"The Flash" Adds "Harry Potter" Star Tom Felton as Series Regular
You have to hand it to DC. They already had a good deal of notable announcements, from the Milestone characters to Warlord returning to the Archie characters to Kevin Smith’s Batman mini-series.
Whatever happened to the caped crusader?
Talk about just blowing everyone else out of the water – one of the few comic book writers out there whose mere presence on a comic book gets media attention, and DC has him writing BATMAN (even if it is only for a short period of time, which is likely)?
What a pull by DC.
And that about does it for the stuff that struck my fancy! Feel free to drop a note in the comments about any SDCC news (that I did not mention) that has YOU really excited!
From the Vertigo Panel coverage at CBR:
“One of the things I’m always asked at conventions,” said Stewart, “is when is the next Seaguy.” Stewart said that he’s been asked that question for five years, and now both “Seaguy 2: Slaves of Mickey Eye” and “Seaguy 3: Eternal,” will be out soon.
This is followed by the announcement that Sean Murphy, a young artist who I dig a lot (here is his website), is going to be the artist on Morrison’s upcoming Warcop series.
To quote Dr. Sam Beckett, “Oh boy!”
Sounds like fun (I like that he’s already done most of the mini-series), but can’t say that I am a fan of Onomatopoeia.
Then again, it could be Batman fighting Constantine Drakon, so I should just count my blessings, eh?
As you can tell by the exclamation mark, I am quite pumped about this one!
Chris Arrant at Newsarama has a good interview with Grell (that’s where the image comes from).
In the interview, Grell first explained that it was meant to be a mini-series to celebrate the 35th Anniversary of Warlord, but soon was given the green-light as an ongoing series!
I wonder if perhaps a series of mini-series would be better here, too, but whatever, man, it’s Grell back doing Warlord! Woohoo!!
I know I recently gave Supergirl a hard time for having ANOTHER new creative team, but I have to say, the idea of getting a Geoff Johns protege to write the book and then have the book basically tie directly with Superman?
That’s a smart idea.
Has Supergirl’s title EVER been this tied to the main Superman titles? Ever?
That’s how IDW described the concept of Larry Hama being behind the G.I.Joe reboot for the new IDW ongoing series.
Well, would anyone actually want that?
Remember Just Imagine Stan Lee?
I’d have stressed instead the fact that Hama’s recent G.I.Joe work has been just as good, if not better, than his old work, so you have a guy whose famous for creating a title AND has been doing good recent work on the title (G.I.Joe: Declassified was really quite good).
I wasn’t much a fan of Hama’s Spooks, but his recent G.I. Joe work still has me looking forward to this series.
If it weren’t for that pesky Neil guy, Andy Diggle becoming the new Thunderbolts writer would be the coolest news of the Comic Con for me, personally, as Ellis’ Thunderbolts was a really great book, so I was fearing the worst with his departure, and Andy Diggle is one of the few writers out there that is not much of a step down from Warren Ellis (whose Thunderbolts run was great).
At the same time, I remember a few years ago, when the signs all seemed to be pointing to Diggle being the next DC writer to make the move to Marvel, but then he stayed at DC, instead – and promptly did basically nothing of note (I mean, don’t get me wrong, I have really enjoyed his Hellblazer work and I absolutely adored his Green Arrow: Year One mini-series, but he did not exactly have a ton of major projects that would make you say, “Ah, so THAT’S why he stayed!”)!!
So while it’s a few years later then one would think, he’s at Marvel now, and I can’t wait to see what he has up his sleeves for the Thunderbolts. I just hope Songbird isn’t screwed!!
On the one hand, Marvel has certainly given the Agents of Atlas a real slow burn, by having them make guest appearances in a number of books in back of their critically-acclaimed (it was critically acclaimed, right? I mean, I liked it, but I forget if other people did or not) original mini-series, so the news that the series is being given an ongoing (written by the great Jeff Parker, but sans original artist Leonard Kirk, who is on the great Captain Britain book right now) is not, like, totally out of left field.
That said, I think a series of mini-series would fit the concept better than an ongoing, and if the mini-series do real well, THEN I can see an ongoing.
