I do like the New 52 because it's read that or don't read new DC Comic stories. Love it or hate it DC Chief Creative Officer Geoff Johns is considered the "architect" of the New 52 and DC seems to be sticking with it. Two years later, why are we still calling it the "New" 52?BurningDoom wrote:I'm in complete agreement about New 52. Most of it has been a mess. Everything is just so damn dark and gloomy in the DC Universe anymore. And most of the characters are a shadow of their former versions. I have noticed that at least the Superman books seem to be veering back to the old feel it had, in the last few storylines. Superman is becoming more like Superman and less like a vigilante.
In regards to Superman being more like his old self - according to Jon Bogdanove, when he was commissioned to draw a New 52 Superman cover he was mandated to not draw the s-curl or the cleft chin. Because of the specifics of the design he insinuated that this new version of Superman copyright 2011 in case they loose the copyright this year WB and DC can fall back on the new version. I did ask him if WB was able to keep the copyright and it didn't fall into public domain would DC bring back the s-curl, dimple, and anything the was created before DC bought the character for $100? He didn't have an answer but did say that movies and toys bring in more $ than comics, and money would be the big motivator not copyright.


