(xxpost)
― Tuomas, Sunday, 10 February 2013 21:21 (thirteen years ago)
the main reason i've been thinking about fables lately is this new jack the giant killer movie bryan singer is releasing was basically predicted in that book
― it was very clear that it's a sarcastic song (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 10 February 2013 21:50 (thirteen years ago)
If "Jack Of Fables" had been the original/only series I'd give it the nod for sure, but "FABLES" isn't a character, and the entire point of its premise is that the characters aren't new.
All possible admiration and respect to Willingham for creating the premise / world / interpretations that have run so long and had so many spin-offs! But it was absolutely sold on the fact that it's very, very old characters in a new milieu.
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Sunday, 10 February 2013 22:00 (thirteen years ago)
Meet the Fables
― mh, Sunday, 10 February 2013 22:11 (thirteen years ago)
The premise of the series was "fairytale characters in a modern setting", sure, but I'd still call them new characters, at least in the context of talking about old/new characters in comics. Let me illustrate this with an example: when people buy a Batman comic, they generally expect to read about a character they're familiar with from other comics/movies/tv series. So the premise the comics are sold on is "the same character in new adventures". (Elseworlds and other reinterpretations/deconstructions are different thing, but I'm talking about the majority of Batman comics here.) But with most Fables characters, their defining traits from folklore are rather minimal, and the Batman type of familiarity isn't really a selling point. I doubt many readers picked up an issue Fables because they wanted to see see good old Big Bad Wolf from the Red Riding Hood fairy tale in new adventures. No, one of the main points of the whole series was to see what kind of new, interesting characters the writer was able to create using names from folklore as starting points.
(xpost)
― Tuomas, Sunday, 10 February 2013 22:28 (thirteen years ago)
Fables isn't a character
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Sunday, 10 February 2013 22:58 (thirteen years ago)
(PS: turns out the 1993 Static Shock ran 45 issues)
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Sunday, 10 February 2013 23:00 (thirteen years ago)
"are there any others? And even those started in the early 80s."
Thunderbolts through a couple stop/reboots went over 100 issues, albeit it is more like Suicide Squad in that it used existing villians.
― earlnash, Monday, 11 February 2013 03:16 (thirteen years ago)
Static also starred in an animated series that lasted for four seasons
― Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Monday, 11 February 2013 05:03 (thirteen years ago)
Much as I dislike Fables, I'd agree that if Lucifer counts as original then they should too - the one quibble is that I thought the point of Fables is that they are the characters that the original stories happened to.
Nonetheless, FABLES IS NOT A CHARACTER
Curious about how non-Big Two comics fare - are they still making Spawn / Savage Dragon comics?
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 11 February 2013 08:40 (thirteen years ago)
I don't get this "Fables is not a character" point..? You think new characters count only if they have a solo title, and titles with multiple protagonists shouldn't be counted, even if said protagonists are new characters?
the one quibble is that I thought the point of Fables is that they are the characters that the original stories happened to.
In some sense, yeah, but more often than not the original stories are said to be twisted versions of what "really" happened.
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 09:31 (thirteen years ago)
And yeah, they're still making Savage Dragon and Spawn. In fact, I think Savage Dragon might be the second-longest running (after Cerebus) American comic book by a single author.
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 09:37 (thirteen years ago)
No, sorry, I was wrong! I think Usagi Yojimbo beats SD to the second place.
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 09:49 (thirteen years ago)
I'm going to disagree on the Sandman - early on (maybe The Doll's House?) Brute & Glob appear and are introduced as being created by Morpheus. While not suggesting Morpheus and Hector Hall are exactly the same character, they are both aspects of whatever it is 'makes' Sandmen i.e. according to Gaiman, Hector Hall was a prior version of Morpheus.
Also you have to bear in mind that Gaiman's original proposal was to revive the Simon & Kirby series but Roy Thomas got priority on some characters for Infinity Inc so it's completely what was in his thoughts.
In terms of non-Big Two - surely Hellboy is the elephant in the room?
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Monday, 11 February 2013 10:35 (thirteen years ago)
Yes, I think if we're looking at "the longest-lasting lead character since the 70s", then being an actual lead character is not incidental to the enquiry.
