So who here dislikes the new suit as much as I do?

[Dr. Hurt]

34 pages about a couple of seams and a collar? Man... And i thought the Wonder Woman forum was bad.

[Dr. Hurt]

The question is to what extent should a character be changed in an effort to reach new fans? And do those changes in fact create a new character?

If a reader likes a certain character and has gained a wide knowledge of that character and an appreciation for all the stories about that character, it can be disconcerting when everything changes. Those readers have a right to feel upset and really why should they continue to buy the stories about this new version of the character? They're readers, not investors--so if they aren't getting what they want, they have every right to say so and not to buy the books.

From the old readers' point of view changing the character to the point where that character is unrecognizable is almost the same as destroying the character. So, of course, old readers would prefer that the character be consistent with the pre-existing concept of the character. It's in everybody's interest to bring in new readers, but one hopes that can be done without essentially replacing the old version of the character with something completely other.

If the publisher creates a version of the character that is really just a new character, then as a reader I should judge that character as a new creation. I shouldn't be expected to buy the character because it happens to have the same name as another character I had a long history with.

And I should have the right to express that opinion to new readers. I should be able to say, "While I recognize that you love this new character, you have to understand this is not the same one I read and enjoyed for many years and I have no attachment to this new character."

I understand that publishers use all kinds of rhetoric to justify what they do. And they have their own considerations for doing these things. Some of it is commerce and some of it is office politics. But I understand that the rhetoric is not the whole story. "We have to reach new readers" is code for something else. But I accept this rhetoric from the publishers--because I understand that's how the promotional game works.

It's disheartening to hear readers--people who should have no vested interest in the publisher's objective--repeating the same rhetoric, without understanding the subtext. As soon as other readers trot out this rhetoric, without exploring the true intent, I'm frustrated. And worse yet, using this rhetoric to shame old readers--as if we are the ones to blame for comics not reaching new readers. That's more than frustrating--that's disgusting.

Reaching new fans should be a goal, but there are a hundred ways to achieve that. It doesn't automatically follow that the publisher's goal is synonymous with the interest of fans. And sometimes fans do know more. Yes people in executive positions are in the driver's seat and readers have no control over that--but just because someone had the luck to win an executive position does not mean they are the world expert on a certain character. And fan's have the right to call them on their decisions. Especially since many fans have dumped thousands of their dollars on consuming these characters.

I'm not just saying this about Superman. In fact, I would say that there are other characters that have been reinvented and replaced to a greater extent than Superman. Both Batman and Wonder Woman have gone through much more re-creation. It's one thing to revitalize a character--I'm all for that--but it's another thing to cannibalize the character to the point where it becomes a new creation.

People have every right to buy and support whatever they like. But no amount of rhetorical finesse is going to blind me to the shell game that DC is playing.

You're acting like Superman hasnt had reboots, revisions and 10000 different origin stories along the years.

The only thing the reboot did was to give him a barely different suit, kill his parents (who stayed alive only during the Byrne era) and cancel his marriage. It's less than what Byrne did.

[MichaelDXIII]

I remember this argument being brought by the time the relaunch didn't actually happen (but we knew about the new suit), and I think some people that actually made legal studies explained that it's not how the law would work on this case, and that it would make it very unlikely for the lawsuit to be the reason of the change (something like legal rights and trademarks aren't the same, so even if Siegel and Shuster won, they wouldn't be able to use the character or his costume, something like that).
Now, since I'm not American in the first place, I can't say wether or not this is true.

According to Comics Alliance: "In theory the rights to some of Superman's earliest appearances revert to the Siegel and Shuster estates in 2013 thanks to a previous legal victory by Toberoff in 2009 - shortly before Warner Bros launched its suit against Toberoff. How that rights split would play out in practical terms remains to be seen, but it could theoretically allow the heirs - and presumably Toberoff, under the terms of their joint venture - to create derivative works based on those early appearances in parallel to Warner Bros' Superman franchise."

Law students and lawyers all have differing opinions on what could be done in light of this ruling, and what couldn't be done. No one is sure what would happen until it goes before a judge. So it does make sense from a legal standpoint for Warner Bros.to distance themselves further from the original 1938 artistic concept, if only to avoid more headaches down the road.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

34 pages about a couple of seams and a collar? Man... And i thought the Wonder Woman forum was bad.

You're acting like Superman hasnt had reboots, revisions and 10000 different origin stories along the years.

The only thing the reboot did was to give him a barely different suit, kill his parents (who stayed alive only during the Byrne era) and cancel his marriage. It's less than what Byrne did.

