Sunday, April 27, 2008

Such a Thin Line Between Clever and Stupid

Do you know what the real problem with Countdown was? There were only 51 issues.

I know, I know, I sound like the guy in the joke: "How was that new restaurant?" "The food was terrible. And the portions were small!"

But seriously, I think I'm on to something fundamental here. The fact that Countdown was only 51 issues, and not 52 as promised, helps us see what a shambles DC's editorial direction under Dan DiDio is right now.

No, no, it's just that our appeal is becoming more selective!Let's deal with the obvious problem first: what the hell kind of countdown ends with 1 and not zero? Really, you can watch a million NASA videos and never see the ship liftoff on 1...

But that's just trivial ranting, right? Yeah, but it marks a sad trend. 52 was to be a fifty-two week series; but as they neared the end, they realized that the writers basically had refused to write the story the editors had wanted, and so they couldn't fit the neglected resolutions into fifty-two issues, and had to publish the abominable 4 issue Word War III to take care of it. So the fifty-two issue mini-series became 56.




And now, with the latest planned-for-fifty-two-issue series, they decided to end it with only 51 issues. Ostensibly, it was because (and I'm paraphrasing here) the zero issue was going to be a direct cliffhanger-filled lead-in to Final Crisis, and they just couldn't end the trade with cliffhangers, so they had to end the series at #1, and make what was going to be Countdown #0 into DC Universe Zero.I’ve told them a hundred times: put ‘Countdown' first and ‘Final Crisis' lastSeriously, that's what Didio said.

Let's look at the ways that makes absolutely NO SENSE, shall we?
  • I've heard of writing for the trades, but editing for them? Cancelling issues or shortening series for the convenience of the trade? Even if that made artistic, financial or editorial sense, has DC never had a trade end in (at least partial) cliffhangers before? DC trade buyers, help me out here...

  • DC knew from Day 1 that Countdown was going to be re-titled Countdown to Final Crisis, and they alerted the world at issue #26. Certainly they knew from Day 1 that it would lead directly into Final Crisis, and involve cliff-hangers of some sorts. So why in the world not pace the "epic" so that #1, the issue that "ended" Countdown cliffhanger free (albeit not untied plot line free) was #0?? Did they somehow not know there was going to be a trade? Why shorten the series, instead of adjusting things so it ended where you wanted to in issue #0? Seriously, folks, it's like Nigel Tufnel trying to explain about his amp going to 11 here...




  • Gee, if DC Universe Zero is supposed to be what was in Countdown #0, why does it have completely different writers? Hmm
You know, I'm more than happy to grant some leeway in the development of a 52-issue weekly mega-series. Things morph, new ideas come and go, editors are replaced (ahem). But when twice in a row you screw up the actual number of issues you need? When you can't even to get the series to do what it's supposed to do (hell, what the freakin' title says it's supposed to do!) and correctly link up with your next mega-series? Countdown to The Issue That Actually Leads into Final Crisis?!?!?

How screwed up is DC editorial on Contdown/Final Crisis? Check out this exchange from Newsarama's interview with "editor" Mike Carlin about Countdown #1:

Newsarama: So Mike, given the various points of narration, this whole storyline took one year?
MC: I wasn’t around for the beginning of this project... So not sure if anyone else said it... But I wasn’t under the impression this was happening in real time. Some sections went quicker than others... But as stories were spread out and checked in on for only a few pages an issue... I assumed many sequences were running simultaneously until they dovetailed at end.
"I wasn't around?" "Not sure?" "Under the impression?" "I assumed?" Are these really phrases you want to hear from the man editing your "lynch pin" series, the "spine of the DCU?" (That's DiDio's quote, not mine). He has no idea of the flippin' timeline of the series?!?! Isn't that an editor's job #1, especially on a series that ties into the rest of the DC Universe? Don't you, like, ASK SOMEONE when you take over? Either this is buck-passing to avoid blame on the most colossal scale imaginable, or Carlin is the most incompetent editor ever.

DC editorial essentially has no frakkin' clue what they're doing. They're making it up as they go along. It's astonishing.




Anyway, tomorrow I'll look at the artistic train wreck side of Countdown. Here's some preview material for you...

4 comments:

Unknown said...

One of the worst things during Countdown were Mike "Shekky" Carlin's weekly recap joke-fests on Newsarama. You never got the impession the guy really gave a fig about the series and was just marking time, which is flip attitude constantly underlined. What a buffoon.

Siskoid said...

Countdown bashed/recaped? I'm up for it.

I started reading Countdown (off the shelves, no sale!) around the point Ray Palmer returned (in case it related to All-New Atom) and it was every bit as horrible as I heard it was.

No. Worse. No one told me the art was going to be THAT bad. Wow.

snell said...

Mark: did you notice how the actual writers each week eventually stopped showing up for those re-cap interviews? Interesting to wonder whose idea that was, and why...

Siskoid: you got off easy...

Anonymous said...

"Mark: did you notice how the actual writers each week eventually stopped showing up for those re-cap interviews? Interesting to wonder whose idea that was, and why..."

Ugh. Those things were just awful. Even Carlin seemed like he didn't want to be there, made clear by his constant wise cracking to divert attention away from actualy discussing the non-story and its non-sensical nothingness.