The DC3: Villains Month

While all of us at Multiversity are fans of a wide spectrum of comics, there are a few of us that tend to self-identify as “DC guys.” We’ve cried for justice; we’ve been through the blackest nights and the brightest days. And now, we’ve been culled together for a new column to focus on some of the bigger goings on in the world of Detective Comics Comics. If you’re wondering who is going to stand up and discuss what is happening at DC – don’t worry:

Today, we take a look at the upcoming “Villains Month.” The news has been covered here and here before, but this is the first real, in depth analysis that the Multiversity Staff has done on the initiative.

Vince: Brian. Zach. I yelled “DC3 Assemble!” today, because I feel like DC Comics has doubled-down on the things that bother me about ‘The New 52’ with its recent announcement of “Villains Month.” Since DC Comics is kind of our thing, I wanted to get your reactions and maybe get into the potential positives, negatives, bright sides, and warning signs of their September 2013 “event.” I’d first like to know: What were your initial thoughts when the rumors of this announcement started spreading a few months ago?

Zach: When the rumor mill (read: Rich Johnston) started churning out the first bits of info about a proposed “Villains Month” to make the New 52’s second anniversary, I was nonplussed. Considering DC already tried something similar in the wake of “Final Crisis,” and the absurdity of coming up with 52 villains worthy of having an entire issue devoted to them, the idea seemed set to be a bigger flop than “Zero Month.” That was my initial reaction, based on absolutely no real information at all.

Brian: Like so many DC ideas, this seemed to be an event on the precipice of stupidity and inspiration. I sort of like the idea of September being an “important” month in DC, and I think every year having a special issue that month is fun for fans, and practical from a story-telling standpoint. It gives stories a logical place to wrap up and start anew (although, to be fair, basing that on solicits for August is a little disappointing – when “Zero Month” happened, it seemed like almost all the books were wrapping up, giving fans an intermezzo before the next course – this time, it seems like more of an interruption of many ongoing stories).

I think that having villains as the focus is something that could, hypothetically, bring people into stores and, again, hypothetically, could make for a fun month.

However, this is the New 52, so I also have a lot of issues with the concept.

Vince: I think that’s a key point. I, too, like the idea of having an ‘event’ month at DC Comics, and while the execution varied wildly on the “zero” issues, we did get a handful of cool stories out of it and it felt deserved. It felt deserved, because the ‘New 52’ was in its infancy and some of the books took real advantage of this fact. With the status quo still being so young, I’m not sure the Villain-centric focus intrigues me the same way. Regardless, the potential is there for cool stories, and the ones that have good creative teams will probably make for good issues. That said, I’m just not jazzed about the overall darker, more grim, hope-free direction of the ‘New 52’, so a Villains Month just feels like it’s perpetuating something I already want to see less of. I want to see heroes being heroes. We’re still getting a lot of in-fighting and distrust between our heroes and from the public perspective toward them. Because of the already drab tone, I really do feel like Villains Month is just piling on.

Now, if this were a catalyst for an “age of hope” in the ‘New 52’ and a celebration of heroics spun out of “Forever Evil” that would be great. Can you blame me for thinking that development just isn’t in the cards?

Brian: Oh, you know I agree on both points. The “darker” New 52 has not meant Nolan-esque triumphs as much as Lobdell-led fuck-ups, and so I totally understand the fear there. However, let me join you in the waters of optimism and repeat that: what if this is a chance for the heroes to actually be heroic? What if, when faced with their villains in such a direct way, it forces their hand towards not silly infighting and half-assed vigilantism, but towards actually standing up as heroes?

But to your second point, that would require forethought and a planned dedication to telling good stories, and I doubt those are DC’s main motivations here. Especially because gimmickry and money have already shown themselves as the established goals here, three months before the books even hit shelves.

Vince: Whoa, back up. If I’m in the waters of optimism, then I’m surely lying face down in them!

