'd even go a bit further and have a brand new Earth with new DC from scratch and leave the past as another Earth.

Jim, great stuff! An old friend of mine who runs a comics shop relates the anecdote that OHOTMU and Who's Who marked the beginning of the emerging subset of his clientele that doesn't buy comics – instead, they buy books about comics.

I honestly want to understand the clusterfu– that is DC's new 52. I really and truly do. But the Batman books are the prime example of why I do not.
As has been mentioned, Bruce has only been Batman for like 5 years. In that time he has had four Robins, presumably in the same order as the original comics.
I can buy that to some degree. Maybe he feels that a year or so in the field is adequate training to set out on their own. Maybe they cannot take more than a year with him. Either way, it is plausible. I guess.
The first thing I cannot wrap my mind around is why Jason Todd looks and acts OLDER than Dick Grayson. I buy his rough character because it differentiates him from Dick, and seems appropriate seeing as he is the "middle child."
The second thing I cannot wrap my mind around is where Bruce is finding these kids in such short order? In the original universe, a lot of time passes between each adoption so it is a little more plausible. But adopting three and siring another so close in age?! Or was Bruce picking up these kids long before he was donning the cowl? Either way, it's creepy – especially because they look fairly similar to each other. There is a name for people that have a knack for that: serial killers. And is he consciously creating an army of underage soldiers for a larger purpose?
Bruce's death and return, as well as Dick's assumption of the Batman role SHOULD NEVER have been incorporated into this universe. Bruce's return to the old DC universe would have been a strong ending note as a symbol of hope. Here it is pointless and meaningless.
And that's just Batman, folks. I don't even know where to begin with the rest of the universe. Suffice it to say that my second favorite hero (GL – all of them) no longer holds any interest…

That issue of S&LSH was the first one I ever bought. I enjoyed both stories. Still do, really. The Cockrum/Grell/Sherman-drawn era of the Legion is still my favorite.

Thanks for correcting my brain freeze, Sara! The new52 does that to a person…

Forgot to mention that sometimes starting in the middle works.

One of the first Legion stories I read was your "Mordru the Merciless." The story spends 3.5 pages on Mordru's history with the Legion. I was blissfully unaware that this was Mordru's first appearance and the referenced story did not exist…

A correction is in order.Greygor & Techberry mention the scene from Batman with the 3 Robins. Jason Todd is not among them. It's Damien, Dick Grayson, and Tim Drake.

And actually, the newDCU contains 4 "robins" – Tim Drake is now the Red Hood, but apparently his stint as Robin still exists.

So in 5 years, Batman has had 4 Robins, was gone for a year and replaced by Dick Grayson, who had a previous career as Nightwing that he now returns to.

Very busy 5 years!