??? Most of my post didn't even talk about Superman. And my comments made it clear that I was talking about a much broader subject. It's like you're putting words in my mouth so you can then argue with those words, instead of what I actually wrote.

If posters are constantly trying to correct the record every time another poster tries to put words in their mouth--that alone is going to extend the length of a thread.

Obviously this thread is about more than the current costume. It might have started out that way, but it's gone in many directions since then. I hardly think long threads are a crime. Many threads on the CBR forums start off with one specific topic and then broaden to include all kinds of other subjects.

If posters think that threads are too long and should be shut down, that complaint is probably best addressed to the moderators.

[Fate's Faith]

Your not getting what I'm saying. They aren't getting the same experience, They have no respect for these characters yet they are being catered to. I may actually find some respect if I could find 1 new fan who actually looked into the history of the character and read everything they can about it. I have yet to find one on these boards or on the old DC boards. Be nice to see that the character is in actual good hands because all I see is bad from the top of DC to the new fan.

In my reading lifetime, there have been three distinct Supermen. There was the post-Crisis Superman when had him working at WGBS with Lana, had a bit of fun fooling Lois whenever she was convienced Clark was Superman, could move planets, had epic adventures in the future when he was a boy as Superboy and had a huge key to his Fortress of Solitude. Then there was the Bryne Superman we got after Crisis who was a farmboy at heart, both parents were still alive, he never was Superboy, he couldn't move planets since he couldn't survive in space without aid, married Lois, worked at the Daily Planet, and came from a cold emotionless Krypton (forgiving all the retcons done afterwards). And now we have the new 52 Superman that has a touch of the Golden Age version, seems to be a bit younger than even the Bryne Superman (unless you solely focus on Man of Steel), both parents are dead, he comes from an advanced Kypton and doesn't seem able to survive in space. That's three very different takes with the new 52 Superman being the first one to have a noticeably different costume that the two previous versions.

I'd have to ask what same experiece are you referring to? Because if you're as old as me or nearly then we didn't have the same experiece. If this all comes down to a costume change then I think you are way overboard making such claims against new fans solely on the basis of a pair of trunks. I still think of the post-Crisis Superman as the classic version of the character since that's how I was introduced to the character. But I actually liked what Bryne did with the character so it was my favorite until they started to try to make him retrofit a previous version he was never meant to be. I really like what I've seen so far of the new 52 version but its doesn't have the development of the previous two yet. It easily could become my favorite because it seems to include some of my favorite things from past versions. I love the brash young man we have now. I'm sad his parents are gone but glad Krypton isn't such a focus in his life as it could be at times pre-Crisis. Wasn't happy to see the marriage go but since I've been there and done that, not excited that Lois may be more important to him so soon. However, if I'm ever disappointed by the current version of the character it never changes what came before. The pre-Crisis Superman will always be classic to me. The Bryne will always be a favorite reintroduction. And I hope this new one will outshine them both. But no matter what, it will never change my past with the character. I find it hard to understand how it can anyone's.

[davidn15]

And how am I doing that?

Not you, but Lexrule sure was

[Fate's Faith]

I am enjoying both SUPERMAN books right now. They are the most fun I've had reading the character in the last few years. However, I have yet to have been convinced that erasing pretty much the entire continuity that existed prior and introducing gimmicks like new #1 issues and "Kryptonian ceremonial Armor" was needed to "save" Superman or the industry. All that was needed was good accessible writing and dynamic art. That's all it took to hook me and I maintain, would be all that's needed now. (That, and better distribution and pricing...but that's another thread topic in the making). All the armor suit accomplishes really is making us adults feel a bit less silly about reading a medium that was originally created for children. A muscled man in alien spandex? But a muscled man in alien armor? That's ok, because all the superheroes in movies wear armor now, and that's acceptible by the general public! Whew. Great. Now I don't feel as stupid that I'm pushing 40 and still reading comics about superheroes.

I see the point. I lived through the exact same thing but my confusion about why 'pretty much the entire continuity that existed prior and introducing gimmichs like new #1 issues' was needed was Crisis on Infinite Earths. I approached this as it was happening with much dislike because at the end of Crisis, nothing prepared us that Superman was about to get revamped. We knew Wonder Woman was since she had been turned to clay (again). But supposedly the last issues of Crisis was the new DCU. But it wasn't. And if I had gone into some kind of nerd rage then my favorite version of the character would have been missed by me. And it wouldn't matter to the rest of the world in the least. My point is, maybe this isn't supposed to be for you. And if it doesn't appeal to you, no one is going to be able to talk you into it. So, was the new #1 issue needed? The armor? I don't know, can you answer if it was needed by someone who never read Superman before? I can't. One thing I will never be is a fan who has never read Superman in a comic before. I know it was needed to get this lapse reader back. Not the armor specifically but several things contributed to me leaving which this seemed to push me toward giving it a chance. One more thing, I'm convienced if this suit was never referred to as armor many would just see it as a new suit. Which is all it is to me. If he's wearing tights or armor doesn't matter. Its just a suit when Superman's wearing it because he's the power in whatever it is.

