Anyone else found a distinct lack of individuality (or anything particularly different to say) from the interviews? They’re all basically the same one done six hundred times over.

Well the ‘exit interviews’ in Newsarama all deliberately had the same format and deliberately asked the same questions…original, no, but it did enable us to get insights on the same areas on each of the different writers (and I did appreciate taht).

However, after reading Matt Fraction’s take on the whole thing, I’m wondering if I should have given it a try…

http://www.mattfraction.com/archives/002791.php

He makes it sound like the most gloriously creative mindfuck of the year, when I suspected it was just a boring, crass, money-making scheme handed down from DC’s corporate office.

Any thoughts on the Fraction article? Is he insane? (I happen to really dig Fraction, both as a writer and a critic. I take his opinion pretty seriously).

A question: With 52 out of the way, will Grant FINALLY be getting back to the WildStorm Universe? He admits he blew off his WS commitments for the sake of 52, which completely explains why the WS relaunch was so paltry. If we could finally get Morrison back on track with WILDCATS and AUTHORITY, it would make the WildStorm Universe worth checking out again.

The Dibny stuff
The Question stuff
The Black Adam stuff
The Oolong stuff

The bad:

Most of the space stuff (especially anything involving Lobo)

The in-between:

The Steel/Nat/Infinity Inc. stuff
The Booster Gold/Supernova stuff

Regardless of who is “at fault” for the sameness, ultimately each of those interviews are practically identical. With that in mind, after the second or third its like wallpaper and you have to wonder why they bothered to keep doing them, given the identical questions / responses. It just seems pointless to have to wade through the same stuff over and over again to find out something interesting.

And what exactly did everyone expect? Them throwing DC under the bus? What they hated about working together? The seedy underbelly of “the machine”? Whatever you think of the book, it’s an achievement that it came out at all – I don’t see a week later being that excessive of a self-congratulatory period. Interviews ten years from now may have a different spin, but I’m not exactly surprised about the attitudes expressed this past week.

And people seriously believed they weren’t going to have at least some individual ownership of specific storylines? Unless they lived together in a log cabin in the woods for a year, I don’t see how writing as a “one voice” is really possible. Plotting? Sure. Writing? Not so much. And quite frankly, I’m glad there was some consistency in writing style to the storylines – I can only imagine the Question’s death scene as written by Johns. I would guess decapitation with Vic’s head serving as the period to a blood trail in the shape of a question mark.

I saw an opportunity for a topical jellyfish humping joke. How often does THAT come along in this lifetime?

What was I supposed to do?

“I know. How much Jellyfish humping can you take! Seriously, guys… It’s time to find a new schtick.”

Forced wackiness with regards some stupid stupid jellyfish joke does not present me with anything particularly new, illuminating or insightful with regards the topic at hand, 52. and if you’ve read all of the 52 Newsarama interviews, the odd ones that are popping up on the Wizard site and various other places, apart from the odd snippet of info about who wrote what or what the multiverse could mean for future comics, they’re basically cutting and paste a good sized chunk of the same blurb and putting someone elses name underneath it.

So, let me rephrase it for anyone feeling vaguely pedantic – aside from terrible jellyfish jokes, fawning rock star analogies and all the other irrelevant cack in the 52 interviews, who else feels that the majority of content in the 52 interviews out there *specifically relating to anything illuminating and / or informative about 52* is just the same autocue speech over and over again?

? They’re all basically the same one done six hundred times over.

I know. How much Jellyfish humping can you take! Seriously, guys… It’s time to find a new schtick.

1) The “machine”, and how it works.
2) Rock-star comparisons, usually followed up by weak Beatles gags.
3) Mourning the death of Steve Wacker. Oh right, he just left for Marvel. Meh.

Anyone else found a distinct lack of individuality (or anything particularly different to say) from the interviews? They’re all basically the same one done six hundred times over.

Back when 52 started, didn’t the various writers swear up and down that they WOULDN’T each be writing specific sections solo?