The wonderful Tom Bondurant ponders the Legion of Super-Heroes in light of the cancellation of the most recent series:

For someone who’s been a part of Legion fandom — perhaps even casual fandom — Legion lore may be best acquired gradually, one issue at a time. It only feels like five, ten, twenty, or forty years if you step back and realize how long it’s been since you started reading. (That story about the Nightwing/Batgirl wedding produced a similar feeling in me, when I realized Dick’s been Nightwing for almost 30 years, and it’s been 25 years since The Killing Joke.) The great irony (for lack of a better term) of our current age of reprints is that if you wanted to, you could probably catch up on a good bit of Legion history, given enough time and effort. Like any other long-running series, LSH is now this big chunk of info-matter — a thing to be mainlined in marathon reading sessions, and not so much doled out issue by issue, month by month. The question then becomes whether there’s still a market for all that old material. Again, conventional wisdom seems to be that there will always be a Legion book, because there’s always been a Legion book. If that circular argument remains unbroken, it means simply having a Legion book isn’t as big a question as justifying a Legion book — which, again, goes back to all those relaunches.

Much more in the link. Speaking as a hardcore Legion fan for decades now – Yes, I am old – I have to shamefully admit that, as much as it pains me to say this, I’d be very interested in seeing a new writer take over the book following the last three + years of Paul Levitz handling the team for a third time. The Legion needs something to get people interested again, and it’s clearly not what’s been on offer for the last few years. I’m only hoping that, whatever replaces Legion of Super-Heroes as a title this time around, it’s more upbeat than the past storyline…

Prompted by the news that the CW’s Wonder Woman project is still in development, here’s a question: Is the problem in adapting Wonder Woman to other media her origin story?

Origins, after all, have particular significance in modern superhero adaptations; they’re where most (if not all) adaptations begin and, in the case of Smallville and Arrow, the space where some stay for the length of the entire story. And yet, Wonder Woman’s origins remove a lot of agency from the character; it ultimately boils down to “She is created and raised by her mother, and then decides to leave her home because of a boy.”

That’s not to say that there’s not a lot of good stuff there to play with – Her mother is, after all, the Queen of the Amazons, and you should be able to spin out enough drama from that alone to fill an entire TV series – but it lacks a moment where Diana does anything particularly dramatic or worthwhile, leaving those responsible for the adaptation to come up with what’s still referred to as “the hero moment.”

She isn’t unique in this, of course (Green Lantern’s origin is similarly happenstance when it comes to Hal’s participation, as is the Flash’s), but Wonder Woman also faces the strange problem of lacking a single, successful (in terms of fan reaction) narrative in any incarnation that provides a framework to build around; whereas Geoff Johns altered Green Lantern with the introduction of the multi-colored Corps, Wonder Woman still lacks that one story for adaptations to… well, adapt. Is the reason we’ve not seen a Wonder Woman TV show or movie so far that those responsible for the adaptation just don’t know what to adapt yet?

Marvel’s superheroes may rule the movie theater, but DC can at least claim the… supermarket?:

In a first-of-its-kind partnership, Target Corp.  and Warner Bros. Consumer Products, in partnership with DC Entertainment, have teamed up to introduce an extensive summer collection of exclusive Justice League merchandise. The summer collection was inspired by “DC Comics – The New 52” comic book character designs and holds surprises for fans young and old. Featuring the full lineup of DC Comics’ iconic Justice League Super Heroes – Aquaman, Batman, Cyborg, The Flash, Green Lantern, Superman and Wonder Woman – the summer collection will launch at all U.S. Target stores and on Target.com beginning May 19.

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “I hope this means that I can finally see my favorite superheroes re-imagined as furniture!” Well, you’re in luck:

And that’s not all!

In addition to the exclusive summer collection, Target will be part of a broader partnership with Warner Bros. Consumer Products that will offer more traditional Justice League licensed products. The broader partnership will span more than 20 categories including home, stationery, toys, apparel and accessories. All Justice League licensed products will range from $1 for Justice League temporary tattoos to $59.99 for a Justice League Rocker Chair.

The next time someone claims that superheroes haven’t penetrated the mainstream, just point them to the fact that there’s going to be a Justice League Rocker Chair.