[Dr. Hurt]

??? Most of my post didn't even talk about Superman. And my comments made it clear that I was talking about a much broader subject. It's like you're putting words in my mouth so you can then argue with those words, instead of what I actually wrote.

If posters are constantly trying to correct the record every time another poster tries to put words in their mouth--that alone is going to extend the length of a thread.

Obviously this thread is about more than the current costume. It might have started out that way, but it's gone in many directions since then. I hardly think long threads are a crime. Many threads on the CBR forums start off with one specific topic and then broaden to include all kinds of other subjects.

If posters think that threads are too long and should be shut down, that complaint is probably best addressed to the moderators.

Dude, relax, i thought this was about the suit and i jumped in. I couldnt read this whole thread so i read the last couple of pages.

If you were talking in general i guess that makes sense, but if you're talking about new 52 superman i'd say you're exaggerating. He didnt change that much.

[Mr. Holmes]

34 pages about a couple of seams and a collar? Man... And i thought the Wonder Woman forum was bad.

Yeah this place has become more like the Wonder Woman forum ever since the DC boards closed down.

[Lexrules]

Yeah this place has become more like the Wonder Woman forum ever since the DC boards closed down.

Probably because quite a few of us came over from the DC Board. I think we made the place look nice don't you. ;)

[Fate's Faith]

And worse yet, using this rhetoric to shame old readers--as if we are the ones to blame for comics not reaching new readers. That's more than frustrating--that's disgusting.

Just a note here, Crisis was said to have gotten rid of the multiverse to assist in gaining new fans. Lots of changes are done for new fans supposedly. No one is saying old fans are to blame for titles not reaching new fans. However, stating that new fans must come to the character the exact same way as the old fan speaking is a bit laughable to me. You didn't come to the character the exact same way as many who came before you. Should you consult with them to find the proper way to be introduced to the character? Do you agree that old fans should determine what you should and shouldn't like? That's the question. I mean saying DC is catering to new fans who don't deserve to be catered to is saying to new fans you aren't welcomed. Saying they want it all spoon fed is saying to new fans you aren't welcomed. Once we figure out if the dollar from an old fan is more valuable than a new fan's dollar then maybe that might have some meaning. Until then its dismissive and elitist.

Reaching new fans should be a goal, but there are a hundred ways to achieve that. It doesn't automatically follow that the publisher's goal is synonymous with the interest of fans. And sometimes fans do know more. Yes people in executive positions are in the driver's seat and readers have no control over that--but just because someone had the luck to win an executive position does not mean they are the world expert on a certain character. And fan's have the right to call them on their decisions. Especially since many fans have dumped thousands of their dollars on consuming these characters.

I'm not just saying this about Superman. In fact, I would say that there are other characters that have been reinvented and replaced to a greater extent than Superman. Both Batman and Wonder Woman have gone through much more re-creation. It's one thing to revitalize a character--I'm all for that--but it's another thing to cannibalize the character to the point where it becomes a new creation.

People have every right to buy and support whatever they like. But no amount of rhetorical finesse is going to blind me to the shell game that DC is playing.

There may be hundreds of ways to achieve that goal. However, this is the way chosen. I disagree with the idea that fans know better. Especially based on the money we spent. Want to have a say? Stop buying comics and buy stock. And do you realize it sounds sort of weird to think DC is playing games with you?

[Lexrules]

Just a note here, Crisis was said to have gotten rid of the multiverse to assist in gaining new fans. Lots of changes are done for new fans supposedly. No one is saying old fans are to blame for titles not reaching new fans. However, stating that new fans must come to the character the exact same way as the old fan speaking is a bit laughable to me. You didn't come to the character the exact same way as many who came before you. Should you consult with them to find the proper way to be introduced to the character? Do you agree that old fans should determine what you should and shouldn't like? That's the question. I mean saying DC is catering to new fans who don't deserve to be catered to is saying to new fans you aren't welcomed. Saying they want it all spoon fed is saying to new fans you aren't welcomed. Once we figure out if the dollar from an old fan is more valuable than a new fan's dollar then maybe that might have some meaning. Until then its dismissive and elitist.



There may be hundreds of ways to achieve that goal. However, this is the way chosen. I disagree with the idea that fans know better. Especially based on the money we spent. Want to have a say? Stop buying comics and buy stock. And do you realize it sounds sort of weird to think DC is playing games with you?