Here’s one nice thing I can say about the event: I think those 3-D covers are a lot cooler than I would have imagined them being. I think some of them will take advantage of the perspective better than others, but on the whole I actually like them and am interested in seeing them in person. What did you guys think about those bad boys?

Zach: If those covers actually work as they are being depicted, then color me impressed. However, I can’t quite get behind raising the price of every New 52 book to accommodate for the gimmick.

I agree with both of your points so far regarding the “darkening” of DC, the merits of yearly events in September, and the (under)performance of “Zero Month.” As I mention earlier, I’m trepidacious about Villains month. However, I couldn’t be more excited for “Forever Evil.” In my opinion, Johns has always excelled at writing compelling villains. If this event fulfill the missed potential of stories like “Final Crisis” and “Dark Reign,” then I will be a happy boy.

Vince: Good segue. Let’s focus on that $3.99 price point for a bit and then move on to “Forever Evil.” I can say right now that I’ll be buying less of these books, solely because of the increased price. Great creative teams will dictate my purchases, but I just won’t try something out for $3.99. I won’t do it for Marvel and I won’t do it for DC, either. I’ll do it for an Image book or an even smaller publisher, but hell, most of those books are $2.99 anyway. Month in and month out, the books that I enjoy most happen to be $2.99. If other publishers can do it, then DC and Marvel can too. Nevermind the proudly trumpeted “holding of the line” at $2.99. Do you guys take as much issue as I do with that price point?

Brian: I do, mainly because the idea of 3-D motion covers is unbearably stupid. The fact that we are saying that animated .gif covers look better than expected means that we had such low expectations that late-90s graphics technology impresses us. If these books are longer, I’ll be better with it, but I really don’t want to spend $3.99 on any comic, let alone one with no backmatter or extra content, just a silly cover.

This also is an issue given that some series, like “Batman,” apparently, will be getting as many as four issues released this month. That is nearly $16 worth of comics called “Batman,” not to mention all the other Bat-books.

The numbering of the books (23.1) is also something that gets my ire up, and makes me want to smoke crack.

Vince: Disclaimer for our readers: Multiversity Comics does not endorse the selling, buying, or taking of any illegal drugs or anything of the sort.

So you’re not impressed with DC Comics’ shameless “borrowing” of Marvel’s “Point One” initiative?

Brian: I’m not a fan of it for a few reasons: First of all, for someone with borderline OCD, this is a cruel trick to play on our longboxes. Secondly, it looks like DC is blatantly copying Marvel. Finally, it is just stupid, no matter how you slice it.

Sorry, I can’t be fair or unbiased in this instance – i really, really dislike the idea of decimal points in my comic numbering.

Zach: I literally laughed out loud when I saw the .1 numeration. Add in the dual titling and the whole thing doesn’t seem to fit with the “new reader friendly” motto of the New 52 (although that’s essentially been out the window for a while, in my opinion).

Vince: I hate the point numbering too. Make them one-shots or something. Fans are already anal about numbering and, though I’m getting less and less so, it just feels so utterly unnecessary to me and needlessly confusing for casual readers.

Zach: I love puzzles, so I’m pretty pumped about piecing this all together. However, I really doubt that’s the mindset DC is going for here.

Vince: Before we try to put together that puzzle, what has you so jazzed about “Forever Evil”?

Zach: Well, as I mentioned earlier, I almost always enjoy when Johns is working with villains. A Johns event starring characters like Captain Cold, Black Adam, and Sinestro is a dream come true.

However, I’m not without reservation. As I alluded to earlier, villain centric events haven’t worked well in recent years. So much rests on the angle and the execution, and with so little information available it’s impossible to pass judgement. Based on what we know, how do you guys feel about the direction of DC’s first major event in two years?