I was surprised to see the upset online yesterday at the news – via DC’s latest round of solicitations – that Legion of Super-Heroes has been cancelled. What was surprising wasn’t that people were upset that the book was ending, but that there seemed to be this feeling that this was the first time that DC had cancelled the book, which… didn’t really make any sense, to be honest.

For one thing, the current volume of Legion was the seventh, and at 23 issues (24, once you include the zero issue), it lasted eight months longer than volume 6, which was cancelled to make way for the New 52 relaunch. That previous volume launched with a cover date of July 2010, meaning that it had been almost a year and a half between volumes 5 (which ended with #50, cover date March 2009) and volume 6. In the meantime, there had been the three issues of the seemingly-permanently delayed Final Crisis: Legion of Three Worlds mini and four issues of an abortive back-up run in the revised Adventure Comics (The Legion were theoretically headliners in the Adventure tie-ins to the “Last Stand of New Krypton” storyline, but that was more of a Superman event that featured the Legion than any attempt at a Legion book).

Even if seven headlining appearances in sixteen months falls within your definition of “continuous publication,” it’s still odd to see people assuming that DC cancelling the current series means the end of the Legion as a whole. Even the final solicit suggests an imminent reboot, with talk of the future of the DCU future looking different… In an era where, just in the last few years, we’ve seen the cancellation of long-running titles like Action Comics, Detective Comics, Fantastic Four, Uncanny X-Men and so many more, just to be relaunched months (in some cases, just weeks) later, surely the idea of a classic book ending “forever” seems ludicrous or at least amazingly naive, doesn’t it? Is there really anyone out there who doesn’t think we’ll see the announcement of a new Legion title – even if it’s not called Legion of Super-Heroes (We have, after all, had replacements with titles like Legion Lost, Legion Worlds, The Legion etc. in the past) – within a few months at most?

At the Beat, David Carter offers up a sales chart for what comics and graphic novels are selling on Amazon. Besides what are now the usual suspects for bookstore audiences – The Walking Dead, Diary of a Wimpy Kid etc. – there’s an impressive presence for DC’s Injustice: Gods Among Us digital series, with thirteen placings in the Top 50, and once again, no Marvel presence beyond Hawkeye Vol. 1: My Life As A Weapon. That book really does seem to be appealing to a mass audience in a way that nothing else from the publisher can manage…

The Hollywood Reporter has Greg Rucka considering the rating given to June’s Man of Steel:

Superman is precisely what we should be teaching our children. Superman inspires us to our best. I haven’t seen Man of Steel, haven’t read the script, and I’ve assiduously avoided spoilers. I genuinely don’t know if this “reality” will be present or not. I want it to be brilliant. I want it to be glorious. I want it to be inspiring. I am keeping the faith.

But that PG-13 on Man of Steel is making me nervous. I don’t know what it means. I don’t know if it’s a warning that there’s another k-shiv coming for the kidneys, or if it’s just the cost-of-doing-business, or even if it’s an MPAA-bias against all superhero violence. I don’t know if this is a genuine caution to parents, or a marketing decision aimed at a demographic too-cool for Superman’s brand of hope and idealism, yet embracing of Batman’s self-loathing rough justice, to assure them their ticket will be money well-spent. I don’t know if that PG-13 is there out of sincerity or cynicism or politics.

Over at his Tumblr, someone asks whether or not this desire for an all-ages Superman movie is inconsistent with his own comic book work on the character, and Rucka responds:

I’m just nervous, as I said. The last time they made a Superman movie, my son was 8. I couldn’t take him to it, it was too dark for him. He wanted to see it desperately, because it was Superman. Superman means a lot to a lot of people. A lot of those people are children.

No, it’s not Warner Brothers’ job to parent my child. But I do think that, especially in the case of an icon as powerful as Superman, there is a responsibility to remember how diverse his audience is. The more of that audience you try to reach – and they’re trying to reach EVERYONE with the MoS campaign – the more, I think, that needs to be considered.

I hadn’t, I admit, given a lot of thought to the rating of the Man of Steel movie, although I agree with Rucka, when I think about it, that a Superman movie should be as available and suitable to young audiences as possible. I was thinking more about the tone of the film every time I saw the trailers or the photos or the whatever from it, and worrying that the movie will be try to be something other than… I don’t know, than “fun,” for want of a better way to put it. I mean, I want drama and I even want beauty, but shouldn’t Superman, of all superheroes, have a movie that’s also just fun?