Considering I and many others have invested thousands of dollars to keep DC running for so many years, I would have to say yes, we should have some kind of say. These are very different times then we COIE was done. There was only one avenue of communication with the company and that was through letters to the editors. In this day and age with so many ways to communicate fans should have more say then what they have when it come to these Iconic characters. As I have said before and will say until I am blue in the face. Dc had a chance to please both old and new and decided to shut out the older fan who have a passion for the classic look and feel. First they could have just made a ultimate DC Universe like Marvel did and have succeeded with for years or they could have made Earth 2 the home for the classic look but missed that boat there to.

[Sacred Knight]

The say that we as consumers have is the option to invest money for their product in the here or now, or to not do so. We don't get nor deserve any more a say than that. The changes in way we communicate has absolutely no bearing on this nor should it. The only thing this new age of instant information affords is easier ways to get our feedback out there. But just as in the days in which that feedback was limited to letters to the editor, it doesn't grant any legitimate say in the direction. When all's said and done the reality is that the individual buys comics because they enjoy reading comics, and does not come with the promise of earning say in future creative decisions. That's just the way it is, its naive to think just because method of communication is easier, that fans should get more say.

And what you're really saying until you're blue in the face is that DC had the opportunity to please YOU but chose to go in a different direction. You're trying to speak for everyone when you really can't. What would have pleased YOU is an ultimate line with the old universe intact. Which is fine, but you can't just assume everyone would have love this as well.

[Lexrules]

The say that we as consumers have is the option to invest money for their product in the here or now, or to not do so. We don't get nor deserve any more a say than that. When all's said and done the reality is that the individual buys comics because they enjoy reading comics, and does not come with the promise of earning say in future creative decisions. That's just the way it goes, its naive to truly believe otherwise.

I think the opposite. I feel we as the consumer especially those who have invested years and their hard earned cash to a product should have some kind of say in what those in charge are thinking when it comes to things like these. Part of our problem in the world is that big business runs everything and the little guy is always &^%$ on even though we are the one's that keep these greedy bastards in business. I feel we are owed just a little bit more respect in that regard. Not just for the older but also the younger fan because there will come a time that they will also be in the same boat we are in as older fans and will have the same arguments we do.

Also please don't think that I think your way of thinking is wrong, It's not. You have your opinion I have mine. That goes to anyone who disagrees with me. Just because you have a different opinion then I do does not mean I don't respect it. I respect all opinions if I agree or not.

[Fate's Faith]

Considering I and many others have invested thousands of dollars to keep DC running for so many years, I would have to say yes, we should have some kind of say.

Well then, how do we divide this up? Does someone who owns the original Action Comics #1 get to determine what and who Superman is? Or did they have to have bought it off the newsstand for that previlage? Or does the Bryne run only count? Since some may have bought the Wally West Flash #1 for 75 cents and the entire run have more say than someone who bought the entire run for whatever hundreds of dollars the back issues may cost today have more say since they spent more? Hell, I bought Crisis off the newsstand (no easy feat given how hard it could be to get consecutive issues at times) so I think that gives me say in the entire old DCU! What if we both have spent the exact same dollar amount, which of us get to decide? That's why fans don't deserve a say. Fans spend money but they don't agree with each other what direction is correct. If anything this thread has done its shown that fans are divided on what is and isn't acceptable. I'm a little suspicious that perhaps you believe you deserve that right but I may be reading things wrong here.

These are very different times then we COIE was done. There was only one avenue of communication with the company and that was through letters to the editors. In this day and age with so many ways to communicate fans should have more say then what they have when it come to these Iconic characters. As I have said before and will say until I am blue in the face. Dc had a chance to please both old and new and decided to shut out the older fan who have a passion for the classic look and feel. First they could have just made a ultimate DC Universe like Marvel did and have succeeded with for years or they could have made Earth 2 the home for the classic look but missed that boat there to.

Or perhaps I'm not. Already we see you've decided those letters to the editors don't quite stack up against all the forms of communication fans have access to today. After all, they had limited ways to express their displeasure so obviously DC couldn't listen to them. But get a Facebook account and you've got ownership of the company on your screen. Personally, I don't think your shade of blue is dark enough. DC had options is a given. Its not how they went. You say they decided to shut out the older fan. I still say that power remains with the fans. You decide when you are shut out. They just produce a product. No one is making you buy it. No one is asking you to (quite the opposite from me) yet you demand to keep buying the product and are holding hostages. By god, I spent thousands of dollars on this stuff and you will not stop me so change it back!