129 preview and discussion

[MikeandRaph87]

Originally Posted by neatoman

You know, it's kind of weird to me. Armageddon Game is set to have these beefy 50 page issues and the solicitations really plays up how much will happen in them. Meanwhile, the solicitations for the ongoing describe fallout of what will happen in Armageddon game. Even the trades for Sophie's run are marketed as a different series from the first 100 issues.

In a really strange way, it feels like ongoing will just a glorified tie-in and Armageddon game will be the real ongoing. Basically, in my head the comic has been on a break since 100 and everything up until July this year has been nothing but license maintenance. Hell, I'm so indifferent to Sophie's run and so interested in what Armageddon Game will be, I've already removed those trades from my shelf so I can put the Armageddon Game trades there instead.

Today at the LCS I signed up for Armageddon Game and picked up again Detective Comics after I dropped it when Tamaki took it over when her run ends in June. The more I read into it I will be fine with just getting the two issue prelude and eight issue mini-series of Armageddon Game. I learned through experience that I don't have to own complete runs, but arcs and loyalty can be toxic.

[ChosenOne]

To be fair, we don't yet know how the story is structured, that is, whether the ongoing and the mini will run parallel to each other, narratively speaking, or if the plot weaves back and forth between them as one single cohesive unit. Any word on this, hypered1?

The timeline seems to be #130>Opening Moves #1-2 > #131> ?, and the solicits only mention the events of Opening Moves - not AG itself - as the reason why Saki enlists the Turtles to counter Rat King and his accomplices. They're not really spoiling Armaggedon Game itself, we haven't seen any real solicits of that yet.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Y'know honestly not an indictment of this book but just in general, I really miss how easily comics were able to pack an entire meaningful story into two or three issues most of the time, and nowadays even stuff of little consequence gets 6-12 issues worth of real estate. It's f*cking terrible. Like, I don't hate it every time but it's much too prevalent. There's a time and a place for it.

I mean, I have some exceptions. "For Tomorrow" is one of my favorite Superman stories of all time, and it probably could've been cut from 12 issues to 6 if you trimmed some of the sequences where people are just standing around staring in mournful introspection, but at least it creates an atmosphere and I feel like the action-heavy latter half pays it off. Conversely, the Chuck Austen run in Action Comics that was going on at the same time definitely didn't need 12 issues, and frankly didn't deserve even one.

You're describing subplots and simultaneous stories happening.

I'm talking about modern writers jamming in plotlines that go nowhere, don't get resolved, end up pointless, are only there to push agendas, are super rushed, etc. They tend to be there as filler.

Also, meh on Austen's stuff, for the most part.

[Leo656]

Just "meh"? I've only read his Action Comics run but I'm still thinking about suing that asshole for punitive damages.

I've heard from folks that have read his other work that he's pretty much the dirt-worst at everything. Guy must have incriminating pictures of somebody.

[hypered1]

Originally Posted by ChosenOne

To be fair, we don't yet know how the story is structured, that is, whether the ongoing and the mini will run parallel to each other, narratively speaking, or if the plot weaves back and forth between them as one single cohesive unit. Any word on this, hypered1?

The timeline seems to be #130>Opening Moves #1-2 > #131> ?, and the solicits only mention the events of Opening Moves - not AG itself - as the reason why Saki enlists the Turtles to counter Rat King and his accomplices. They're not really spoiling Armaggedon Game itself, we haven't seen any real solicits of that yet.

Colour me shocked that you'd want my input, but for what it's worth I want to apologize for being occasionally heavy handed in my opinions but I'm still going to bite back against any comments that are directly derogatory.
Regarding the structure of the upcoming arc I know that it's 130 - Ann/fcbd'22 - OM1+2 - 131, with the most recent solicitation indicating that 132 is before AG1 but that's all I know with the exception that Sophie had hinted at some post-AG plots on Patreon.

[ChosenOne]

Originally Posted by hypered1

Colour me shocked that you'd want my input, but for what it's worth I want to apologize for being occasionally heavy handed in my opinions but I'm still going to bite back against any comments that are directly derogatory.
Regarding the structure of the upcoming arc I know that it's 130 - Ann/fcbd'22 - OM1+2 - 131, with the most recent solicitation indicating that 132 is before AG1 but that's all I know with the exception that Sophie had hinted at some post-AG plots on Patreon.