Vince: Geoff Johns putting together a team of C and B-list villains, with a smattering of A-list for effect, would have been a thing that I would have bet the house on. I already alluded to a villain-centric event feeling a little redundant in a universe that doesn’t celebrate its characters as heroes, so much as it pits them against each other and shrouds everything in a cloud of distrust and an overall feeling of reluctance. Furthermore, I just think that Johns’ most specific talents have been dampened by the status quo. When was the last time the Teen Titans or the JSA (“Earth 2” is great, but it doesn’t exactly count) really worked? When Johns was writing them and celebrating their most classical aspects.

If you ask me, Johns has not been allowed to produce something that truly stretches his most valuable writing muscles, because it’s all filtered through a bland prism. “Justice League” should be triumphant, but the status quo does not allow it to be. I would be surprised if “Forever Evil” doesn’t end up just feeling like it’s glorifying the very things that make ‘The New 52’ feel the way it does.

Brian: I think that DC’s biggest problem, going into this event, is that there will be such disparate creators working on it that there is no way to ensure consistency or tone. Sure, your Brian Buccellatos and Peter Tomasis of the world are writing multiple books for the month, but that doesn’t mean that the tone of their collective 10 books (or however many) will link up to the other 46 books being released that month.

I mean, is there a reason that this is the month to focus on the villains, story-wise? Does something happen at the end of ‘Trinity War’ that leads to this? Or is this just a “hey, let’s celebrate the great villains DC has to offer” type event? I think, once we know that, it will be easier to judge the concept.

However, even as I’m cynically bitching about having to buy two non-James Robinson written “Earth 2” books, there are certain books that look appealing to me, based on either character or creative team. What are some of the standouts, in theory, to you guys?

Vince: Well, “Dial E” is obviously the standout…

Brian: Obviously. But what else?

Vince: I think “Killer Croc” from Tim Seeley will be one to keep an eye on. I think that’s a particularly good match of writer and character, plus it’ll be his first DC work.

​The Sholly Fisch-written issues are on my list. His Action Comics backups have been such breaths of fresh air that I can hardly believe that his take on Superman exists in the New 52.

​Basically, some creators I like are getting a month to shine in a way they haven’t been able to yet. That’s exciting to me.

Brian: Seeley is a great fit for that book. I’m cautiously optimistic for Fisch’s work as well, and it is nice to see Matt Kindt getting so many books (“Sinestro,” “Solomon Grundy,” and “Harley Quinn”). But personally, as an old school Teen Titans fan, seeing Marv Wolfman write “Trigon” is a really exciting proposition, and one I will inevitably be let down by.

Vince: I just have to butt in here. Anyone else think Wolfman must be looking at New 52 “Teen Titans” and thinking “What the **** have you done?!”

Brian: Of course he is.

Zach, what about you? What has you jazzed?

Zach: Regarding the timing, I think it’s been confirmed that the villains month and “Forever Evil” is very much tied to the end of “Trinity War.” It’s looking like we might have a world without heroes type situation. If that’s the case, and there is a vacuum of good in the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw some of these villains doing heroic things before it’s all over. It would definitely turn the “Forever Evil” moniker on it’s head.

As far as books that I’m excited for, the Matt Kindt, Sholly Fisch, and Greg Pak books are all standouts so far, with “Sinestro,” “Grundy,” “Bizarro,” and “Darkseid,” being my most anticipated. The Johns and Buccellato books look interesting as well, and “Dial E” had the potential to be the best thing ever.

As far as the rest, does anyone else feel the weekly nature of the books breeds an “all or nothing” mentality? For instance, the sheer number (and homogeneity) of the various Batman books as essentially killed my interest in the lot of them.

Vince: I think that’s definitely the case for me, with a scant few exceptions where creative teams interest me. I’ll buy the Tim Seeley issue, but that’s about the only one that stands out. And because I’m not interested in what all these villains are doing – especially enough to interrupt stories that I might actually care about – this month feels like a big skippable hole in the year, for me.

