WOnder Woman gives up killing and renounces her murder of Max Lord. Wonder Woman was Wolverine for what, about 6 months real time? And out of the blue? They made her Ms. Wolverine just as a plot device for the story, it wasn't any major character change like it would be if say the Punisher stopped killing. Wonder Woman not killing is not some big reversal of modern DC characterization, it's always been the status quo of Wonder Woman even in the darkest of the modern eras.

Batman doesn't kill Alexander Luthor in issue #7. Well how many times has Batman had a gun to the Joker or his hands around his neck and realized (again) that it wasn't worth it and killing was wrong? Repeatedly, as recently as Hush. So doing it again is not a symbol of backing away from the modern status quo in favor of light stories, since Batman backing away from murder at the last minute is actually a staple of grim modern Batman stories.

And Superman being more inspirational was just tacked on I believe because they needed something for Superman to "conquer" too for the sake of story symmetry and when they couldn't think of anything they just made up something vague: "Batman, be less of an asshole." "Wonder Woman, stop being such a cold-blooded killer, even though you only became one a few months ago out of the blue." "And Superman...uh...(crap, what should Superman's issue be?)...uh, inspire!"

Anyway, the problem with DC recently has never been that the superheroes were murderous, it's more that they remain detached, superior and stubbornly anti-murder almost to a fault while the villains and the world around them get depicted as more and more psychotic, gory and graphically disgusting and depraved at the same time. Now look at Infinite Crisis #7 with the sheer cannon fodder and the bloody beating of Earth 2 Superman combined with Batman once again being on the verge of killing a villain (yet again) until being talked off the ledge (yet again) and you'll see that it's all an illusion of change. All of the "changes" in Infinite Crisis #7 at best only serve to return the characters right back to the ineffective, elitist nonkillers in the face of bleak carnage that they were before the whole miniseries started.

Anyway, the impression I got from Identity Crisis in light of all that was that DC stood by its depressing darkness, had made peace with it and was going full steam ahead, with the sole exception of making Batman more likeable because even they admit they went a little too far on that one.

Think about it, our Superman and Batman didn't change their views about our world, the OTHER side did. Earth 2 Superman realized he was duped and wrong about our Earth and the heroes here are just as heroic, despite their dark exteriors. I'd argue the opposite of course, but that's not the point. Also, the other two critics of the darkness, Superboy and Alexander Luthor, were shown to be hypocrites, manipulators, and insane villains.

Oh, well, anyway...count me in on the crowd who could have sworn that Dan Dideo, when asked about all the grimmness in the DCU at the time, insinuated that it was the "darkness before the dawn" and that things were supposed to get a little happier.

Granted, some would argue it did, just not as much as you might expect.

Also jeers to the the whole Endangered Species crossover format. I must be the only person on the planet that’s really upset about it, but it’s about a far away from the Progressive X-men Era as we could possibly be.

I am looking forward to getting it just to see that Silvestri art though. Should be some of the best X-Men art in a while, I really dig that guy's evolution as an artist.

I have five pieces of original comic book art. Four of them are Jason Pearson's Legion of Super-Heroes work. Wonderful stuff.

JEERS to the X-Men: Endangered Species one-shot. It was like the well-written first part of a comic book, where people talk before something happens…only nothing happened!!! There’s more plot advancement in the Curtis comic strip!

Thank you for that.

Also jeers to the the whole Endangered Species crossover format. I must be the only person on the planet that's really upset about it, but it's about a far away from the Progressive X-men Era as we could possibly be.

(Hey, I totally just used the Comic Book Dictionary.)

Until they decide to hit the reset button (again) and go another way (Crisis, Zero Hour, IC...in ten years or so, we'll get another one).

I used to be a huge DC cheerleader, and I understand that for some insane reason writers/editors believe that they somehow can't sell a story to the public unless everything is "dark" because they need to sell books, but really, it's overdone. Hero books in both companies used to be fun, but lately it seems to me to be a marathon to see who can violently out-grim who.

Here's an idea: start with the character. Tell us what is unique and interesting about the character and why I should care to drop $3 a month on your book. Then write stories about the character that are interesting and not exercises in "how much violent crap can I put them through? Look, I found another layer..."

Waid's Flash, Giffen's JLI, Busiek's Astro City, Willingham's Fables, etc. I'll assume that anybody reading this can point to great runs on series, and what makes them great? Not a lot of violent acts, but rather character development and a sense that we know who and what these characters are...not having that sense distorted because some violence needs to mark them.

Violence is a one way to alter a character significantly, but it isn't the only way. Someone writing these books should realize that.

Will definitely read on now that Mark Waid's back; his first run was one of the greatest on a mainstream superhero comic, IMHO.

Wasn’t the point of IC that DC was going to be fun again?

Everyone keeps saying this. It's simply not true. It never was true. No one at DC promised this. The closest they came is that Mark Waid said Batman would be less of a dick, which he is. But if anything, Infinite Crisis was an affirmation of the darkness. Reread it, and you'll see what I mean. They are indicted by Alexander Luthor, Earth-2 Supes and Superboy Prime for being too dark now. For not being heroic anymore. But slowly E2 Superman realizes that he was being played for a fool and that these new heroes ARE heroic. And who turns out to be the real villains? The two people influencing him and trying to convince him that the darkness was bad. And the final proof appears in the death of Connor Kent issue, where the narration captions basically tell us that this world, warts and all, is heroic after all.

I took all that to mean that DC was saying "Look, we may be more dark, we may be grim, gritty violent and rapeariffic, but dammit we are just as heroic as ever and screw anyone who says otherwise." They brought up the point of modern comics being too dark not to criticize themselves but rather to address the point and shoot it down as the wrongheaded assertations of raving lunatics stuck in the past (like Alexander Luthor and Superboy Prime, hypocritical lunatics driven insane by their nostalgic need to return things to how they were).

SO yeah, the point was not to decry the modern darkness of DC but to proudly proclaim it shamelessly.

I also agree on the Flash points. Wally's return is more than welcome, and Bart's decline over the last few years is pretty sad (his feet were even normal sized before he died). I'd also like to add a Cheer to DC for keeping everything so tightly under wraps: the finite nature of Bart's Flash title, the return of Wally and Mark Waid, Flash's title going back to its old numbering, etc. The campaign of secrecy and misdirection that kept this all hidden up until last weekend was really impressive. Kudos, DC.