(Related/unrelated: I loved Rucka’s Adventures of Superman run, as weirdly truncated as it seemed at the time. Very few people in recent memory have written a scene that “gets” the character as much as the one where Superman returns a lost child to her mother and then, calmly, happily explains that, no, there’s really not anything more important than that that he should be up to. I’d love to see Rucka do some more Superman; I’d really love to see Rucka do some more Lois Lane. Maybe one day.)

Laura Sneddon considers Wonder Woman, her current title and her place in the DC Universe:

The real holy grail is still to be found – a Wonder Woman comic that really hits the high spots of character development, plot, superheroism, mythology and dramatic tension, in the same way that old pros Batman and Spider-Octopus (until recently) manage. Wonder Woman doesn’t have the same baggage as Superman, as despite also being invulnerable she doesn’t have to always be super good and she allows herself to make mistakes. She does share Bruce’s wealth, and would perhaps be intrigued by his methodology. Trying to live in a world she hasn’t grown up in is storyline gold, and making her an actual (pan?)sexual woman rather than mooning over the first man she meets would be terrific. (Would she even want to be monogamous?!) Her relationship with Kal could be wonderfully complex; two invincible people no longer having to worry about their lover getting hit by a bus, yet trying to work out a power balance that suits both of them (in the bedroom! Hurr hurr. Sorry).

Considering the brand extension that other DC characters have enjoyed – Right now, Batman is in how many titles? Even Green Arrow has two solo books, if you consider the TV tie-in Arrow – it’s kind of surprising that we don’t already have a more mainstream Wonder Woman title to accompany the Azzarello/Chiang version…

Marc-Oliver Frisch looks at the DC sales for March in his inimitable fashion:

Since issue #1, Talon has been promoted with a 1:25 variant-cover edition. For issue #1, there was also a 1:200 variant, and for issues #2 through #5 there were 1:100 variants. Issue #6 was the first issue with just the 1:25 variant-cover edition. So that’s at least part of the explanation why Talon is still dropping at an alarming rate, but certainly not all of it.

After issue #7, now, co-writer Scott Snyder (of the Him That Sells Many Books Snyders) and popular artist Guillem March (of the Him Whose Page Rate Is Way Too High For A Title That Won’t Move 25K Marches) will vacate the premises. And come issue #10, Talon will no longer be supported with any variant-cover editions, either. To make a long story short: It’s going to be an uphill struggle from here on out.

For DC, the worrying thing here is that they had a top-flight co-writer and an upper-class artist on a book that launched strongly out of a tremendously successful crossover, and it still ended up in free-fall.

The interesting thing for me in this month’s sales analysis – Aside from seeing quite how savage Marc will be about drops that Paul O’Brien would call standard attrition over in his sales chart analysis – is the addition of the 10 year comparison, which seems to work out surprisingly well for the publisher: Overall sales are up compared with a decade ago, and most individual titles are also higher than they were. Hopefully, we’ll see the same being added to Marvel’s charts soon.

Michael Moran wonders what’s behind the trend for today’s superheroes to be anything but common men:

In part, the recasting of billionaires as supermen is down to the current trend for realism. Money Supermarket threw together some figures on how much it might cost to become a superhero. Batman came out at around $690,000,000. The price of becoming Iron Man was an even more impressive $1,600,000,000.

Now, those numbers are fanciful estimates rooted in the weird science of superhero world, but they’re probably in the right order of magnitude. Until we find a planet populated by creatures who can fly and shoot lasers from their eyes, or an interstellar police force armed with near-omnipotent jewellery, money is the only real superpower.

Of course, billionaires aren’t the only heroes of hit superhero flicks. There’s also The Hulk (scientist employed by the US military), Captain America (super-soldier created by the US military), Hawkeye and Black Widow (assassins employed by a US-dominated covert military force) and Thor (a god).

And that was just The Avengers.

It’s odd, when you stop and think about it: Marvel Comics dominates today’s superhero mythology in the mainstream, but the focus on characters who – with the exception of Spider-Man – are miles away from the once-dominant-within-Marvel focus on superheroes who were “just like you” is weirdly close to the DC heroes, who were either brilliant scientists, jet pilots, newspapermen or billionaires. Is it just more fun for audiences to tune into the adventures of characters who live fantasy existences in both of their double identities?

