Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Marvel Comis Takes Over Star Wars in 2015


Can't say I'm surprised, but I am a little disappointed. Means Legacy 2 will probably only last two years total (though with enough warning to wrap things up!) and Dawn of the Jedi will likely have only one more arc if that.


DarK Horse is going to be a very tough act to follow after putting out the most consistently-good SW material for years (and often the best SF comics coming out in the US period). Here's hoping Marvel can manage or, better yet, hoping they hire some of the same writers Dark Horse did.

I remain skeptical. Look at what a cock-up the superhero-verse is at Marvel.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I remain skeptical. Look at what a cock-up the superhero-verse is at Marvel.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I remain skeptical. Look at what a cock-up the superhero-verse is at Marvel.

They're much, much better at planning and organizing a comic universe than DC.


But, that is compared to DC, of course. Compared to Dark Horse which so consistently produces great work? Skepticism is warranted.

So I guess it's just a matter of time before we get Sith Lords vs the X-Men.

Originally posted by Q99
They're much, much better at planning and organizing a comic universe than DC.


But, that is compared to DC, of course. Compared to Dark Horse which so consistently produces great work? Skepticism is warranted.

lol. Dark Horse don't produce anything anywhere near the level of quality that Marvel does, let alone DC, if the SW comics are anything to go by.

Originally posted by Q99
They're much, much better at planning and organizing a comic universe than DC.


But, that is compared to DC, of course. Compared to Dark Horse which so consistently produces great work? Skepticism is warranted.

DC is just shitty anyways. The only reason why I know DC characters is because they eventually get movies. Otherwise, I wouldn't have the first clue.

Originally posted by Astor Ebligis
lol. Dark Horse don't produce anything anywhere near the level of quality that Marvel does, let alone DC, if the SW comics are anything to go by.

Leaving aside the more mature, cerebral storylines of the early '90s X-Men and the pretty awesome until it jumped the shark X-Men 2099, this is largely untrue.

Originally posted by Astor Ebligis
lol. Dark Horse don't produce anything anywhere near the level of quality that Marvel does, let alone DC, if the SW comics are anything to go by.

Take it you don't know dark horse much?

Hellboy is, I would say, probably their highest-quality line. Usagi Yojimbo's a very good long-runner too. The Knights of the Old Republic comic was fantastic, and so were a fair number of other SW titles, of which Legacy 2 is currently my favorite, but they've got the Lucas Draft and the Brian Wood book as well, and Dawn of the Jedi. I'd take any of the SW books over pretty much any random DC book.

In terms of quality books, there's a lot of competition right now. Marvel is, of course, huge, so has more books periods, so even though there's a good number of mediocre, they've got plenty of good ones (Mark Waid's Daredevil is fantastic. Hawkeye. FF. I'm a fan of Captain Marvel, Scarlet Spider, and Red She-Hulk too). Image has Saga (best space opera out there) and Walking Dead (if you're into zombies). Dark Horse has the aforementioned.



Originally posted by Stealth Moose
DC is just shitty anyways. The only reason why I know DC characters is because they eventually get movies. Otherwise, I wouldn't have the first clue.



I liked it before the current editorial regime, but in the last few years it's been a litany of writers being swapped out or quitting, complains of extensive last-minute editoral changes preventing writers from using their talent, a lack of planning visibly transparent with hyped-up new story lines and 'this new character is really important' characters being dropped with zero resolution on a regular basis. And every time they swap writers they swap directions, so you've got tons of 6-12 month runs who's stories were just cut off. Heck, Batwoman's writers were recently unceremoniously dropped off due to editorial wanting to change multiple key moments in the climax of their 25 issue run (remove an origin, change the story ending, and don't allow the heroine who proposed in the comic to marry. All previously-approved elements)... and the writers last issue ended on a cliffhanger, which the new writer did not pick up from.

Even if you find something you like at DC, it won't get a conclusion.



Really, all the big companies have access to much of the same good writers, it's in how you manage them. And with DC's management, you aren't missing much.

To be fair I wouldn't say what you're describing is anywhere near as prevalent as you're making it out to be, and only really applies to the mid to low tier series DC produces (and I agree that both the big two produce their fair share of mediocre works as well). When it comes to DC's good stuff however, there isn't a single SW comic that even comes close. The KOTOR, Legacy and Dawn of the Jedi series are good but hardly spectacular and I'd go as far as saying that the Brian Wood series, original draft adaptation and the Old Republic tie-ins are quite simply bad. Meanwhile the likes of Wonder Woman, Batman, Batman Incorporated, Superman Unchained, Grant Morrison's run on Action Comics, Aquaman, Geoff John's Justice League stuff and the conclusion to his Green Lantern run, Green Arrow since Jeff Lemire took over, Swamp Thing, Animal Man, Dial H, I, Vampire, Forever Evil and bits of Justice League Dark, Constantine, Phantom Stranger and Pandora have all been as good as comics get and some of the best stuff released over the past few years. The SW stuff isn't remotely in the same league.

Edit - Marvel and DC have accoss to the same level of talent for the most part (though I'd give DC the edge for sure) but the other companies, while having access to some top writers, don't have access to the same quantity of top tier talent. The only truly great writer by today's standards that's worked on a SW comic in the past few years is Brian Wood, and I'd argue his Star War series is by far among his weakest work, it's literally shockingly bad.

Nooo, George Perez, writer and artist of Crisis on Infinite Earths, quit Superman 6 months after the reboot due to meddling.

After Morrison's Action Comic run, they hired a writer and artist team to take the next run, Andy Diggle and Tony Bedard as the full time team. Due to editorial issues, Diggle quit *before his run started*, and Tony Bedard was slated to just take over... and he rapidly announced he'd do just three issues and quite.

And that's Superman.

Green Lantern also had a case where the post-Geoff Johns writer quit before they even started because their story arc was approved, he worked on scripts, then significant alterations were required (including 'tossing in' the death of John Stewart, something they backpeddled on) and he just threw his hands up and quit.

