InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Sweet lamprey of Sante Fe!"

thebigapricot (thebigapricot) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-09-09 19:10:00

Entry tags:

char: wonder woman/diana of themyscira

DiDio makes it official on Wonder Woman

He says he'll definitely give WW a 600th issue if he gets 600 postcards.

Doesn't say if the renumbering will continue after that issue. He'll probably want something else for that.

http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/news/?cat=5877

And for legality one of my favorite covers.

Tip your server with cards!

(Post a new comment)

	ex_menagerie993 2009-09-09 11:39 pm UTC (link)
	My reaction to this is occasionally, "Doesn't anyone care about the people at Mile High and other such huge comic book establishments?!" Renumbering is such a pain. Neutral to it myself, just find it weird that companies keep doing this. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	sandoz_iscariot 2009-09-10 12:09 am UTC (link)
	The renumbering is an especially big pain when newer books like Runaways or Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane get 3 or 4 new "number 1" issues before they even crack issue 50. It seems like it would be very hard for modern books to ever reach number 100 (let alone 600) these days. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

strannik01
2009-09-10 03:03 am UTC (link)

If you think that's bad, you should see some Golden Age comics. Back then, it wasn't uncommon for comics to go back to #1 once a year (Target Comics, Airfighter/Airboy Comics, etc). And don't even get me started on the numbering mess that was Cat-Man Comics. Long story short, it was published on a very, very irregular schedule, and the numbering often changed seemingly on a whim. According to the Grand Comic Book Database, it went like this (the numbers in brackets are the original numbering that actually appeared on issue covers):

http://comics.org/indexstatus.lasso?SeriesID=255

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kamino_neko 2009-09-10 11:00 am UTC (link)
	That's not even taking into account seemingly random* title changes, meaning a new title could start at issue 27, or summat. * Not REALLY that random, but, you know. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jaybee3 2009-09-09 11:53 pm UTC (link)
	Couldn't they do what Marvel did when it went back to the numbering of Fantastic Four (and I think a couple of other series) where they have both numbers (looking slightly different) one with the cumulative number (in this case 600) and right above it the number of the current volume (45)? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	04nbod 2009-09-10 12:09 am UTC (link)
	they do it for Adventure Comics. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	goblinthebamf 2009-09-11 10:43 pm UTC (link)
	yeah, I always liked that solution. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	04nbod 2009-09-10 12:10 am UTC (link)
	I don't see what is so special about Wonder Woman. If they do it for her they should do it for flash and green lantern too. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	colonel_green 2009-09-10 01:43 am UTC (link)
	I agree, though in Wondy's case #600 is impending (#45); Flash and GL's books are a bit further away from the next multiple of 100. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-10 02:28 am UTC (link)
	For one, unlike Flash or Green Lantern, Wondy's been the same character the whole way through. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	thebigapricot 2009-09-10 02:41 am UTC (link)
	She's part of the Trinity. And since Batman and Superman will both hit issue 700 next year it will help put some of the focus on her book and its longevity as well. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	scottyquick 2009-09-10 03:11 am UTC (link)
	Green Lantern? You mean Alan Scott? Jay "Flash" Garrick? Diana's part of the Trinity. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jcbaggee 2009-09-10 03:42 am UTC (link)
	They did it for Wally when he came back after "Flash: Fastest Man Alive". I think the new Flash is going to use the "All-Flash" title and focus on all the Flash characters, with Kid Flash co-features. Can't remember where I read that though... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	foxhack 2009-09-10 12:22 am UTC (link)
	It just hit me. Tacos and coffee?! Lord almighty if that's not a recipe for explosive diarrhea, I don't know what is... (Reply to this) (Thread)

	zordboy 2009-09-10 12:26 am UTC (link)
	I gotta say, that food looks ridiculously unappetizing. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	leikomgwtfbbq 2009-09-10 12:30 am UTC (link)
	Moreover, who puts spaghetti in their tacos? What the fuck is that? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-09-10 12:32 am UTC (link)
	Taco Whiz's founder was Juan Giovanni Lopezzini. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	suigetsuxsasuke 2009-09-10 12:42 am UTC (link)
	Oh God...I've been watching too much Monsters Inside Me on Animal Planet. All I see is tapeworms...O_o (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	neuhallidae 2009-09-10 01:22 am UTC (link)
	asfhgrgod, that show. I stupidly watched a marathon of it and did not sleep. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	leikomgwtfbbq 2009-09-10 02:05 am UTC (link)
	Also, I just got a second look at the nachos and beans on that plate. It looks like it's wilting or something. D: (Reply to this) (Parent)