Corey Blake steps into the ongoing debate over a lack of superheroic material in this year’s Eisner nominations:

So what happened? Did Marvel and DC, and the superhero genre in general, just have an off year? Are Marvel and DC getting lazy after years upon years of ruling the roost? Are superhero comics not keeping up with the increasing growth and quality of other genres? Is the rest of the industry leaving Marvel and DC behind in being leaders in creative and innovative comics? Are movies and TV finally doing superheroes better than comics? Or did the Eisners just have stuffy superhero-hating judges this year?

That line about “is the rest of the industry leaving Marvel and DC behind in being leaders in creative and innovative comics?” sticks with me because, well, have superhero comics from either publisher really been leading the way in creative and innovative comics for anytime in the last… what, decade, at least? That’s not to say that either publisher haven’t been putting out good – or even great – superhero fare during that time, but… am I alone in thinking that the place to look for material that pushes the boundaries of the medium isn’t necessarily the New 52 or the Marvel Universe? That’s not what they’re there for, surely? Aren’t they primarily focused on fulfilling expectations of the genre and the fanbase, and generating interest in the characters and concepts each universe contains, instead of innovating or pushing comics forward?

Sonia Harris considers the importance of Superman’s Best Friend:

It is no accident that Superman, the original boy scout, the mildest-mannered, the most humane of all superheroes, always has a dog. Obviously, the concept of a super-powered dog is probably the silliest one yet to come from comic books, but whether it was with Krypto or a more mundane dog, I always picture Clark Kent growing up with animals. Unlike the humans in his life, he would never have to explain himself to them, or fear rejection if they saw his true nature. Animals are important in any kid’s life, but I can imagine that they would be essential to a superhero growing up with a secret like he had. Any hero as solid and grounded as he is would need to have animal companionship to grow up with and in many ways they could be as important to him as his human relationships, since we’re all alien life forms to him.

Krypto is one of those superhero concepts that either work for you or seem utterly and irredeemably ridiculous. For me, it’s the former; I am a sucker for a Krypto story, and those that have appeared in Superman comics lately have been of the “Krypto is a very good boy who loves his owner, and he loves Krypto back” variety that completely wins me over. Comics needs more Krypto always, I think.

I’m still mulling over DC’s pulling out of the monthly Q&A column with Bob Harras and Bobbie Chase over at CBR. On the one hand, it’s pretty much the definition of a PR own goal to open yourself up to fan questions and then, four months later, quit because some of those questions were things that you didn’t want to talk about. On the other, as Heidi Macdonald wrote yesterday, only in comics would we expect upper editorial executives to subject themselves to monthly questions from their readership. To go further, only in Big Two comics would we expect that, because of the way Marvel interacts with readers and the press; we don’t see the decision makers from Dark Horse, IDW or Image undergo regularly scheduled interrogations, and I’m not sure anyone really expects them to, either.

What happened with the short-lived B&B column highlights the difference in… slickness, perhaps, between DC and Marvel, I think; Marvel is just better at managing the audience, their expectations, and making it look seamless. Axel Alonso’s weekly Axel-in-Charge column is pretty much the same thing as the B&B column – A combination of responding to softball questions with vague and meaningless responses and promoting upcoming product -  but the tone is different, somehow, and that’s the all-important thing: Alonso seems relaxed and engaged with the audience, even when he’s just saying “No plans for [whatever is being asked for]” or “Wait and see!” over and over again, whereas Harras and Chase seemed to be trying to hard, and selling too hard. I’m curious to see how Alonso – or Tom Brevoort, for that matter, who’s pretty much a model for how to communicate with fans online and has been for some time – would’ve responded to the Jerry Ordway question that seems to be at the center of DC’s decision to pull the column; I’m convinced it would’ve been something that would have felt sympathetic and appropriate, at least.

What the takeaway from this is, I’m unsure as yet. Maybe that DC needs to find different ways to engage its audience (or different people, perhaps)? Perhaps that Marvel outreach – Something that can be traced back to Stan back at the start of the company, via the Bullpen Bulletins and letter columns – has skewed our expectations of what to expect from comic executives?