DC is a company that's basically surviving off the backs of a few authors with high selling books (Scott Snyder, Geoff Johns) because their other writers have to put up with meddling, sometimes in very unprofessional amounts.

There was a writer a few months back that swore off the big two, saying, to paraphrase, "DC treats it's writers like crap and is a horrible place to work! .... oh, and marvel is very story-arc focused, which is fine for some, but it's not my thing, y'know?". The contrast was striking.




KotoR, not spectacular? Not according to most fans I've talked to. The first arc is really terrific stuff that captures the Star Wars feel better than the wide majority of SW stories.

Legacy's more love-it-or-hate-it, Cade gets mixed reactions but it has great setting.



.... have you considered you may simply have poor taste? The Wood series opened to great reviews and is a female-lead book outselling Wonder Woman.

And speaking of Wonder Woman...



Are you talking about the one where the main character somehow grew up into her 20s without knowing how her culture reproduces and somehow managed to be at a 180 from her culture on the subjects of rape, murder, and slavery, and has all of her female power-sources and role models replaced with male ones?

I mean, it has good writing in *some* respect, but post-reboot WW does not have issues, it has catalogs.


Justice League, does alright in sales but it's flashy, not deep. Haven't seen much praise on it's story lines, most of the DC fans I know aren't fans of it. Doesn't help that they threw Cyborg in for diversity and didn't use him.

Aquaman, Action Comics, Lemire GA, Batman, sure, those are nice book, but I wouldn't count a number of ones you listed as 'great' ('Forever Evil'? C'mon).


DC is a big company so despite it's issues it has some good books, good writers who manage to avoid the editorial eye will manage some things, but it is a company with problems, and is doing worse than Marvel right now for very, very clear reasons.


Judging by your lineup, you sound like you like the dark/supernatural stuff. The Animal Man, Swamp Thing, etc.. Keep in mind when talking SW books, they aren't supposed to be that way and have a very different tone. Good SW books may simply be very much different taste than yours.

And if one does like supernatural dark stuff, Dark Horse has Hellboy and BRPD anyway.

Sure, I like Animal Man and Swamp Thing simply because I like dark/supernatural stuff, nevermind that they've been among the best reviewed comicbooks released since The New 52's inception or are fantastically plotted by two of the most highly regarded writers in comics today, or that I mentioned numerous titles that don't fit that description. Compare the critical reception of Animal Man and Swamp Thing to Hellboy and BRPD over the past few years and tell me they're even remotely comparable in terms of quality. You, sir, are quite simply delusional if you truly believe that any Star Wars comic measures up favourably against the top stuff produced by DC that I mentioned, stuff written by the likes of Grant Morrison, Geoff Johns, Scott Snyder, Jeff Lemire, Brian Azzarello, etc. that are among the critically most well received books being published every year. I'm aware of the editorial controversies but as I said when it comes to the absolute best stuff that DC produces, it doesn't seem to have been a factor and is largely irrelevant. Likewise your complaints regarding Wonder Woman, while arguably fair, are in the grand scheme of things inconsequential and do little to detract from everything else that the series does right.

Justice League was only mediocre in the first six issues, the crossover with Aquaman was fantastic, as was the build up to Trinity War and its involvement in the big events since. I slotted Forever Evil and I, Vampire in at the end and had meant to say that they were in parts fantastic, as they have been, along with the likes of Phantom Stranger and JLD.

I will note I originally comparing them to Marvel, and noting DH's consistency.

DC does have some good authors who produce great books (and I find even some of Geoff John's lacking. Post-reboot Hal is too much of a jerk, and not the fun kind of jerk like Guy, etc.), but only allows a few of them free reign.

And Dark Horse's output is, as I said, far more consistent. DC has no idea how to purposefully make a good book, they just luck into it.

Dark Horse's worst Star Wars book in the last decade is... well, I'm not sure, none stick in my mind as very bad. Maybe one of the star wars tales...? Or possibly a Boba Fett book I haven't read...? On the critically acclaimed side, Brian Wood is, as I've mentioned, a majorly critically acclaimed big name author who I'm surprised you give so little credit to. Heck, I don't even *like* him and I still admit that.

And note, for DH I'm using 'decade'. For the next two, I shall use 'two years.'

Marvel's worse stuff currently is, merely nothing to write home about, but I can't think of anything that's aggressively bad (extend to decade and it'd get Red Hulk, Ultimatum, OMD, etc., but thankfully those are in the past). And they have a long rack of critically acclaimed comics right now (some of which have very long runs as a bonus. There's more of Mark Waid's Daredevil than any two, maybe three of the ones you've listed!), so they don't lose out to DC there.

DC's worst stuff.... well, you've got books that have had three or four writers in 2 years, with a new direction with each writer, and in multiple cases at least one of those writers is Rob Liefeld. Their Static Shock was a bad joke (it turned out the editor and the artist worked together to cut out the original writer!), their Blue Beetle removed almost everything fun about it, pre-Lemire Green Arrow was weak sauce, Justice League Dark's first writer thought it was a good idea to waste the second issue breaking up a relationship that had no reason to exist in the reboot, Superman/WW seems mainly focused on showing how great Superman is and not portraying them very well as partners or having much in the way of romance, you get the idea.

Grab a random Marvel book and you run a risk of getting "eh," and a good chance of "this is really awesome!". DC book, you've got a chance of awesome, but you also run a chance of getting a real stinker. Dark Horse book, and while there's fewer "this is really awesome!", if you don't get "awesome," you get, "Hey, this is pretty good." That's consistency.




Oh, I've got more. The book is really much more of a Greek God, or "Wondy's Friends" book rather than a Wonder Woman book. While she's got a central role, she has very little development focused on her and a reader doesn't particularly know her all that much better now than we did 4 issues in.