Hey, man, don't be. I have no beef with you and it's certainly nothing personal, we're both here for the same reason as TMNT fans despite being on opposite sides of a particular barricade at this point in time. I know I can go a bit overboard with the teasing sometimes, and I apologize for that too if/when I seem just a tad too caustic, but make no mistake: I don't bear you any ill will, have openly said I'm generally amused by your antics, and this place wouldn't be the same without you as it wouldn't be the same without so many others. In this instance, I figured since you're closer to Campbell than most other members, you could confirm or clear things up a bit for us. And you did, so thank you.

I'll be intrigued to see what the status quo is post-Armaggedon Game, and whether it's more or less suited to Campbell's sensibilities than post-#100, or even if she picks something up from her time co-writing with Waltz and at least manages to keep up the quality of some recent issues. Never underestimate how badly I want this comic to succeed in spite of everything.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Just "meh"? I've only read his Action Comics run but I'm still thinking about suing that asshole for punitive damages.

I've heard from folks that have read his other work that he's pretty much the dirt-worst at everything. Guy must have incriminating pictures of somebody.

Yep, just meh. I read his X-Men stuff, and it mostly just made me roll my eyes and irked me mildly. Believe it or not, there's writers, especially in recent times, that have actually gotten me far more livid.

[Leo656]

Well, I never read that. But his Action run is one of the worst Superman runs I've ever seen in my life and I wasn't shocked he got yanked off his own story before it finished, and then they immediately set about undoing every single thing he'd spent ten issues building to. F*cking worthless.

You had Rucka's 12-issue "Ruin" run of Adventures of Superman and Azzarello's "For Tomorrow" run in the main Superman book going on at the same time, and both were great. But then you also had Austen's wretched Action run going on right in the middle of it, and it was like "Jesus, this is dog sh*t, get it away." So as bad as it was in a vacuum, it was way worse when compared to its contemporaries.

That's the only Austen comic run I've ever read, and the only one I ever WILL read. I'll never be able to speak to his other sh*t because I saw all I needed to with his take on Superman and I wanted to f*cking puke.

Maybe his other stuff is less abhorrent but I'll never be bored enough to find out.

[superstaff]

Originally Posted by Leo656

You had Rucka's 12-issue "Ruin" run of Adventures of Superman and Azzarello's "For Tomorrow" run in the main Superman book going on at the same time, and both were great. But then you also had Austen's wretched Action run going on right in the middle of it, and it was like "Jesus, this is dog sh*t, get it away." So as bad as it was in a vacuum, it was way worse when compared to its contemporaries.

This is because Rucka and Azzarello tend to be solid, and actually talented. Rucka, in particular, is one of my favorites. I just love 99% of the stuff he does, and him being on the new Batman cartoon gives me a modicum of faith it might be good (I'd have been way more excited in the early 2010s or something, nowadays I tend to await things with dread given the current entertainment climate).

That's the only Austen comic run I've ever read, and the only one I ever WILL read. I'll never be able to speak to his other sh*t because I saw all I needed to with his take on Superman and I wanted to f*cking puke.

Maybe his other stuff is less abhorrent but I'll never be bored enough to find out.

I believe you on Austen. He's most definitely a hack, but there's so many of those at DC that he's probably somewhere in the middle of my list. I probably won't elaborate further because if I talk about them, I'll likely piss people off because some of the ones I hate are big name ones that people love for some reason.

[Leo656]

I dropped out with New 52 and can't speak to anything or anyone since. Except that Geoff Johns is an exercise in self-parody by this point; I have seen some of his stuff like Three Jokers and... yeah, Hollywood went to his head. He *thinks* he's clever and brilliant. Maybe in 2002, Geoff m'boy. Maybe in 2002.

I liked Doomsday Clock, though, so... I'unno.

But yeah I haven't read any DC stuff from anyone but Geoff and Grant Morrison in over ten years. So I have no idea who's done what, I just know that every time I bothered to pick up a book I mostly wished I hadn't. Just reading the descriptions, it all sounds pretty dreadful and doesn't make me feel like I'm missing much.

I'll trust your judgment. So long as you don't speak ill of Dan Jurgens we're fine. And if ya do... well, we're gonna have to hash that one out in person. NOBODY puts down Dan The Man while I'm in the room, that's a hard rule.