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 11 February 2013 10:46 (thirteen years ago)
crucially, this is not a comic book
the point under discussion is "longest-lasting lead character since the 70s." There is no character in Fables called, say, Dave Fables who - say - is the protagonist of the stories.
While not suggesting Morpheus and Hector Hall are exactly the same character, they are both aspects of whatever it is 'makes' Sandmen i.e. according to Gaiman, Hector Hall was a prior version of Morpheus.
Hector Hall is shown as being a completely separate character and a far more minor one in the story than Doctor Destiny, Matthew Cable, J'onn J'onnz or Hector Hall's widow.
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 10:57 (thirteen years ago)
Yeah, I think that's a retcon in that they are former servants of Morpheus, but their wacky hijinks while he was away was what we were seeing previously.
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 11 February 2013 11:07 (thirteen years ago)
Fair enough, it's been years since I read it.
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Monday, 11 February 2013 11:09 (thirteen years ago)
Fair enough, but I didn't take this discussion to be so specific, I thought it was more about the Big Two failing to create new characters with lasting power, regardless of whether they are in a solo or multiple-protagonist book. I mean, The Sandman is pretty much a ensemble book too, even if it was named after one character; Morpheus is a minor/supporting character in three of the longer story arcs and most of the short stories, and the series made Death almost as popular as the Dream.
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 11:58 (thirteen years ago)
it was more about the Big Two failing to create new characters with lasting power, regardless of whether they are in a solo or multiple-protagonist book
Amanda Waller
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:05 (thirteen years ago)
Chas
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:06 (thirteen years ago)
Tim Drake
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:07 (thirteen years ago)
Specifically, the retcon was Brute and Glob were Morpheus's former servants, and that they manipulated two of the previous Sandmen (who Morpheus knew nothing about), Garret Sanford and Hector Hall, into thinking they were the rulers of a place called Dream Dimension. When Hector Hall meets Morpheus and says he's "The Sandman", Morpheus starts laughing, implying Hall has nothing to do with the "real" Sandman.
However, what Aldo might've been thinking of was the bit in the first Sandman arc, where it's said Wesley Dodds (the original Golden Age Sandman) has an aspect of Morpheus in him, or something like that (I think this was later confirmed in Sandman Mystery Theatre?). So Wesley Dodds is the only superhero Sandman who's an explicit predecessor (or successor, if we follow DC's internal chronology) to Gaiman's Sandman.
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:10 (thirteen years ago)
Tim Drake might actually be a good example of a successful new lead character? He did star in his own book for more than 200 issues, though the fact that he's also a legacy character kind muddles the definition of "new".
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:14 (thirteen years ago)
Oracle kinda was, till recently.
― Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:17 (thirteen years ago)
Barbara Gordon was created in 1960s, though. Though I guess you could almost call Oracle a new character, considering how thoroughly Ostrander et al reconstructed her. (And I'd say it's one of the best reconstructions in superhero comics history, especially considering the "Women in Refrigerators" type of ending Moore gave to her previous career.)
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:22 (thirteen years ago)
Yeah, I was going to suggest Nightwing as well - I get the impression there's even less Batman in his book than in Robin's?
I know I'm going to regret this, but how is Wesley Dodds a successor?
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:34 (thirteen years ago)
'cos Dream is zillions of years old and Dodds is from 1938
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:35 (thirteen years ago)
Nightwang feels much less of a break from the previous character than Oracle btw, eg he literally goes upstairs and changes his pants then comes down and says "yo I'm Nightwing now but I still have the same house and girlfriend and team and I'm still yr leader, lets go"
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:37 (thirteen years ago)
(ok with a tiny pause to say "why is Joseph wearing that uniform", as if gay Arabian disco pirate is a large-scale regulated force)
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Monday, 11 February 2013 12:39 (thirteen years ago)
Hahaha!
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:48 (thirteen years ago)
I though the start of his book coincided with his move to Bludhaven, the city in Gotham's shadow that is much tougher and more dangerous but had mysteriously never been mentioned in the previous 50 years?