Also somewhat on the sex issue front, but not just that, it has Wondy mysteriously putting up with the sexist Orion slapping her butt, abd includes bizarre moments like when he's being rude she decides to kiss him before punching him. Now obviously, that goes on the catalog side, but aside from that, leaves one wondering, "Why is she responding that way?", which is not something one should be wondering on the main character of a book.


Then there's the side issue that it's almost a separate continuity than WW in the other books. Relationship with Superman that has it's own title? What's that?

(And, speaking as a WW fan, it doesn't do much that hasn't been done before. Whenever people say they find the focus on mythology and monsters a 'new take,' I chuckle)



Even putting aside the gender issues, I simply think Wood's Star Wars is a superior book to WW that handles it's characters better, and ditto KotoR too, who's Zayne is a very compelling hero.




Hellboy and BRPD are preeeetty high up in critical reception, actually... so yea, I'd take that comparison. Granted, some of the best stories tend to be earlier on, but there's some good HB/BRPD stuff recently too.

Didn't WW threaten to rip Orions balls off after he slapped her butt?

DC is currently kicking Marvel's ass IMO. But both have comics vastly more entertaining than anything Dark Horse is currently putting out.

I can only see this as a good move for SW comics which, for the most part, have been very sub-par recently.

Yeah, I'm torn personally. The last truly decent star wars comic series to come out, imo, was KOTOR.

But on the other hand, Marvel has done absolutely zero to impress me since Civil War. Not a damn thing.

Are you including Civil War itself in that?

I hear Young Loki was pretty dang awesome.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Didn't WW threaten to rip Orions balls off after he slapped her butt?

Nope, different occasion. And the ball-one was after a kiss... for some reason.


Originally posted by Nephthys
Are you including Civil War itself in that?

I hear Young Loki was pretty dang awesome.

Civil War was 7 years ago.

Young Loki was indeed awesome.


One of the odd things about Marvel is their events tend not to be great (even the not bad ones don't leap out at me), but the follow-up to the events is almost always top notch. CW, for example, while it was crap, Avengers Initiative, The Order, the New Avengers/Mighty Avengers split, was all good stuff. Secret Invasion's follow ups were pretty interesting. Siege had Kid Loki and the Heroic Age. And with the X-men, the whole 'moving to California, then Utopia, then living on it,' cycle was very interesting.

Given that I simply choose to not read the bad stuff I don't particularly concern myself with the lows, it's the highs that matter and DC regularly reach far greater heights than Dark Horse could ever hope to.



The ensemble cast is one of the book's best features and something a lot of people who read the book love about it, and the sense of family is something that is quite touching. It's part of what makes this the best Wonder Woman series there's ever been. It might not be to your liking but it isn't an objective criticism of the book. As for Wonder Woman, her character goes through a lot, even if she doesn't necessarily change too much (which is by no means neccessarily a bad thing) and is absolutely central to both the world building and the drama.



Or rather, was interrupted by a panicked Zola as she was about to say/do something about it.



Grabbing his balls as you later recognised, and by kissing him she was a) playing along with him, lulling him into a false sense of security, and making the ball grab more impactful and shocking by the stark contrast of the kiss. Grabbing somebody's balls is simply far more painful and demeaning when you do so after giving them a gigantic boner.



Holy shit...

What next? Are you going to suggest that it's superior to the likes of Sandman, Hellblazer or Lucifer?

Jesus I didn't realise that Dark Horse had fanboys.



"Over the past few years", which was the period over which I was comparing them to, I don't think you would take that comparison, given that Animal Man and Swamp Thing have been some of the critically most well received books and Hellboy and BRPD have been incredibly non-descript. I don't care about their reception ten years ago when I'm talking about what I'd rather read now.

Best WW run would either be Greg Rucka's run and Gail Simone's run, both of which outdo it pretty solidly.

They develop Diana better, have great stories, and manage without massive plotholes like "Just how does one end up ignorant of one's own culture?".







Look, your low opinion of the SW comics is not universal, nor your high opinion of the current WW one. I don't feel that the current WW book has developed her, and I've seen multiple other people express the same sentiments and quit reading as a result.

Knights does a very good job of making you emphasizing with the characters and developing them. It's no Sandman or Lucifer (not to mention it's an *adventure* comic and those two aren't, different genres), but Azzarello's WW isn't worth mentioning in the same breath as those anyway, not even close, so so what?


Dark Horse isn't my favorite company and Star Wars isn't my favorite line nor even my favorite DH line, but credit where credit is due.




'Non-descript?' Hellboy's won a dozen awards including multiple Eisners (BRPD won an Eisner in '09, HB won Project Fanboy awards for best indy hero/character the same year. There was a Best Story award for HB not long before that... there's quite a list, in short), and Alan Moore personally recommends it.


I think you're confusing 'you personally like more' with 'more critically acclaimed'. You're going to be hard pressed to find a more critically acclaimed series than Hellboy that's in print.

I also think you disproportionately weigh things more towards the horror side and give lighter adventure too little credit. Just because something is lighter fair, doesn't mean it doesn't have more developed main characters.

Their runs were great, especially Rucka's, but Azzarello's is better.

The plotting and scheming of the Gods interspersed among prophecies about First Borns and Last Borns and Old Gods and New Gods all make for some really intruiging stuff and the story also has far more of an epic feel than previous Wonder Woman books, such as the moment when she removes her cuffs in issue 12 and turns into a major badass, or when she kills Ares and becomes the new God of War in issue 23 and as I said it has the family dynamic as well that previous series have not had, and try as you might to argue that it doesn't feel like a Wonder Woman book the fact remains that she's gone through numerous changes and had numerous moments and been at centre stage throughout the series (if you truly feel the need to disagree I can go into more detail). It doesn't hurt that this is by far the best art the book has ever had, and in general the story is just very well plotted and paced with all the twists and drama and epic moments and scheming all being very well done.

She remained ignorant of that one facet of her culture because, clearly they are very secretive and don't talk openly about it and according to Hephaestus, they only do it three times every century; I'd imagine they don't inform the younger generation of the practise until they feel they are ready, and then it may only be a small portion of them that are picked (and Diana's integration with the outside world would probably have menat that she may have never been informed of it). So it fully makes sense that she would remain ignorant of that element of her culture. Not a plothole in the slightest.