I just hope that if the sales aren’t there, it won’t affect seeing them in future mini-series and one-shots.
And, of course, I naturally hope that the sales ARE there, as I’m looking forward to the book.
Wouldn’t it be funny if this series mostly just reversed the whole “the Rogues blast Bart Allen and then kick him to death” story (I see Johns is already sorta addressing the silliness in Rogue’s Revenge)?
What’s the current record for shortest time before a story came out to explain away a previous story? How long after Avengers #200 was Avengers Annual #10?
Gotta give Van Sciver props – that’s a neat cover.
Well, just recently, I did a “Top Five Ultimate Trades” list, and I gave four of the five spots to Millar’s Ultimate work, so you know I was pleased when it was announced that he would be returning to the Ultimate Universe.
He seems to really “get” the concept of the Ultimate universe better than most other writers (perhaps even Bendis, whose work on Ultimate Spider-Man, as a whole, has been awesome).
See, now THIS one I am less wary over. Newsarama has a good interview with J. Michael Straczynski where he discusses the move (that’s where this neat promo image came from, as well!).
The Archie heroes are fine heroes, in and of themselves, but unlike the Milestone heroes, they’re not tied to one specific universe, as already noted by the !mpact experiment of the early 90s (which had some really good comics, notably the Black Hood and Waid’s The Comet), so they’re basically blank slates for Straczynski to attempt to work some magic on.
I’m looking forward to their usage in The Brave and the Bold. It sucks that he’s able to get the usage of characters from a whole other comic book company, but can’t use Vertigo character. Feh, I say! FEH!
By the by, who drew the promo piece? Is that Joe Bennett?
(I apologize for the multitude of posts, but I like to wait until San Diego Comic-Con is over before I sort out the news that strikes me most interesting, and I don’t think a catch-all entry is cool with so many disparate stories)
Talk about a mixed reaction! On the one hand, I am a huge fan of Milestone Comics, so I am thrilled to hear that DC was able to work out a deal to bring the Milestone characters back to the world of comics. And with Milestone founder Dwayne McDuffie directly involved, to boot!!
THAT SAID, mixing them into the DC Universe?
Boy, am I wary about that.
Don’t get me wrong, a bunch of the Milestone characters should be able to mix into the DC Universe without a real problem, with Static being the most notable example – his shtick works in any universe. The same goes, I would say, for Icon and Rocket.
But Blood Syndicate? Hardware? Holocaust? The Shadow Cabinet? These are concepts that scream out “isolated universe,” much like the Marvel Family (who have never really been adequately integrated into the DC Universe, despite Jerry Ordway doing yeoman work for years to make the square peg fit into the round hole).
So I fear that some of the unique characters will lose their uniqueness a bit, but in the end, it is a return to comics of some great characters, so really, it’s a secondary issue – Static is back! Woohoo!
Spoiler warning! Continue Reading »
Okay, so I’m reading about the whole situation where the band, Fall Out Boy, is no longer interested in doing a comic book by the Dabel Bros. since the lawyers from the Simpsons got involved over the use of the name “Fall Out Boy” (who is a character from the Simpsons, and while not a registered trademark, certainly is a trademark of the Simpsons).
Now, I get that the Dabel Bros. are pissed off because they had a contract from the band to do the comic, and since the Simpsons’ legal team got involved, the band has cooled off, interest-wise (it seems to me like they want to cause as little ruffles with the Simpsons as possible, because they understand as well as anyone that they’re using a trademarked name).
However, according to the Dabel Bros., the comic CAN proceed, it just can not use the name “Fall Out Boy” as a title (or for advertising). They quote the Simpsons’ lawyers as saying, “Our sole interest is that the name “Fall Out Boy”, the related Simpsons images and any references to The Simpsons not appear in any of your publications.”
Well, okay, but while I certainly feel for the Dabel Bros. here – who exactly is interested in reading a Fall Out Boy comic where you can’t use the name Fall Out Boy in the comic book?
I’m not saying the Dabel Bros. don’t have rights here, but I wonder whether they’re really worth enforcing. How well would a comic about Fall Out Boy, without the support OF Fall Out Boy and not even CALLED Fall Out Boy sell?
Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.