...He did kinda have Superman say "Whoa!" a lot more than was probably ever appropriate for that character. But he also had him go through a heavy metal phase when he was Jimmy's roommate in '93, so... all's forgiven. He also gave us the Super-Mullet! Bless that man.

[superstaff]

I also dropped out as a regular reader with New 52, it's just that every so often, I'll skim through something new or buy something that piques my interest or whatever. It's very rare that I enjoy anything from the Big Two nowadays. I also read posts on forums/Reddit of what's coming out, much of it being horrible and insulting to my intelligence, especially stuff from the past 5 years.

I don't have a problem with Jurgens, no, so it's all good there. You did mention someone on my sh** list. I don't know if I want to discuss it further because I'll probably get pelted with tomatoes ala Fozzie Bear. I'll say that some of the people on my list were also the types who I used to enjoy their work, but then they went so downhill that I've grown to despise them (I mean, I can still enjoy their old works, but I hate them as people now, and cringe at the sight of their name or praise to their name).

[Zog The Magnificent]

My cutoff is about 2009, at least for mainline DC. Oh sure, there's a few series I'll pick up every now and then, like the new Swamp Thing comic, but that's mostly because I'm a completionist. The New 52 is where everything kind of goes to hell. I mean, it was somewhat confusing, what with all the in-universe reboots that happened every 10 years, but it still mostly made sense. New 52 is where I completely gave up on trying to understand what the hell was going on most of the time. It's like every series starts in medias res, and they never clarify what still counts and what doesn't, and what is still important to the characters or not. It's like they pick up in the middle, assume you know everything by supernatural means, and then never look back. I have so far not had a completely satisfying read from any New 52 series I've attempted to read. Even the Swamp Thing series was overly confusing, even if I did like it. And that's not even the only problem with the New 52's whole deal. And then of course there's all the stuff DC has put out recently. So yeah, 2009. That gives me about a 25 year window from 1985 to then where there's all sorts of good stories for me to read.

Anyways, so far I've always enjoyed anything by Grant Morrison or Jeff Lemire. Lemire to the point where I'm just a fan, and anything with his name on it is something I'm willing to give a shot.

[MikeandRaph87]

Originally Posted by Zog The Magnificent

My cutoff is about 2009, at least for mainline DC. Oh sure, there's a few series I'll pick up every now and then, like the new Swamp Thing comic, but that's mostly because I'm a completionist. The New 52 is where everything kind of goes to hell. I mean, it was somewhat confusing, what with all the in-universe reboots that happened every 10 years, but it still mostly made sense. New 52 is where I completely gave up on trying to understand what the hell was going on most of the time. It's like every series starts in medias res, and they never clarify what still counts and what doesn't, and what is still important to the characters or not. It's like they pick up in the middle, assume you know everything by supernatural means, and then never look back. I have so far not had a completely satisfying read from any New 52 series I've attempted to read. Even the Swamp Thing series was overly confusing, even if I did like it. And that's not even the only problem with the New 52's whole deal. And then of course there's all the stuff DC has put out recently. So yeah, 2009. That gives me about a 25 year window from 1985 to then where there's all sorts of good stories for me to read.

Anyways, so far I've always enjoyed anything by Grant Morrison or Jeff Lemire. Lemire to the point where I'm just a fan, and anything with his name on it is something I'm willing to give a shot.

The New 52 for a number of fans myself including is a marking period that was for a dropping point in quality as well as a marker for where to end runs, the opposite of DC's intension. All new enforced direction does not mean good. It means six months of increased sales then lower sales than before the bump almost across the board. Ending Batman/Detective Comics and Superman/Action Comics numbering for #1s from primarily Marvel readers to sample or casuals. It gave me Barbara Gordon under the Batgirl cowl, but I will trade that away for Dick Grayson under the Bat cowl and quality story. How is Synder cutting Joker's face off to wear as a mask and putting Commissioner Gordon in a mecha better? Shrinking a timeline and cramming in too much taking away fronm characters and relationships. Acting as if marriage is something people don't want or can relate to. Now they think fans want to get woke, no quite the opposite. Batman/Superman: World's Finest is exactly the way characters should be written and respected with a mix of action and characterization that makes sense to what is established.