My opinion of the WW book is near universal you'll find among critics and the people who read the book. It's the minority that don't like the new series, a vocal minority but a minority nonetheless, and like you I suspect fans of the older Wonder Woman books that don't like the new (and better) direction the book's going in. Comicbook characters, in many cases, are very clearly defined and set in their ways and not supposed to change. Would you criticise a Batman book because his character doesn't develop over the course of the series?

I don't think you would find many that would label the SW comics as spectacular in the grand scheme of things or compare them favourably to the top comics released by the big two.



lol, genre has nothing to do with it. Azzarello's WW certainly isn't in the same league of those series (few are) but it possesses the same characteristic that they do, in being in many, many leagues beyond any Star Wars comic.



Again, this all relates to a time before the one I'm forming the comparison over. Since The New 52's inception, they have been pretty non-descript while Swamp Thing and Animal Man have been considered some of the best books released and really helped establish Jeff Lemire, if not Scott Snyder, as one of DC's very best writers.

As great as Batman Incorporated was, I wouldn't use the far greater acclaim of Grant Morrison's Batman run circa 2009 as evidence for how well it was received during The New 52, which hasn't been as great, though still very good (and in some cases, for example the ending, a little misunderstood).



Which is why I included Geoff Johns' work on my list, whose Justice League you criticised for not being deep interestingly enough.

And their ethics? They have to be ok with the matter to do it.

Even if she was ignorant of the event itself, there's the fact that she grew up strongly opposed to murder, rape, and slavery in a culture that practices all of the above.



Deep-deep isn't necessary, but I would solidly put KotoR above Justice League on the character front, themes front, and story front. KotoR has a very tight story arc that strongly affects the main character who we get to know very well. He has a tendency to write characters his way rather than as they are in their own books/prior stuff- *His* WW and the Wonder Woman in Azz's book are fairly different. Geoff Johns has some bad writing habits, and they show up in JL (less-so in Aquaman).

I'd put most SW books above JL pretty solidly. Some of the weaker ones on the same level.



Also notably, the Geoff Johns ones are about the only ones that you listed that could be considered the same genre. I mean, Animal Man and Swamp thing, great, sure, but a Vertigo-esque title is very very different than a SW title and trying to do a SW title in that tone would be very non-SWsy.


And again, consistency. All the SW books are very solid. Of DC's more adventure-y books, a lot of them sink like stones and the ones that don't are reliant on just a few authors, while every DH SW author is fairly solid. Going from 'regularly good' to 'hit and miss- with plenty of misses' would not be a good transition.


Marvel's less hit-and-miss than DC, when they try to do a solid book they normally succeed, but it's still going to be hard to get Dark Horse's level of consistency.

Well it's not so much about their ethics as it is their attitude towards men. Sure they do all of those things (not sure that rape was involved btw) but chances are that they see ethics as not applying to men, in the same way their hunting of animals is not so much a reflection of their ethics as it is a reflection of the fact that they do not believe that ethics apply to animals.

Given that their treatment of men in how they reproduced was something they kept secret from Wonder Woman, and that the manner in which they treated men wouldn't be reflected in the values they would teach their children to uphold in a female utopia like society, I don't really see an issue here.



I agree that the characterisation in Justice League isn't always the best but the storytelling is the main focus, and after the first 6 issues it's been great. For the record I was also talking about the JLA series which has been very different to JL.



Is it not possible that you're simply aware of DC's lesser series, due to their higher profile and how big a deal has been made about DC's editors (which appears to have coloured your perception of them) whereas with Dark Horse you remain blissfully unaware of their lesser titles? How can you be so sure that Dark Horse are as consistent as you claim they are? And I maintain that they don't come close to reaching the highs that Marvel and DC do, especially if we're limiting the discussion to their SW output.

Also, going back to what you were saying about it being about the talent behind the work and how they're managed that makes a series however good it is, well it's also about the setting, and the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of comicbook writers have two types of books they grow up wanting to write: creator-owned books and books belonging to either one of the Big 2's shared universes; not random franchise tie-ins. The norm for a successful comicbook writer is to write superhero stories for either Marvel or DC; these are the types of comics they grew up reading and fell in love with, the comics that they go into the industry brainstorming ideas for and thinking about how they would write certain characters, it's where they draw a lot of inspiration from and its a rich history that most are intimately familiar with as fans. The Star Wars setting will simply never have that same impact on comicbook writers and it's largely why you rarely see top talent writing for it, and that when you do, it's usually not very inspired.

One, I'm talking about their Star Wars line specifically, where I've read the wide majority of the books and am familiar with every big one they've ever put out, and while early ones were hit-and-miss, by the 00s their quality was rather good. They certainly keep a tight eye on those and make sure they pick good authors.

Two, Dark Horse's strategy is to produce a fairly limited number of titles and to keep a reputation for quality. It's not that hard to at least keep tabs on most of their books, and you'll be hard pressed to find a bad one. Sure, no-one's perfect, but quality control is clearly a priority to them. For their size, they have a rather disproportionate amount of Eisner and other comic industry awards.

DC had a huge array of flops during their 52 relaunch of all places, they couldn't keep quality consistent during their most publicized event ever. And many of the replacement writers in turn also turned out to be flops. When you can't even get things right with multiple tries on your big "Look at this everyone" event, that shows slopping quality control. Sure, there's hits in there, good ones, but it's dartboard style hits, just throw things out there until they stick and eat a large number of misses in the process.

Also, very significantly, there's lots of SW comics with complete, finished story arcs. Something DC has a problem with even with their good books, just look at Batwoman. Knights of the Old Republic was a *fantastic* book, but it wouldn't have been nearly as strong if some editor with a desire to meddle swapped out the writer as the climax begins.





