..the New 52 Universe is an in name only adaptation of the New 52 Universe?
It's not a comeback. I just think you're misusing the trope. The New 52 Universe isn't an "adaptation" of anything. It's a continuation of the events in the DC Universe.
He meant that it's the DCU in name only. Anyway...
It's hard for me to get seriously upset about this reboot, because I'm old-school enough to be of the opinion that the "real" DC continuity ended in 1986. Still, I'm a little annoyed about a few things:
1) I was actually very pleased with most of the changes the company made after Infinite Crisis just a few years ago, and now they're all gone again. In particular, the original 52, which everybody loved, is presumably now erased.
2) This whole reboot seems like it was done very quickly with very little forethought. The slapdash feel of it all is really baffling, considering what a big change it is. I wish they had sat down and hammered out the details more thoroughly before plowing ahead with something that they may be stuck with for the next decade or two.
3) There have been a lot of complaints about the demeaning sexualization of a number of the female characters like Catwoman and Starfire.
4) The new costumes for the Big Three look silly, but I'm sure they'll be gone in two years, tops.
Edited by HelloLamppost
What's wrong with the Big Three's costumes? Nothing notable really changed, other than Superman losing his red underpants.
If the New 52 isn't an adaptation, why do we list Adaptational Villainy and Heroism?
Should they be take a level in kindness/badass?
Also NO Not the Red Undies! Why DC? WHY?
I'll miss those outside underpants. );
Edited by DrPsyche
"This whole reboot seems like it was done very quickly with very little forethought." Agreed. Between George Pereze stating poor communication as one reason he left "Superman" and noted confusion about Tim Drake being Robin BEFORE Red Robin, they obviously didn't take long enough to think this through. They wanted to "start fresh" and alleviate reader confusion due to decades of continuity, yet they insist that "some stuff still happened", and have made things more confusing than ever for readers new and old.
"What's wrong with the Big Three's costumes? Nothing notable really changed, other than Superman losing his red underpants." Wonder Woman's biggest (visual) change is that her gold trim is silver (perhaps because silver is closer to black, thus it's "darker" and thus it's "better"?). Batman has lines to ape the look of armor (like a lot of other characters, a true tribute to Mr. Lee's contemporary design skills), and Superman...I really do miss the red outerwear.
There seems to be a ridiculous amout of attention paid to making the women sexy (meaning half-naked) and the men badass and almost everything in between dark and gritty. There's little to no room for the kind of fun found during Steph Brown's tenure as Batgirl (speaking of, much as I love Cass and Steph, I'd rather they stay in limbo than risk being subjected to executive meddling to make things 90's EXTREEEME!!!).
Leave battle to the warriors or put a target on your ass!
I want to add Lying Creator, because I think I remember DC claiming they wanted to make continuity easier for new readers and have less Crossover Events; and now we have 3 crossover events happening at the same time. But I'm not sure if that's what they said. And I'm not sure if claiming that they actually made things more inaccessible to new readers is YMMV
Avatar by Leafsnake
Chuck Cunningham Syndrome or Ret-Gone. How do we list the characters who now don't appear anymore, like Cassandra Cain or Stephanie Brown, or Obsidian. I know the writers want to forget them, and there isn't a reason why they should be gone, they simply don't exist anymore. Then again, the whole Flashpoint Fiasco got rid of those characters, but it seems more like a writing sense and not an in-universe one. What I'm saying is that the missing characters who continue to be missing aren't addressed as such, so I don't know if it's a Ret-Gone, like in Crisis On Infinite Earths.
Ah well, I hope Grant Morinson does something similar to this like he did in Animal Man with the Psycho Pirate.
Hide / Show Replies
I just realized that we have a trope for Comic-Book Limbo as a viable third option. Not that this smiplifies things. But I think Ret-Gone should be reserved for those who definitively never existed in any way, shape, or form in this new continuity - right now, that means only Jade and Obsidian. Everyone else, like Wally West and the ex-Batgirls, may exist out there somewhere.
I thought it only was stated to be Obsidian, but I guess that Jade makes sense. When asked about the two batgirls, DC merely stated they'll see if they show up again. That said, I was under the Impression that Retgone is like when The Villain goes back in time to make the Hero never born... or something to that effect. This is basically a retcon done in universe, where the effects of the guy literally retcons the people out of existence without acknowledgement. Well, that's what I got from the works page.
Comic Book Limbo is interesting.
I'm writing it here because I'm trying really hard to be good and I hope this will help.
I was tempted to write as an example under In Name Only The whole New 52 universe
I know its not fair to DC and not appropriate for TV Tropes but I wanted to so badly. So here it is in the discussion area.
Whew! I do feel a little better. Thanks you fellow tropers.
Hide / Show Replies