It's trying to enforce something unto fans that we don't want and instead of widening it shrinks the audience just like this new diversity push is doing. I am invested in Dick Grayson, Hal Jordan, and Wally West not what DC is forcing onto me. Dick Grayson I prefer as either Robin or Batman, not as Nightwing. In fact the current run is relying on his rleationships and time as Robin for its success to counter the liberal agenda that is peppering it. Liberal agendas are destroying comics and taking away from the fun hero vs villains capers, mysteries, epics that we emjoy.Johns was granted 20 more issues to fiinsh his Green Lantern storyline centering around Hal Jordan, Sinestro, and others, but that was it. It also showcased why Barry Allen needs to be dead and legacies allowed. Keep your crap in a corner and don't let it spread good or bad. People that loved Blackest Night didn't have it takeover the company line and it could be ignored or embraced without interference. This whole Death of The Justice League joke where the characters continue to appear despite their 'deaths' is the best example of why it does not work.


Mutant Town did not work and intrigrating characters such as The Punk Frogs, Groundhuck,Dirtbag, Razhar, and Tokka do not excite me, but I wish were left alone instead of introduced. We may say we want to restart after Armaggedon Game, but do we really want a New 52 TMNT style? The creators will be the same and it will just be putting paint on something and saying its different. We need an embrace of what made superheroes successful and move forward with solid narratives that make sense for the characters no politics, no major shakeups. Will it happen in a medium that is near a deathblow? Not likely.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by superstaff

You did mention someone on my sh** list. I don't know if I want to discuss it further because I'll probably get pelted with tomatoes ala Fozzie Bear. I'll say that some of the people on my list were also the types who I used to enjoy their work, but then they went so downhill that I've grown to despise them (I mean, I can still enjoy their old works, but I hate them as people now, and cringe at the sight of their name or praise to their name).

It is now acceptable (at least around here) to say you hate current-day Geoff Johns. Most people here at least are aware that he was replaced by a pod person after "Blackest Night" and that everything since was not written by Actual Geoff Johns. Actual Geoff Johns wouldn't have done Three Jokers or ruined the Justice League movie. The pod person did that.

It's the only thing that makes sense as to why the guy who gave us such immortal classics as the Teen Titans and JSA runs and "Green Lantern: Rebirth" would somehow put out... well... EVERYTHING since "Blackest Night".

I think Actual Geoff Johns escaped from the Phantom Zone long enough to script most of Doomsday Clock, but after that they put him right back in there.

[CyberCubed]

The art in this issue looked unusually bad for this series. Oof.

[ChosenOne]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

The art in this issue looked unusually bad for this series. Oof.

Oof is right. Alopex looked like a mutant donkey in a couple of panels.

[MikeandRaph87]

it appears the letter column is gone. The new Editor does not want to print our commentary.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

It is now acceptable (at least around here) to say you hate current-day Geoff Johns. Most people here at least are aware that he was replaced by a pod person after "Blackest Night" and that everything since was not written by Actual Geoff Johns. Actual Geoff Johns wouldn't have done Three Jokers or ruined the Justice League movie. The pod person did that.

It's the only thing that makes sense as to why the guy who gave us such immortal classics as the Teen Titans and JSA runs and "Green Lantern: Rebirth" would somehow put out... well... EVERYTHING since "Blackest Night".

I think Actual Geoff Johns escaped from the Phantom Zone long enough to script most of Doomsday Clock, but after that they put him right back in there.

Geoff Johns was always like that. What you got from Johns post about Sinestro Corps War was just a Johns untethered by editors. Nobody reining him in anymore.

He was an ideas man (before he ran out of them) that worked well with strong editorial guidelines. Outside of that he's a hack.

[Zog The Magnificent]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I think Actual Geoff Johns escaped from the Phantom Zone long enough to script most of Doomsday Clock, but after that they put him right back in there.

I can't believe you like that one. This is not to argue, just to express surprise. I thought that that story was an incomprehensible mess of way too many plotlines, nothing interesting to say, and way too interconnected to ever make sense to anyone who hasn't read every single comic DC has ever put out, as well as a story that took itself too seriously while also taking 2 entire years to come out, which not only undercut it's own momentum but made it's impact on the DC universe that it was supposed to have null. Suffice to say, I did not like it.

What did you like about it?

[Zog The Magnificent]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

it appears the letter column is gone. The new Editor does not want to print our commentary.

If anyone needed any further proof that they know what they're doing is unpopular.