I’m sorry to say, DC-leaning comic fan that I am, DC has already lost enough of its share of my pull list without a stunt that looks like an easy spot to drop even more titles. Having, what, 20 Batman-related titles does nothing for me, when the only Bat-title I’m still pulling is Snyder and Capullo’s. I haven’t seen Ales Kot’s name on any of these, so unless I missed something, I don’t need whatever “Suicide Squad” villain issue might be coming either.

I feel sorry to say that I am only going to pre-order about 4-5 of these titles. Any others that I read will be read for this site and/or will be snap decisions upon their release. This grim-looking event is just bumming me out. Probably the exact opposite of what they’re going for, but they haven’t earned my goodwill lately.

Brian: See, on one hand, Vince, I think you’ve nailed it – I don’t want my regular stories interrupted.

That said, I think that just about every villain mentioned could have a great story in them, and maybe this is the opportunity to see that story. I’m a completionist at heart, so don’t think a big part of me doesn’t want to buy them all, just to have them all. I want to believe that this is going to be fun and good, but I’m having a hard time convincing myself of that.

As it stands now, I’ll just be buying the ones that I really care about – Black Adam, Sinestro, Trigon, the Earth 2 ones, and maybe Deathstroke.

Vince: Let me reveal one of my biggest complaints, and I feel bad saying this: I feel like I know exactly what I’m going to get from these stories. I know what a Peter Tomasi one-off looks like, for example. I just have a feeling that the resulting product is going to feel like a bunch of yeoman-like one-shots, without enough experimentation or chance-taking.

​I’d be willing to bet we choke on “sympathetic backstory” that month. A baker’s dozen of daddy issues here, a buffet of melodramatically tragic love stories there.

Brian: I can’t argue with that. I mean, for every Sinestro and Black Adam (who were this close to being heroes), there’s the Joker and Doomsday. I would love to see a few silent issues, or a few just totally insane fucking stories, especially for the more chaotic/crazy villains.

Vince: You just named two really great villains that are sympathetic, so I don’t want to give the impression that that idea is played out or unimportant in crafting a good villain. I just see a one-month overload of those kinds of stories on the horizon.

​I want to see some insanity too. You know, Brandon and David joked about Egg Fu, but I do want to see some “weird” to complement the evil. I will be pleasantly surprised, as will admit as much, if not every issue is a grimdark angsty take of love, family, or friendship gone wrong.

Brian: One of the more disturbing elements of this month is the weird balance of certain creators/books being featured multiple times, while others are sitting on the sidelines. For instance, Brian Buccellato is featured in 5 books, with Ales Kot, James Robinson, and Justin Jordan on none. 4 “Batman The Dark Knight” issues, but none of “Catwoman,” “Birds of Prey,” “Batwoman,” “Batgirl,” “Nightwing,” or “Talon.” It’s just a weird way to go about their business – clearly a cash grab to gain marketshare, but still an odd one.

Perhaps this is like “Flashpoint,” where a lot of B or C (or D) list creators were working on these books to give folks time to craft their New 52 books? Maybe some of those great creators who are seemingly being ignored are off this month to sure up the next year of the New 52?

Zach: “Flashpoint” was one of the first things that came to my mind as well, only that situation was the result of regular writers gearing up for their New 52 gigs. With Villains Month, the whole thing seems more editorially driven, and therefore likely more volatile. For instance, I can’t help but wonder if Robinson had a story in mind for Grundy, but was passed over for Matt Kindt, precipitating his departure from the book. Aside from the names you mentioned, it’s strange to see big names like Snyder and Lemire only on one book each. Some little things, like John Layman writing on a Batman book other than his regular “Detective,” make the whole thing seem even more arbitrary. It seems DC is very much basing their success on brand recognition, a risky move in an increasingly creator-centric market.

Of course, we all know having 16 books with the word “Batman” in the title is a sure to raise their market and dollar share considerably for the month of September.

Vince: I hesitate to name names, but I had the same feelings. I feel like the number of writers chosen for this event that will write to the company line is far greater than the number of truly top creators, of which DC has relatively few anyway.

