DavidRose92

October 1, 2012 6:40 pm What need be noted first is the medium's inexplicable knack for doing the same thing over and over and over. The New 52 was supposed to be something new. The trouble is, 'new' has kinda proven to be the same 'old', minus a few exceptions.

September 20, 2012 6:44 pm Way late to the party here, but nevertheless -- I think the real issue here is the way comics are distributed anymore. If I felt the only way I could read, for example, Steve McNiven's artwork was to buy the individual issues -- I'd buy every book of his the WEEK it came out. But figure in the fact that I can look at his art online, wait for the trades, or just get it later digitally, and I feel less and less compelled to buy his artwork JUST for his work. So, in summary, an issue of supply rather than demand.

September 13, 2012 10:38 am DC is really making sure they have their TOP talent on this book. With the likes of Jim Lee, Ivan Reis, Gary Frank and Geoff Johns at the helm, it makes me wonder why I still am not reading it.

September 13, 2012 10:26 am My greatest fear is that I'll die and nobody will know what to with all my crap.

August 12, 2012 9:27 pm As soon as I read the news, I said aloud, "no, no, not Joe."

August 9, 2012 6:06 pm Or rather, the apocalypse is ending. My bad.

August 9, 2012 6:04 pm The end of the apocalypse. Good one.

June 6, 2012 12:00 pm Here's an easy mistake to make: DC comics, as part of its company-wide-initiative to update and modernize their comics, has tweaked Alan Scott's character to fulfill the needs of another minority. That's what everyone will think when they read the headline, 'DC COMICS CONFIRMS ALAN SCOTT OF EARTH 2 IS GAY'. But I'm not really sure that's what's happening here. As James merely all but said, this is not a story element but rather a character element. And to me, this doesn't feel like a stunt or a company trying out yet another gimmick. It feels like James wrote it this way to pay homage to what came before.

May 21, 2012 10:31 am Very good, Sir. Very good.

May 21, 2012 10:20 am In response to most all of the commenters of this article in somewhat defense of the body of work, I wish to submit a reasoning opinion to Molly's anguish. This article seems rather the tipping point of her own frustration, rather than that of the comics industry. Not to say that she wouldn't or couldn't be annoyed by this book otherwise. I mean, female readers do have a certain right to be upset with most of the propaganda printed in comics. But that seems not to be the case here, especially the way she began the article. I say this with all respect to Molly, I read most all of her articles published here at iFanboy and love her opinions and writing, but just here and now I think this article is somewhat senseless to the actual comics medium.