Huysmans

May 14, 2013 8:27 am I would actually enjoy a "Martian Manhunter" book instead of one about the Question...

May 14, 2013 8:14 am @Arathi411 : my bad, I checked my count and I completely didn't notice Batman, Inc was cancelled! So your count was the right one: there is 7 books missing, and 7 empty slots. I am half-happy, half-sad that Batman, Inc is cancelled. Happy because who else, if not Morrison, could handle the concept right? Without Grant Morrison the book is sure to become stale and boring. But it's such a cool concept, one I accepted from the beginning and went ahead with, that it makes me sad DC doesn't even try to make it last. But maybe Morrison's story comes with the end of Batman, Inc. itself, hence the cancellation. Wait and see.

May 13, 2013 7:28 pm Scarlet, where did you hear such news?? I'm not sure they're great, weekly comics look like such a money grab... Marvel do bimonthly and I'm not a fan of the quality being displayed (euphemism), so weekly seems... "bold"!

May 13, 2013 6:48 pm There's actually 6 books missing. (10 slots are empty but 4 are already taken by Superman Unchained, Larfleeze, Batman/Superman and the soon-to-be-cancelled-for-sure "Trinity of Sin: Pandora"). Just for precision.

March 20, 2013 2:06 pm I only love and read DC books, and yet, right now, I feel so ashamed of being part of this company's consumers... They look like the worst dumbasses ever. KEEP. YOUR. WRITERS. DC!

January 12, 2013 7:44 am ResurrectonFlan is right: Snyder gives writing classes at the uni, and met and helped James Tynion IV there. It's not the first writer Scott Snyder backed up: Kyle Higgins (the current writer of Nightwing) was vividly supported at DC by Snyder a year and so ago.

January 7, 2013 7:28 pm @Mikegraham6 Okay, thanks Mike. I was letting this page open on my browser while working late, because it seriously made me sorry to think I could have brought sadness concerning this particular societal issue. People being angry/violent concerning Alan Scott and Mile Morales, it's beind words for me. I think there's always that kind of crowd in any hobby or community (it's not specific to comics), and I try to move past that. I trust the comic community to be respectful in those particular regards. Don't let yourself get pushed further by these people! They don't deserve to have even the tiniest impact.

January 7, 2013 4:46 pm @RoiVampire: I know about the great praise on Saga; just take a look at all "The Bests of 2012" and Saga always ends up first! ^^ I think, to conclude this discussion, that I can bring 3 points: 1/ We'll have to agree to disagree about "what makes storytelling poor". It's a philosophical problem, and I know it's okay to be on one side of the fence or another, but I think a rational canon for Beauty and Quality does exist, and that it can be used to "judge" pieces of art. I'm not saying you're wrong when saying "opinions are opinions", just that it is a philosophical stance to either pretend you can rely on criterias to discuss of literature, or not. It's all fine and good here. 2/ I agree about separating iFanboy and the people. I always say it's important to differentiate ideas/things from people, and it's not okay that those seemed the same in my comments. Generally, I tend to be very shocked at the low level of quality culture websites seem to be okay with nowadays. iFanboy is an exception from this general statement, and I would be sad to see it agree too much with the Big Two for the sake of agreeing. Hence my ranting. I was for instance glad to read Ron wasn't praising Lobdell for his work on Superman (which isn't good. Wait & see but until now it's not really the best). Not for the sake of disagreeing with Lobdell's work, but just because his writing isn't okay for now on, and that it should be pointed out. Thanks for that, and I was happy to see this bold move. 3/ Anyway, the whole "separating things and people" makes me think also about one thing. I'm sorry if I offended someone, I do agree my first comment was "blunt", to put it that way. Take it as a proof of my passion for Art and this website rather than rage, which it isn't. I learned a long time ago understanding my mistakes was important, so, from the bottom of my heart: sorry for the blunt form. Also, I'm getting afraid of one thing. @Mikegraham6 talked below about "homophobic comments". Mike, I sincerely hope you didn't take the "sucking balls" that way. No homosexual person should be mistreated or hated. I want this to be said clear and loud from my part. I used what I consider being an English expression just as that, and if it sounded like it was also an attack on a whole community, please be assured it wasn't. You have the right to consider me being a "dork", but I'm a nice person, or at least I ain't for sure a hater who freely condemns entire communities on posts. I deeply hope if any feelings were bruised on that particular chapter, they aren't anymore, because the hate homosexual persons have to endure is an awful scandal that I don't want to nurture, even only through misunderstandings.

January 7, 2013 3:59 pm @mikegraham6: no need for youtube video, when some Twitter users are already making me more famous than Kardashian ;) @MisterShaw: I agree about being interesting for what's coming next. I won't buy nor read the Superior Spider-man (or I really wouldn't be coherent, would I?) but I do understand the interest. Such as it was interesting to see Dick Grayson being Batman and so on. @RoiVampire: Well, I also respond here to your comment below. The "sex act on the non-existent body parts of a multimedia corporation" part was made not only concerning this article, but also concerning the stance Ifanboy took: you can't praise Vaughan's sage or say that "comics are dying" and in the same way give a great review of the badly written Slott's story. Also, you can't treat readers of being "INFERIOR" (please go check the title of this article) for not agreeing with Jim. That is why I DO question the integrity out there. Ifanboy used to be sharper and me being annoyed here is more a proof of how I highly consider this website rather than not. But I'm sick of this website telling us about "event fatigue" and what not, and then explaining us how good the comics are nowadays. Why not praising what is good (Saga, for instance) and pointing out what isn't (ASM, for instance). I don't question the pleasure one can have by seeing a new direction. Again, what I do point out is the badly executing writing, storytelling and lack of respect. Did I somewhere write "you are bad for being excited?". No. But telling me I'm "inferior" because I think Slott's run is bad litterature isn't okay either. Finally, of course, one can like something the other doesn't. But what are we here for? Saying that everything is relative, and end of discussion? Or trying to use our rational knowledge of good litterature and comparing it to what is now being delivered in comics? I READ ASM #700, I read Slott's run, because I wanted to give him credit. I judged it bad and poor, not for being a hipster, but - guess what - because I love comics. Ifanboy tells us how "tired" it is of gimmicks (like "Peter Parker dying and probably coming back later") but in the same way tells us those gimmicks are great. That startles me. To say the least. Hence the questioning on how honest it truly wants to stay. Because I. just. don't. understand then!

January 7, 2013 3:04 pm Everyone's a critic... I have not seen thy sunny face, Nor heard thy silver laughter: No thought of me shall find a place In thy young life's hereafter - Enough that now thou wilt not fail To lsiten to my fairy-tale.