​I feel like I have to reiterate, I want books from DC Comics to be good. I feel like this is a month designed to sell a lot of titles, but to not actually tell a bunch of great stories. Was the “TBA” creative credits on a few of these as telltale of a sign for you as it was for me?

Brian: The “TBA” credit is nothing new in the solicits game, but yeah, it doesn’t exactly instill great confidence in the work being produced.

One of the things I mutter to myself when it comes to comics, or ticket prices for Baseball games, or weird music distribution models (bonus tracks on iTunes drive me nuts) is that I often forget that this is all a business, designed to make money. And if that is the goal of Villains Month? Mission accomplished. Hopefully, this will get people excited about some of these characters, and they’ll follow them wherever they wind up next.

However, I can’t help but think that a good number of these folks who wander in to buy a Joker comic won’t be back next month, no matter how clearly the “follow the Joker stories to Detective Comics #25” tag at the end of the issue is going to be.

Will DC win September, market share/dollar wise? Almost certainly. Will this carry over to October? I’m more doubtful.

Before we wrap up, let’s discussthe three spin-off minis that are growing out of “Forever Evil” in October. (“Forever Evil: Rogues” by Brian Buccellato and Patrick Zircher, “Forever Evil: Arkham War” by Peter Tomasi and Scot Eaton, and “Forever Evil: A.R.G.U.S. by Matt Kindt and the quite busy T.B.D.”). To me, these are far more exciting than the monthly interruption in the titles I’m already reading. Are you guys going to be picking up these books?

Vince: I’m going to try the first issues of all of them, depending on how we decide to cover them on the site.

​I’ve already expressed my concerns that “Forever Evil” will hamstring Johns’ best talents by being overly grim. I hope I’m wrong. I hope he finds a way to have these characters play off of each other in a way that’s also fun, a la “52”, a book that had some dark aspects but a lot of fun ones too.

​The Tomasi book is the one that’s being most hyped up, if you read the interviews that have been done. Scott Eaton is a talent that I’m interested in seeing work at DC Comics. I guess that’s the one I’m most excited about, but that’s a relative term. It’s another Bat tie-in and I’m just not all jazzed about this event to begin with.

​I will check out anything Matt Kindt does – he’s great, but his non-creator owned work isn’t a total slam dunk bet.

And the Rogues? With “The Flash”, we’ve seen what the Rogues look like written by Buccellato in the New 52. I’ll just say that I miss Johns writing them.

​I hope these books are all pleasant surprises, but I’m not getting my hopes up. Man, I’m a crab ass aren’t I?

Brian: I can’t say I disagree all that much, except that Flash villains > Batman villains every time, so I’m more excited for the Rogues book. Kindt is a guy who is deceptively great at dealing with the machinations of writing for one of the Big 2 because he clearly has his heart in his creator-owned work. So, it isn’t such a big deal for him to be told “change x to y,” as his investment, mentally, seems less than others. I say that to say, yes, I will certainly be checking out his book.

To be totally blunt? I will probably read every single villain issue put out there, but will buy very few. Make of that what you will.

Zach, bring us home – what do you think of these spin-off minis?

Zach: I’m pretty much in the same boat as you guys. I’m very excited for the main “Forever Evil” book, and just hope it’s not completely grim/dark. As far as the tie-ins go, I’m most excited for “A.R.G.U.S.,” which is the only one I’ll be pick up for sure. I too miss Johns’ take on the Rogues, but Patrick Zircher on art makes that mini pretty tempting as well. I’m completely burned out on Batman’s rogues gallery, so “Arkham War” isn’t even a blip on my radar.

There aren’t many villains I’m extremely interested in, so it’s all coming down to the creators to win me over. More than anything, I’m excited to see which issues end up being sleeper hits.

Vince: And I’m sure the DC3 will be back to discuss which of them were, right fellas?

Brian: You know it, baby.