Ah, so you're moving to how you think the two should be in general. Though I would point out that if that's how you think, shouldn't that apply to the big 2 as well? And of course, tons of people grew up loving/watching SW.

Except the real big problem with the argument is that their talent is rather good in output regardless of how you think they should be, and is often superhero comic veterans of high note to boot. John Ostrander has several very famous comic book runs. Not to mention, well, how many people grew up with and love SW.

You know turning Barbara Gordon into Oracle, during the acclaimed
Suicide Squad, a change widely praised and used for decades? His idea. He also made the famous Grimjack comic that still gets reprinted 30 years later and there's been a fair amount of movie talk about it (JMS almost managed to make it into one a few years back).

Ostrander also wrote the Star Wars story Twilight in the Republic comic, which had so much impact that one of the Jedi from it got adopted into the movies themselves, something I believe unique for extended-universe Jedi. Aayla Secura, you might have heard of her. From the same story, Quinlan Vos made it into the Clone Wars show as well.


And John Jackson Miller, writer of the Knight Errant comic series, also wrote multiple SW novels that made it to the New York Times bestseller list and are considered some of the better in the entire SW novel line. That's plural critically acclaimed NYT bestsellers.


Knight Errant, Knights of the Old Republic, Republic, Legacy, Dawn of the Jedi. I'd disagree highly with your 'uninspired' comment, the comics tend to have more inspired and tighter plot than the rest of the EU.

And while they may not have an impact on the comic industry per se, they *do* have an impact on both the NY Times bestseller list and the movies themselves, which I believe speaks for itself, and both are something most writers quite appreciate.


It seems to me like you have an image of how the comic writers are, but seriously, this is grade-A talent that has made plenty of great stories. And there's also some grade-B talent with merely 'fun and readable' stories, but grab a random SW book off the shelf and you are

What are we talking about right now?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
What are we talking about right now?


Mostly on whether or not a new company would be able to match Dark Horse's output.




Astor thinks DC would be able to do a better job, but I highly question their consistency.

I question Marvel's consistency less than DC's, but I still view Dark Horse as a tough act to follow because they've done a really good job of avoiding putting out bad SW comics for the last decade+.

Originally posted by Q99
One, I'm talking about their Star Wars line specifically, where I've read the wide majority of the books and am familiar with every big one they've ever put out, and while early ones were hit-and-miss, by the 00s their quality was rather good. They certainly keep a tight eye on those and make sure they pick good authors.

Well you keep on switching between the two so it's hard to tell!



A quick glance tells me they release a number or original books each month in the region of 50-60. Hardly a limited number of titles comparatively. I think you're being a little disingenuous in claiming that you can keep tabs on most of them.



As I said, DC's misses are generally more highly publicised, as a company they are generally held to a far higher standard than the non-Big Two companies, and you severely exaggerate the number of misses they've had.



Now the idea that they have no control over their hits is just silly, when they typically put their best creative teams on the more important series, and by no coincidence these are the series that usually do well. Green Arrow being a massive success wasn't blind luck, it was the fact that they put one of their best writers on the series in Jeff Lemire and oversaw his inspired vision for the series. Likewise with Snyder and Batman, Azzarello and Wonder Woman etc.



Batwoman is the exception, not the rule, and I'd hardly call KotOR fantastic.



Sure they did but it wasn't something that they associated with comics, and the reality to them as aspiring comicbook writers was that they would hopefully write for the Big Two one day. Hardly any of them would have been familiar with the Star Wars EU like they are with the DCU and MU, and as I said there has never been a truly top tier comicbook writer that has written an inspired Star Wars story. Brian Wood comes close, but his efforts were the furthest thing from inspired you could imagine. Ostrander is a legit writer, and had an interesting vision for his stories, but he is by no means top tier. He's no Ennis, Waid, Azzarello, Vaughan etc. Those guys are grade A talents, Wood is borderline, and Ostrander is quite clearly nowhere near that league. There has never been a spectacular Star Wars comic series.

You're the one switching between them.

I said DH's SW is very consistent. You asked about other stuff, and I mentioned they do well there too, but most specifically the SW part is the one I'm most familiar with.



Um, considering that Lemire is the *fourth* Green Arrow writer team after the reboot? Yes, that's dartboard.

It went J.T. Krul, Keith Giffen and Dan Jurgens, Ann Nocenti, and *finally* Lemire. Lemire wasn't plan A, plan B, or even plan C. He was literally their plan D.

If they were on the ball, he'd be plan A, but he wasn't.


If it takes you four tries to get something good (none of the prior three runs were well-received by either readers or comics), then it's a good sign that you cannot consistently get those results.


Also don't forget Nu52 books like Static Shock, Blue Beetle, Mr. Terrific, and Firestorm where things never worked from the start and continued to not work until they were canceled.

Then you've got books like Voodoo where the writer, Ron Marz, another respected industry veteran, was literally announced to be changed before the 3rd issue was out because they changed their mind on direction while the story had barely started.


Or just to go pre-52, remember JMS's famous and much-hyped runs on Superman and Wonder Woman one year before the reboot? Where Superman started out an absolute trainwreck and WW started out dull, until the new writers stepped in to salvage them?

DC has an impressive number of unforced writer errors and mid-stream writer replacements.




And Grifter? Deathstroke? Sword and Sorcery? Superman (they lost George Perez, writer of some of DC's most famous stories and who himself did a critically reclaimed reboot before, due to meddling)? All also exceptions? Writer change overs in NuDC are common.

Heck, the creator of Earth 1 quit DC due to meddling, despite that having a couple of good books.

Not to mention, one that didn't actually make it onto a book, announced critically-acclaimed writer Andy Diggle pre-quits Action Comics due to professional issues with editorial. He was the one they pegged to fill Morrison's shoes.


And don't forget Gail Simone being fired off of Batgirl only to get re-hired due to fan outrage.


Dark Horse's has zero cases like that.


Whether or not you, personally, like KotoR, most people disagree, it's a very well-received story that I see frequently citing among people's very top SW recommendations and in some general comic recommendations too.