As a quick look around the Internet will tell you, today is the 75th anniversary of the release of Action Comics #1, the comic that introduced Superman, Lois Lane and the basic concept of the superhero to the world. Although the poor guy remains much derided by some fans – I think everyone agrees that Lois is utterly spectacular though, right? – I’m a pretty big fan of Superman, for the optimism and simple sense of inherent goodness in the character. Lois, I’m also a great fan of; even at her most Silver Age “I simply must find out Superman’s true identity/trick him into marriage!” she was a rare female character of resourcefulness and agency, and at her best, she’s Superman’s equal (if not, at times, better) in terms of fighting for social justice and refusing to give up in the face of ridiculous odds.

It’s easy to see why Superman and his surrounding mythos have survived this long; there is still so much untapped potential in the ideas that orbit the character and his world. Although things may not be entirely working out for his books creatively right now – ahemActionahem – he’s a character who has enjoyed some great creators throughout the years, from Edmond Hamilton, Wayne Boring, Bill Finger and Al Plastino way back when to John Byrne, Mark Waid, Chris Roberson, Ed McGuinness, Pete Woods, Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely in more recent years (with greats like Jose Luis Garcia Lopez, Curt Swan, Cary Bates and Elliot S! Maggin along the way). But, when it comes to being celebratory about the Man of Steel, there are two men above all who should be held up and lionized; the two men who started the whole thing off, and created – through cultural synthesis, inspiration and some unrepeatable magic – one of the most indestructible ideas and fictional characters of the last 100 years.

So: Thank you for everything, Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel. Your work is something that has changed, and saved, lives.

Jim Starlin immediately wins over the fans of Stormwatch before he stepped on to revamp the title:

[Dan Didio] sent me the first 12 issues of “Stormwatch.” Once I read them, we talked on the phone and we both agreed that “Stormwatch” hadn’t really worked out too well at the conversion to the New 52 [Laughs]. A number of the books worked out really well, but “Stormwatch” was clearly not one of them.

Yes, talking trash about the series you’ve just taken over and rebooted in three pages is always a winner for longterm fans. I suspect that Starlin can get away with this – well, to an extent – because (a) he’s Jim Starlin and that name still carries some weight (and will likely carry more as Thanos becomes better known), and (b) not that many people were reading Stormwatch anyway. I wonder how a lesser-known creator would fare, with similar attitudes in an interview, though. When it comes to creators taking over familiar properties, how respectful should they be, publicly, to what’s gone before?

The right-wing Media Research Council looks at recent DC Comics news and doesn’t like what it sees:

In an upcoming release, DC’s openly lesbian Batwoman character will be shown kissing her lover while proposing marriage. And now, Batgirl has a transgendered roommate. These are not your father’s comic books.

Like the rest of American pop culture, comic books have increasingly included pro-gay propaganda pieces aimed at the children and young adults who read them. Not to be outdone by DC’s super-heroic sexual diversity, Marvel released a comic a few weeks ago where “Wolverine and Hercules share a gay kiss,” as reported by The Huffington Post.

Gay characters began appearing in comics in the early 90s but this agenda-based tactic has been employed more frequently in the past 10 years. In 2006, an Advocate story titled “How Gay is Superman?” led the way for the “turn your favorite superhero characters gay” trend. Since then, comic book writers have been aggressively promoting politics in their stories.

Ah, yes, “pro-gay propaganda.” That’s what DC is doing, of course. Not anything like trying to reflect the diversity of the real world in its books in an attempt to appeal to more readers, because that would be ridiculous. Not that I’m surprised by the lack of research that went into the piece, but “gay characters began appearing in comics in the early 90s” is nowhere near true; Howard Cruise even had a title called Gay Comix on the stands in 1980.

Even when it comes to the Big Two, DC’s first openly gay character debuted in 1987, by my reckoning – Superman and now Batwoman supporting cast member Maggie Sawyer – with its first openly gay superhero following months later. Of course, these days, few remember the greatness that was Millennium‘s Extrano. I can only imagine the reaction he‘d get from the Media Research Council…

Marvel may own Marvelman now (Well, some version of the character, at least), but it turns out the publisher could’ve made everyone’s lives a lot easier and bought the U.S. rights to publish Alan Moore’s run on the character way back when:

Shooter said, ‘We can’t do Marvelman,’ and I said, ‘But you ARE Marvel!’ He said, ‘Yeah, but the trouble is if his name is Marvelman, he represents the entire company. It would be like if this character was called DC Man, he’d represent DC. We couldn’t have a figurehead character who’s involved in a bizarre sexual triangle with the wife who’d rather sleep with the Greek God superhero than the forty-year-old pudgy secret identity and all this other stuff. Besides, he’s British, so how could he represent us?’ So he didn’t want it either.