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:58 (thirteen years ago)
Seriously though, Nightwing's own new costume in that issue is one of the best examples of superhero artists not exactly being on the cutting edge when it comes to sartorial trends. That collar thing looks like it's from 1977, not 1984:
http://www.comicsrecommended.com/images/dc/talesoftheteentitans_044_nightwing.jpg
― Tuomas, Monday, 11 February 2013 12:59 (thirteen years ago)
Also the area above his crotch looks like a pair of eyes doing "confused face"
― Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 11 February 2013 15:50 (thirteen years ago)
ARE YOU PEOPLE READY?
― Welcome to my world of proses (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 11 February 2013 16:59 (thirteen years ago)
Maggie and hopey, duh.
― it was very clear that it's a sarcastic song (forksclovetofu), Monday, 11 February 2013 17:18 (thirteen years ago)
So all the writers are leaving their Green Lanternverse titles; new writers not announced. Shuffling the deck chairs or a chance for a new vision for the rings?
― EZ Snappin, Tuesday, 12 February 2013 02:22 (thirteen years ago)
Seems weird to sabotage one of your bestselling comics when everything else is tanking. Or not, because it's DC.
― Chuck_Tatum, Tuesday, 12 February 2013 10:21 (thirteen years ago)
Hmm. You have to remember that none of the GL mythology was rebooted into the New 52 because Geoff Johns couldn't give up his Action Playset. Any new writer with a greater attention span than him will undoubtedly jettison masses of that shit and so it probably makes more sense to get rid of the people that have been writing inside his idiom as well, so clearing the decks and having a proper New 52 reboot makes a lot of sense from one angle.
Me? I'd go back to the beginning of the Silver Age and have Hal vs Qward, especially since GMoz's Action has refocused on anti-universes.
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Tuesday, 12 February 2013 11:23 (thirteen years ago)
They have kinda been the only really overperforming part of the dcnu. I can't see Green Lantern supporting four books without the hook of Johns' worldbuilding. While I could easily see quite a lot of people writing a best-selling justice league or two. Don't know, their plan might be for more worldbuilding and books in the line (such as aquaman, katana and vibe), but it does seem pretty stupid to bet on so massively a month before they know whether jla and co will work at all. But hey, it's the dcnu.
― Frederik B, Tuesday, 12 February 2013 13:14 (thirteen years ago)
http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2013/02/the-savaged-hawkman-what-latest-dc-casualty-says-about-new-52/
― ( ͡° ͜ʖ͡°) (sic), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 04:33 (thirteen years ago)
ultimately, Johns killed off Hawkman in Blackest Night only to resurrect him in the final issue
The Johns boosters in the comments might be ignoring that things like this are what's wrong with DC's output in recent years.
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Wednesday, 13 February 2013 11:17 (thirteen years ago)
OK, DC have just escalated WTF to new levels by spoilering Batman Incorporated #8 themselves before it's published. They've confirmed that all the rumours that have been circulating are true.
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Monday, 25 February 2013 15:14 (thirteen years ago)
Annoying! But they also spoilered Batman RIP, when it was clear from even a cursory reading that he didn't actually die at the end.
― Chuck_Tatum, Monday, 25 February 2013 16:20 (thirteen years ago)
wasn't there some other thread where we failed to name a single major character who had stayed dead (from either Marvel or DC universes?) Everybody gets resurrected.. deaths are just a marketing gimmick.
― Donkamole Marvin (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 25 February 2013 19:23 (thirteen years ago)
I think they gotta have em come back to maintain copyright anyway! But it is really pathetic when they can't even keep people dead for a year.
Did I miss something and Gwen Stacy came back? I thought that was the only character, well her and Uncle Ben, who were off-limits.
― Brakhage, Tuesday, 26 February 2013 00:12 (thirteen years ago)
I don't think Gwen Stacy actually came back. Straczynski just violated her corpse.
― Coke Opus (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 26 February 2013 01:48 (thirteen years ago)
And she did have a clone walking around for a while
― Panaïs Pnin (The Yellow Kid), Tuesday, 26 February 2013 02:58 (thirteen years ago)
I swear if these fools kill off John Stewart then I am done.
― tsrobodo, Friday, 22 March 2013 19:18 (thirteen years ago)
Yeah, and two writers quitting before anything by them on the title is probably worth wtfing about.
― Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Friday, 22 March 2013 19:20 (thirteen years ago)