Oh gee, Dark Horse is only full of *B* and B+ rank comic writers, with just one maybe-A (also, I will, frankly, put Ostrander, Wood, and JJMiller all above Azzarello. Aside from my issues with the WW book- both on plotholes and characterization- quite a lot of his other books aren't exactly A-grade either, like For Tomorrow and Before Watchman).

But, I will note, and very much to my point, no Cs or Ds (well, not since Dark Empire at least, but that was back in the 90s).


Dark Horse very consistently makes good stuff. DC has some better ones, but also a lot of worse ones, and they don't seem good at being able to consistently pull off good matches even with their talent pool, and are known to lose some of their best people due to meddling.


I think some'll disagree on the 'never been a spectacular SW comic story,' but the gap in consistency is much more evidence and much less a matter of opinion.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I remain skeptical. Look at what a cock-up the superhero-verse is at Marvel. It has stories better than what the SW label has ever produced, lol.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
DC is just shitty anyways. Read above.

Not a single SW story is even near the quality of All Star Superman.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Yeah, I'm torn personally. The last truly decent star wars comic series to come out, imo, was KOTOR.

But on the other hand, Marvel has done absolutely zero to impress me since Civil War. Not a damn thing.

^ Hasn't read God of Thunder.

Pussy.

Wood, around the same level, though Azzarello edges it, and as I said, Wood's Star Wars book was shit regardless of how good he is. Ostrander is good, but not on that level at all. He is very much a tier 2 writer. John Jackson Miller is a complete and utter nobody in the comic book world... it's frighteningly bizarre that you would consider him above Azzarello, and says everything I believe that needs to be said about the value of your opinion in this matter.

You didn't really have any valid complaints about the WW series and it's been a huge critical success, Luthor and Joker were fantastic, and 100 bullets is one of the greatest creator owned works of all time. Wood is the only writer comparable to Azzarello in terms of comic book accomplishments, and quite frankly he simply did not have an inspired Star Wars story to tell.

Azzarello is a god among men. Joker and Lex Luthor: Man of Steel are two of the greatest comics ever created.

Originally posted by NemeBro
^ Hasn't read God of Thunder.

Pussy. There are no good Thor comics.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Read above.

Not a single SW story is even near the quality of All Star Superman.

Bro you hardly need to bring All Star Superman into this. There isn't a single Star Wars comic book story even near the quality of a fairly good (by DC's standards) Superman run.

I don't do things by half measures.

Why keep All Star Superman in reserve when its name alone renders any counter-point meaningless?

Originally posted by NemeBro
I don't do things by half measures.


My Dad says otherwise.

It isn't my fault that he can't get me up.

Lesse, have I gone through them all here...?

The main character has an ethical standard 180 from her home culture, doesn't know how they reproduce despite living into her 20s there (somehow no-one even *mentioned* that in her presence while growing up, even past puberty), doesn't know they're ok with slavery, managed to get strongly opposed to everything they do anyway, which is a pretty massive plot hole, affecting base character motives as it does.

She has a not-very-explored character for a book that's gone on over two years (we don't get inside her head much), and there's odd moments like in response to Orion being sexist, she kisses him before grabbing his balls for being sexist (why the kiss...?) and puts up with him slapping her butt (why?), or for some reason having her mother bring up her old origin just to retcon it the same issue (why would Hippolyta make up the 'made from a statue' origin if reproduction with males is normal in their culture? There was no story reason to include it at all).

That's aside from the thematic problems in making all the Amazons evil rapists, and shifting all of her power sources and formative influences from female characters to male ones (powers? Zeus. Trainer? Ares. Ethics? Thin air. Etc.).

I've had multiple friends drop the book due to the lack of development of Wondy, and way more have had problems with the Amazons being remade into a misogynist strawman.


It is not a book without significant complaints, and it's not Azzarello's best work.


Originally posted by Astor Ebligis
and as I said, Wood's Star Wars book was shit regardless of how good he is.

Not really, it's been quite well received.




He's only a multi-NYT bestselling novelist....

Look, you're bouncing around on standards here. "Wood's rep in the comic world is good, but his book is totally bad anyway!" "JJM may have good stories, but he has no rep in the comic world!". Pick one and stick with it, ok?

These people all make solid stories. The books themselves are good.


Someone on their first story can make a terrific story. If you're judging solely on rep, sure, whatever, DC has people with bigger rep.


But that's very much not my standard, which is more based on "are these stories really fun?" and "How many of them are actually bad?". And the answer is, 'most of them' and 'almost none.'


And considering DC doesn't consider many of it's own books at the launch good, as evidenced by them writer-shuffling them, several times in a row in some cases, that says a lot about the differences in consistencies.







Inspired? No. Solid and well-written? Yes.



But if we want inspired stories, there's a fair number of others. Sith realms run by a nihilistic sith and a solipsist sith in Knights Errant, or the story of a failed padawan who's master try and kill him out of fear of a sith outbreak in the middle of the mandalorian war.


Hey, let's take a look at some Amazon reviews. Just for fun.

Knights of the Old Republic: Commencement.

31 reviews. Average, 4.6. Zero below 3 stars. Only two 3 star reviews.

Vol 2 of the same. 18 reviews, 4.6, lowest review 4 stars.


Wonder Woman: Blood.

61 reviews. Average, 4 stars. Seven 3-star ratings, four 2-star, six 1-star.


Going by Amazon reviews, JJM's SW tops Azzerello's WW solidly.




And hey, again, the primary argument I'm making isn't that DC doesn't make good books, it's that the SW line has been very consistent. Which it has. And DC hasn't. Which it really, really hasn't.



Originally posted by NemeBro
I don't do things by half measures.

Why keep All Star Superman in reserve when its name alone renders any counter-point meaningless?


Counter-point: All Star Batman and Robin ^^



Though, more serious counterpoint: Morrison's left DC anyway, he doesn't count when talking about future good stuff.

