Thing #1)This isn't really about the series - for aught I know, it's in all of the DC books this week, it just happens that this is the DC book I bought this week. Anyway, what it is is a house ad for the latest way DC is mis-handling the character of Dick Grayson, which has the slogan "You think you know Nightwing...You don't know Dick." Seriously? Are you *****ing me, Pyle? This is in a DC comic book? Look, I'm no prude - I've enjoyed crude jokes, and even made them from time to time. But this sort of thing should not be in a DC super-hero comic. It's not "adult", it's not "edgy". It's lowest common denominator idiot humor. Plus, I know, comics aren't just for kids anymore, wibble, wibble, wibble. But even still, aren't we always saying that we want more kids interested in comics? If I was a parent and saw something like this in a comic, it sure wouldn't make me eager to encourage my kid to read this stuff. If nothing else, a gag like this ought to be beneath DC's dignity. I was about to say that it ought to be beneath the dignity of anyone much above the age of eight, but, to be honest, I wouldn't be thrilled with an eight year-old making that joke.
Thing #2)A quote from the issue:
"And while he may not have liked it, it was hard to deny the fact that Oliver was a protégé at most things he attempted......He was a natural." - Written by Jeff Lemire. What's wrong with this? Actually, upon doublechecking the defintions, I'm not sure it is wrong, necessarily. I find "protégé" deifned as: "a person under the patronage, protection, or care of someone interested in his or her career or welfare." I suppose that could sort of fit, since in the story Oliver is presented as the son of a rich guy who tries to give him every advantage. However, given the next sentence, "He was a natural", I strongly suspect that "protégé" was actually meant to be "prodigy", meaning a "person, especially a child or young person, having extraordinary talent or ability", which to my mind fits better. Not a big issue, and maybe not even Lemire's fault in this day of autocorrect and such. Still, this story lists an editor (Harvey Richards) and a "group editor" (Brian Cunningham). You'd think that between the three of them, one of them would've caught this. I'm just saying, is all.
Bonus Thing About the Series as a Whole:
So far, this series seems to be following a pattern: three origins per issue, one headliner with two midcarders.
Issue number one featured Superman, Robin (Dick Grayson), and Supergirl. OK, no problem. It makes perfect sense that you start off with DC's flagship character.
Issue number two featured Batman, Aquaman, and Starfire. OK, again no problem. Batman is DC's other flagship character - some might even argue more popular than Superman. No problem there.
Issue number three featured Green Lantern (Hal Jordan), Batwoman and Red Robin. Here's the problem as I see it. How in the Blue Hell is Wonder Woman - the longest-running and best-known super-heroine ever, member of DC's "Trinity" and arguably their most important female character - not the headliner in this issue? Instead, she's bumped in favor of Hal Jordan? Hal "I've never been even remotely interesting from 1959 unto the present day and they made an unpopular movie about me" Jordan? OK, fine, Green Lantern books are real popular these days, they're like cockroaches, for every one you see, there's a hundred you don't, whatever.
But then, issue number four featured Harley Quinn, Green Arrow and Robin (Damian Wayne). So, now, Wonder Woman is bumped in favor of the Joker's would-be girlfriend? Is Harley even considered a headliner? She's not even that interesting of a character! Enough dis-respecting of Wonder Woman, here!
Anyway, the point of all this is - I'm an old man and I don't like it!
Replies
Anyway, the point of all this is - I'm an old man and I don't like it!
You and me both, my friend. Not only do I think no one at the Big [insert appropriate number here] takes seriously the notion that anyone younger than, oh let's just say high school age, ever picks up their books ... I'm guessing that a majority of the creative and marketing staff weren't even born the last time that was considered realistic by the industry.
So, putting aside the "age inappropriate" argument, they still oughta be whacked upside the head for being juvenile.
"Comics --Too Crude, Graphically Violent and Sexual for Kids, Too Dumb for Adults" isn't an effective slogan or marketing plan.
Also, get off my lawn!
I'm not excusing but i am explaining:
1) When Dan DiDio became head honcho at DC, he frequently expressed his belief that Green Lantern ought to be DC's third, or at worst fourth, most important franchise. Given that there are currently six books in the Green Lantern family Green Lantern, GL Corps, GL: New Guardians, Sinestro, Red Lanterns, Larfleeze), and just two starring Wonder Woman (Wonder Woman, Sensation and a third if you count Superman/Wonder Woman), then Green Lantern currenlty is DC's third-most-important franchise.
2) I suspect Harley Quinn's appearance reflects that fact that is really hot at this specific moment. Her solo book keeps going back for second and third printings, and she has a SDCC one-shot out right now. Plus, she's the star of Suicide Squad, which just re-launched. And, of course, there's the Bat-connection.
Incidentally, I don't know of a single editor in my building who wouldn't have caught that protege/prodigy error. It's barely even a homonym, the two words have differing roots and the spelling is considerably different. But evidently the hiring process for editors in comic book is A) you live in New York, and B) you were roommates in college with someone who's already working in comics.
Captain Comics said:
When the movie Billy Bathgate was out, I remember a reviewer pointing out that Dustin Hoffman, as Dutch Schultz, makes such an error, speaking of the youngster of the title as his "prodigy" when he meant "protégé." The reviewer wasn't sure if that was meant to show the level of Schultz's education, or if it was just bad writing.
Forget who it was but I remember reading once somebody got hired (I think at Archie) because he used to come in every week and stock the vending machines so he got to know the editor.
As long as he was a good guy who expressed an interest and started out honestly as anyone else did, I say he deserved it. I'm a firm believer in "who you know" as long as you're a good person.
I get that people hire who they like. I know I would.
Ron M. said:
Wandering Sensei: Moderator Man said:
I'm all for hiring people you know, as long as they're qualified for the position. I don't think I'd be doing a buddy a favor by hiring him for a position that he was only going to crash and burn at, or would only be able to retain by my patronage.
You just described 90 percent of mid- and upper management at the newspapers I've worked at. I'd be hard pressed to think of anyone who was promoted due to merit at The Commercial Appeal the first 20 years I worked there.
Picked up Issue #5 - it features Cyborg, the Red Hood and Mera. Still no Wonder Woman.
I'm still amazed, shocked and disappointed that there STILL is no DCnU Cyborg #1.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next