	thebigapricot 2009-09-10 02:42 am UTC (link)
	Silly, it looks that way because Medusa is in the kitchen. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-09-10 04:25 am UTC (link)
	So you're saying the tacos have Medusa's hair. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	thokstar 2009-09-10 07:31 am UTC (link)
	I think they're supposed to be badly drawn onions. Really badly drawn onions. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	leikomgwtfbbq 2009-09-10 07:44 am UTC (link)
	Even so, though, who puts that much in the way of onions on their food? I like onions okay, but jeez. There seems to be nothing but onions/spaghetti/whatever in that taco, and then there's a heaping helping of it on the side with the decrepit-looking nachos. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	filkertom 2009-09-10 01:44 am UTC (link)
	I take it that, for some mystifying reason, you were looking at the tray of food. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jcbaggee 2009-09-10 03:42 am UTC (link)
	Finally! An excuse to use this icon! (Reply to this) (Parent)

	selke 2009-09-10 04:16 am UTC (link)
	That's the first thing that struck me. You may as well put Imodium on that for what it's going to do for the person eating. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	silverzeo 2009-09-10 02:07 am UTC (link)
	BEsides the fact that 600 isses is happening alot this year, who else thin they should restart Diana 's original series? All-Star Comics? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-10 02:26 am UTC (link)
	Surely you mean Sensation Comics? And yes. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2009-09-10 02:16 am UTC (link)
	Green Lantern will hit 470 issues since the golden age when this series hits 50. Since hall jordan became green lantern, issue 50 will be issue 438. so 30-60 issues till GL can hit 500. Flash on the other hand hit issue 500 back in June of 08 with issue 241 (Reply to this)

	sailorlibra 2009-09-10 02:22 am UTC (link)
	Damnit, now I have to go hunt down some postcards. (Reply to this)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-10 02:29 am UTC (link)
	Been meaning to post this all day, but got lazy. Need to hunt down a postcard. And that has always been my favorite Bolland Wondy cover, though the food is silly looking. (Reply to this)

	schala_kid 2009-09-10 03:17 am UTC (link)
	Fuck I am going to be sending a postcard and tell my aunt and uncle to send some too :D (Reply to this)

	cricharddavies 2009-09-10 07:38 pm UTC (link)
	He says he'll definitely give WW a 600th issue if he gets 600 postcards. ... aaaaand we believe he's being honest, because ...? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-10 08:37 pm UTC (link)
	Huge backlash from readers if he flakes on it? And being the number's so low, it doesn't look like he needs so much convincing. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	cricharddavies 2009-09-11 12:29 am UTC (link)
	"We got a lot of postcards, sure, but we didn't quite get 600. And unfortunately, a lot of people are claiming to have sent in postcards when they actually didn't. It's sad, really." It would cost him nothing. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-11 12:48 am UTC (link)
	I'm not really getting the point in assuming he'd do that, though. That's just needlessly pessimistic, it's not like the guy's pure unbridled evil, after all. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	cricharddavies 2009-09-11 03:45 pm UTC (link)
	it's not like the guy's pure unbridled evil, after all. You are welcome to your opinion. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	kingrockwell 2009-09-11 05:42 pm UTC (link)
	Now that's just poor form. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	ian_karkull 2009-09-10 10:15 pm UTC (link)
	And that acomplishes.. what exactly? Prove that there are 600 people out there that are familiar with Wonder Woman's publication history? Like that's a big feat... Sorry, but I'm with Dan on this one, smaller issue numbers attract more customers and this whole "quick, we need a sales boost! let's renumber our comics!" scheme is kind of silly anyway. (Reply to this) (Thread)

thebigapricot
2009-09-10 10:53 pm UTC (link)

Having Wonder Woman reach her 600th issue during DC's 75th anniversary concurrent with Batman/Superman's 700th will provide tons of PR fodder. The resultant media coverage is far more likely to attract new readers to the book than keeping the issue number low with the hope that it will attract new readers wondering through a comic shop. As if they don't know that.

Honestly, the whole 600th issue for 600 cards is a PR stunt. I wouldn't be surprised if we see DiDio sitting at a desk covered with bags of postcards.

And with the re-org yesterday Wonder Woman has became an even more valuable asset to the company. Joel Silver's option on a Wonder Woman movie is probably being pulled or is already pulled. A 600th issue combined with an announcement of the movie? Won't be serendipity. And remember all this stuff was underway, the Marvel/Disney deal just accelerated it into this quarter vs. Q1.

(Reply to this) (Parent)