(Additionally, Miller has also left DC, which is purely a good thing)

"She has a not-very-explored character for a book that's gone on over two years (we don't get inside her head much),"

This is completely untrue. She goes through numerous shocks/tragedies, all of which she responds to in a very open and emotional way, from the revelation that her entire origin had been a complete lie and that Zeus was her father, to having her people turned into snakes and her mother turned into a statue by Hera, to finding out the shocking truth behind how her people reproduced, to having to deal with Hermes' betrayal, and the deaths of Lennox and Ares. We see her good nature manifest itself repeatedly, from general heroism such as protecting Zola and her baby to attempting to free what she at the time thought of as slaves from Hephaestus, to feeling sorry for Hades and trying to help him by shooting him with Eros' bullets while he was looking at his own reflection (so that he would learn to love himself and not be so self-hating), to sparing the Minotaur, we see her capacity for forgiveness in how she comes to forgive Hera for all that she had done, we know that she's wary of her own power and wears cuffs to keep it in check, we see a softer side to her as she connects with a family she's only just come to realise she has. There's the cool twist when Hades tries to get her to marry him by shooting her with Eros' bullets so that she would love him (and later getting further confirmation of this via the truth lasso), only to later find out that it has no impact on her as she is all-loving in the first place and loves everyone, including Hades. And of course when she's able to sacrifice Ares so that she could put a stop to The First Born, showing that she can make tough decisions for the greater good.

This is of course, not to mention the central role she takes as the primary hero of the book, and what she represents in the book's mythology (one of the last remaining demigod children of Zeus, and more importantly, since killing Ares, the new God of War).

And all this while Azzarello has an entire ensemble cast of heroes and villains to explore alongside Wonder Woman. I'd hardly say she's unexplored in light of all the above.

"or for some reason having her mother bring up her old origin just to retcon it the same issue (why would Hippolyta make up the 'made from a statue' origin if reproduction with males is normal in their culture? There was no story reason to include it at all)."

1. It gave insight into how Wonder Woman had always been alienated from her fellow amazons for having been made of clay.

2. It served as a reminder of the original origin, and made the twist that she was actually the daughter of Zeus more impactful.

3. As I already explained, the manner in which they reproduced had been kept a secret from Wonder Woman, so it wasn't "normal".

4. It's explained that Hippolyta had made up the story to protect Wonder Woman from Hera.

"and shifting all of her power sources and formative influences from female characters to male ones (powers? Zeus. Trainer? Ares."

This hardly qualifies as an objective assessment of the book.

Everything else you mention I already adequately addressed.

None of your complaints have been valid, and while it's not Azzarello's best work (that would be 100 bullets), it's certainly up there.



I don't believe it's been particularly well received, and reception isn't a perfect indication of quality; by any account there's nothing particularly different he's doing with the series, and it's simply not very interesting or compelling.



I believe the majority of the Star Wars EU, much of which is shit, makes the NYT bestselling list, and it has a lot to do with the Star Wars brand itself. Either way sales =/= quality.



I've read Knight Errant and it's not particularly good. In JJM's case he has neither. He's hardly demonstrated that he's a rising star or an emerging talent like somebody such as, Charles Soule who's currently writing Swamp Thing.



So you basically agree it seems. Yes it is well written at its core because, Brian Wood's a great writer, but the story is incredibly bland. There's simply nothing interesting about what he's been doing with the Rebellion trying to find a new home, and there being a spy among them. The space battles are also incredibly boring and tedious, filled with technical jargon where it's hard to tell who's saying what, he doesn't capture Luke, Leia or The Emperor well at all (apparently he thinks that Luke is Anakin, and The Emperor came across as entirely petty when dealing with Birra Seah) and he doesn't seem to have a particularly good grasp of the EU. Not to mention setting up Bircher to be this major badass only to have him fail spectacularly the first time we see him in action to a manoeuvre that isn't made out to be particularly impressive.

The KotOR storyline you just described isn't inspired at all... and Knight Errant while having somewhat interesting ideas (in so far that it's real world philosophical system being applied to a Force User, so hardly the most inventive but I guess it's not something we've seen in a Sith before) didn't manifest itself into an interesting book.

As for the amazon reviews, Wonder Woman had a greater number of reviews (typically the rating lowers the more reviews you have), and the Amazon reviews are hardly a great sample size to work from, nor do they reflect the same standards being used to measure and rate the two books. If you look at a legitimate and universal reviewer like ign or cbr, you'll see that Wonder Woman's reviews (which routinely measure in the 9s and 10s) are vastly superior, they're basically not close.



Actually, and on the subject of Wonder Woman, he's currently writing Wonder Woman: Earth One, as well as Multiversity which apparently has a good chance of being his magnum opus.

Also something else interesting about the New 52 Wonder Woman series, there's actually a single issue that wasn't written by Azzarello and was not received particularly well in stark contrast to Azzarello's stuff, and guess who it was written by? The one and only Ostrander.

Why do I get the feeling what you want from a SW book is not-a-SW book?



You'll also find more negative reviews and negative feedback from comic reviewers because it's turned off a fair number with it's issues. And, proportionally? there's only twice as many Amazon reviews for WW than Commencement, yet there's *ten* low-ratings, so it's not like just high numbers is enough.

KotoR is a SW story that, well, you're literally the first person I've met to hate it!


Anyway, individual books are not the point. The consistency, as repeatedly mentioned, is. DC has a lot of books where the authors couldn't handle it, were rotated out, had crappy takes on the subject, etc..


I am quite glad if someone in the big two has to get it, it's Marvel and not DC, as they have a lot less misses. Dark Horse is good at making sure their Star Wars books have solid writers that produce good SW stories.


Sure, DC has Morrison, Azzarello, etc., but they aren't going to get SW books even if they were at the company, and whoever they do pick has a higher odds of flubbing it up, because, well, they have a history of flubbing it up. *Four tries* to get a good Green Arrow! And GA has a TV show right now.