Given the current status of Captain America as Marvel’s heart and moral conscience, could Marvelman represent the entire publisher these days? Turns out, the character’s name was also the reason DC didn’t purchase the rights when it had the chance the other day, according to Dick Giordano:

DC Comics publishing something called Marvelman; are you crazy? Do you know the problems we have with Captain Marvel, and you think we’re going to do Marvelman?! I couldn’t touch it. I love it but we couldn’t possibly do it.

The comics industries we could have had…! Just imagine.

It’s the dream of every message board poster – To be called out by name (or message board name, at least) by a creator during an interview, as Scott Lobdell did in a recent CBR conversation:

I’ve been reading a bunch of your message boards (Hey, MissLane38! I never said I hated fans. I don’t!) and it’s been fun watching everyone guess the exact nature of the reveals we’ll be learning in “Superboy” #19. Alas, they are all wrong!

That’s you told, “MissLane38,” right? That’s what you get for saying that Scott Lobdell hates fans! Except… That’s not what she actually said. This is what she actually said:

What does this have to do with Lobdell? Choosing Lois because she might have some of the same Neo-Sapien DNA as her niece Susie was just speculation, so pointing out she’s not biologically related to Lois is not a criticism of Lobdell. We don’t know that’s the story he has planned or it was his idea. And if Lobdell hates fans who are aware of continuity, then that’s really sad and pathetic of him.

Note that “if”? That kind of changes things from a declarative statement, don’t you think? In other words: Scott, she didn’t say that you hated fans, or that you said you did. On the plus side, this means that the two of you are in agreement – Hey, it’s just like an old-school comic book where heroes fight due to a misunderstanding before teaming up to deal with the real bad guy… except, you know, with more public shaming based on misreadings.

If you’ve seen the recut trailers that reconceptualize The Shining as a romantic comedy or Mrs. Doubtfire as a horror movie, then you might think the following video is along those lines. But, no — it’s an actual promotional spot that evidently aired on ABC Family this past weekend, offering a very different interpretation of the first entry in Christopher Nolan’s Bat-trilogy, Batman Begins:

Albert may have gone through 10 Things Learned from DC’s July Solicits on the main site, but something that’s worth noting: That’s the second month in a row where there are less than 52 books in the New 52 line. Last month could have been a blip – like February – before new launches brought the line back up to 52 series, but two months in a row…? Is it possible that DC has decided to drop the “rule of 52″ after nearly two years – and if so, could we be looking at a far smaller line at some point in the future?

Last week’s news that Vertigo will be publishing both Tom Strong and Astro City is another reminder that things are very different for the DC imprint in its post-Karen Berger era. Both books are good, sure, but both are also all-ages superhero titles – far outside the previous Vertigo remits of horror/supernatural genre work and Suggested for Mature Readers titles. Of course, those two things are now being published under the DC Comics imprint – Swamp Thing, Constantine and Animal Man for the former, and Before Watchmen for the latter.

That both Tom Strong and Astro City are former Wildstorm titles is doubtlessly worth noting – Vertigo now falls under the control of Hank Kanalz, SVP of Integrated Publishing at DC Entertainment and former Wildstorm GM. But what I find myself wondering is whether or not we’re seeing Vertigo slowly shift to an imprint for DC’s creator-owned or creator-controlled works (What is the status of the ABC books, anyway?).

The relative failures of books like Lot 13 and Insurgent have to have clearly demonstrated to DCE and DC Comics that pushing out non-DCU books under the DC Comics brand is likely to result in a lack of audience awareness and media coverage – Really, who was talking about Insurgent before it got cancelled early? – and, meanwhile, there was Vertigo lying around, its line shrinking and doing nothing much apart from waiting for Sandman Zero and some new Fables titles. What could go wrong?

I could be wrong, of course; these may be the only two off-topic additions to Vertigo that we’ll see, and other creator-owned/controlled books from what would’ve been Wildstorm will appear in future without the Vertigo banner. But somehow, I suspect that we’re watching the Vertigo imprint and brand be rebuilt as something else right in front of our eyes…