As I said, amazon reviews hardly mean all that much. They're user reviews that lack the professionalism of critic reviews, not to mention the standard for universal measurement and comparison. When a critic reviews a book, they do so using the same standards they apply with any book (in theory at least; in the case of Wonder Woman it would usually be held to a higher standard than KotOR in any event) whereas when a user reviews a book they have no such obligation and the score they give is usually arbitrary and imprecise. They are also an aggregate of a small sample size, that typically draws in the more extreme views on the products. As I said, it's a minority, but a vocal minority that seem to have issues with the new Wonder Woman, and they are a prime example of the type of people that would write reviews on the amazon website (you'll also get fanboys posting reviews as well of course, which is why there are so many 5 star reviews for the book as well). Either way, hardly the best measure of critical success you could have picked.

As for the other two, now you're just choosing to post random reviews. I can do the same:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/08/15/wonder-woman-12-review

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/08/21/wonder-woman-23-review-2

From IGN no less, a far more reputable critic.

Here's a few reviews for some of the series I mentioned as being mediocre earlier:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/09/05/the-star-wars-1-review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/10/03/the-star-wars-2-review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2010/07/09/star-wars-the-old-republic-1-review

Such consistency.

BTW I can give you plenty examples of good SW stories. Try the KotOR games for starters. I don't hate the comic series, I just don't find it at all spectacular.

If DC, and their better talent, actually cared about Star Wars, I'm sure they would produce some great books around the franchise, but as I said, most top talent aren't really all that interested in writing Star Wars.

And say what you want about DC, but no other company produces as many excellent series as they do, never mind consistency, especially if you include Vertigo. I mean, currently they are releasing all of the following:

1. Batman
2. Wonder Woman
3. Green Arrow
4. Animal Man
5. Swamp Thing
6. Astro City
7. Coffin Hill
8. Fables
9. Fairest
10. 100 Bullets: Brother Lono
11. Trillium
12. The Sandman: Overture
13. The Unwritten
14. The Wake

No other company comes close to releasing that quantity of truly excellent titles.

Sure, meaning it has... mixed reviews.




And yea, though that one has the excuse of being based directly on an early draft.


The original material, though? KotoR, Legacy, Knight Errant Dark Times, etc.? Strong adventure stories that get the style very well.




Presumably DC cares about the rest of their books, yet they got a lot of flops.

Also, if we count Eisner award nominations from last year, Dark Horse got 7. DC got 3.



I do think you underestimate the draw of something as big as SW... but anyway, that goes back to what I was saying. DC wouldn't put on anyone better than DH uses, and probably worse.




"Never mind consistency" indeed, especially if you talk the main line, which drops your list down to... 5 books. One of which, as covered, is controversial and has a good number of detractors.

And all from a company with something like 5 times the output of anyone except for Marvel.


Image has Walking Dead, Saga, Chew, Jupiter's Legacy, Invincible, and a pretty big wrack of comics I admittedly haven't checked.

Dark Horse has Hellboy, BRPD, Abe Sapien, Umbrella Academy, Usagi Yojimbo, SW LegacyII, Empowered, Blade of the Immortal.

Marvel, Hawkeye, Scarlet Spider, Daredevil, FF, Ultimate Spider-man, All-New X-men, Invincible Hulk, Young Avengers, Captain Marvel, X-men Legacy, Wolverine and the X-men, Superior Foes of Spider-Man... probably a lot more not off the top of my head, I don't really follow the avengers stuff admittedly.



Vertigo is admittedly very good, but they've (1) got a different editorial staff, (2) largely do creator owned projects, and (3) work in an entirely different genre. Star Wars is pulp SF adventure, I don't think even well-done pulp SF adventure is something you'd list as 'great' judging by your lists.

Oh yea, and DC's no-marriage/no good relationships rule would be no Mara Jade stories, no Han/Leia stuff, no Zayne/Jarael.... ^^

The Dark Horse nominations were for the most part incredibly random. Best Archival Collection/Project? LOL.

Also it's well known that the industry awards like to give as much attention to the non-Big Two stuff as possible, the only reason the (massively overrated) Hawkeye's getting so much love is because of how it resembles an indie comic. And getting best writer for that was laughable, the only noteworthy thing about that book is clearly the art.

And for what it's worth, the nominations that DC did get (namely the cover art ones) were far more relevant than those that Dark Horse were given.



And that was because I was listing the books that are truly great (I could have also listed stuff like Batman and..., Justice League, Superman Unchained and The Movement etc. all of which are excellent). If I were to do the same with Marvel, I'd literally only be able to post a single book: Daredevil. The difference between my lists and yours is that I genuinely included the best of the best; I mean X-Men Legacy? That book's an absolute joke, that's practically ruined a character for me, filled with painfully bad art and terrible attempts at humour. That you would compare it to the ones I brought up is absolutely ridiculous. Likewise, Wolverine and the X-Men was another huge disappointment, being such a big fan of previous young x-men style series, only to find that it's been relegated to a laughably bad comedy series with ridiculous storylines.

I noticed you also included series that aren't current, such as Umbrella Academy.

And no, you don't get to dismiss Wonder Woman for the reasons you've brought up, it's nowhere near as controversial as you'd have people believe, and you didn't have a single valid complaint about the series.

No, it's still DC, and I still has access to the same talent the company as a whole attracts. You seem to give far too little credit to the talent, and btw any genres they do cover is also handled by The New 52 somewhere or another (primarily the dark line of the New 52). The talent is still the same for the most part, such as Snyder, Lemire and Azzarello all producing great work for both Vertigo and The New 52, and of course people like Mike Carey, Kurt Busiek, Neil Gaiman (!) doing just Vertigo stuff, and Geoff Johns and Charles Soule just doing New 52 stuff. The difference is that Vertigo only do a handful of series and as such are more particular with who gets to work on their books, whereas the NEW 52 can't help but take on B Grade and C Grade writers as well simply because they produce so many books.



This is also not true, it doesn't even have double the output of Image or Dark Horse.