GeekGround DC to replace Superman/WW (comics - rumor)

10/7/19 3:27 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 47889
From https://www.bleedingcool.com/2019/10/07/jonathan-kent-to-be-the-new-superman-for-dc-comics/
 
Jonathan Samuel Kent, the son of Clark Kent and Lois Lane, was created as a character by Dan Jurgens for the Convergence: Superman series, though playing on previous alternate history versions of who the children of the two stalwarts of DC Comics would be.
 
He was later established by Jurgens as the son of a previous pre-Flashpoint version of Clark Kent and Lois Lane, who were living in secret, in hiding, within the DC Universe, at one point timeline, continuities and memories were merged with the current, younger, unmarried New 52 versions of Clark Kent and Lois Lane.
 
And who suddenly had a ten-year-old son who was best friends with Batman’s son, Damian Wayne. He began to exhibit Superman-like powers and the recent few years has seen Superman as a father, seeing his young son grow up and take on a role as Superboy.
 
This underwent a radical change recently when Jonathan Kent went on a galaxy tour with his revived grandfather Jor-El, which also involved some faster-than-light travel and saw Jonathan return to Earth aged seven years when a few weeks had passed for his parents.
 
But is there more to come.
 
DC Comics’ Generation 4 timeline that Bleeding Cool first ran over the weekend, reveals that Jonathan Kent, teenage son of Clark Kent and Lois Lane, is going to be aged again, during his trip to the future with the Legion Of  Super-Heroes, currently being played out in issues of Superman, Legion and Lois Lane.
 
Bleeding Cool understands from comic professional gossip at New York Comic Con this past weekend, spinning out of our reports on the new DC timeline, that it is planned by DC Comics editorial that Jonathan Kent will now return from the 31st Century and the Legion of Super-Heroes to the present day (whenever that is now meant to be) as a young adult.
 
At that point, I understand that Jonathan Kent will replace his father, and be the new Superman.
 
And this will be the new status for the Superman comic book titles at DC Comics, Superman, Superman/Batman, Action Comics, Lois Lane, Supergirl, Jimmy Olsen, Justice League and more going forward.
 
The Superman books are currently written by Brian Bendis, and it looks likely that this is part of his plan going forward. Previously at Marvel Comics, Bendis saw the Ultimate version of Peter Parker, Spider-Man, die and replaced in the role by his creation Miles Morales. Could we be getting a similar story here?
 
More on this story and other DC Comics plans from Bleeding Cool today. For the speculators amongst you, Jonathan Kent’s first appearance is Convergence: Superman #2 in 2015 as a newborn. He then appears as a child in Superman: Lois and Clark by Jurgens and Lee Weeks where he first exhibits his powers. He debuted as Superboy in Superman Vol 4 #6 by Peter J. Tomasi, Patrick Gleason and Mick Gray.
10/7/19 3:27 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 47890
From https://www.bleedingcool.com/2019/10/07/gossip-wonder-woman-first-die-replaced-dc-comics-5g/
 
Oh, it’s a busy day in Bleeding Cool towers. You publish once piece of gossip, that inspires another, which inspires another. A few months ago, Bleeding Cool scooped the world, with news about DC Comics replacing Bruce Wayne with a new character under the cowl, the son of Luke Fox, Lucius Fox. With Bruce Wayne becoming a behind-the-scenes guy, who the world has thought has died.  And in the summer, we also heard that DC Comics was planning something called 5G, we just had no idea what.
 
This weekend they all came together with the DC Comics Timeline. A new 60-year history of the DC Universe, with some time-twisting shenanigans along the way (thanks to Zero Hour, Crisis and Doomsday Clock), but showing us four distinct generations of DC Comics history. And realising that 5G meant the fifth generation of DC Comics history. We then learned that Jonathan Kent will be aged again, and become the new Superman.
 
A new Batman, a new Superman, a new generation of DC Comics heroes. It was all starting to fit together. And now we know more. New first issue relaunches for both. That the first title to be relaunched will be Wonder Woman. Initially planned for January 2021, it may be rescheduled for November 2020. And every month from then on, a new relaunch of a DC Comics superhero title, with a new character in the lead. And not the obvious replacement either, this is not about sidekicks of legacies getting a promotion but the new generation of DC Comics superheroes getting their shot.
 
Welcome to 2020/2021. These are not your grandfather’s superheroes. And what happens to the heroes they replace, how they get taken off the table… well that’s for another day. Let’s see what the reaction to this news is first.
10/7/19 10:19 PM
8/20/16
Posts: 511

Ugh. Do not want.

10/8/19 9:30 AM
7/13/09
Posts: 15591

“Welcome to 2020/2021. These are not your grandfather’s superheroes.” 
 

Yes those characters were original and actually sold units. 

10/8/19 10:06 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 47891

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

10/8/19 1:58 PM
8/20/16
Posts: 512
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.

10/8/19 2:16 PM
3/7/05
Posts: 31435
Nerd point, if Jonathan was the one traveling at near light speed he would age slower than his parents, not the other way around.

Aside from that this sounds like a mess.

Replacing hero X with new version/person is the typical 'we cannot think of anything better to do right now' ploy comic companies try again and again. 95% of the time it's a failure but hey then they get to do a 'guess who is BACK' issue later.
10/8/19 4:22 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 47896
blabbermouth - 
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.


1. I believe Dan Didio was around when Dick Grayson became Batman. Regardless, if even a casual fan like me knows DC's done this before, anyone who works for DC should know DC has done this before. (Hell, DC animated the whole "Death of Superman/Return of Superman" within the last year or two)

2. Dunno if this is fair point or not, because characters have been replaced all the time as pointed out that DC has done this before. That said, IF DC is doing this because they think when Marvel did it, it was successful from a sales perspective, they are crazy.

Off the top of my head, only Kamala Khan (Ms. Marvel) and Jane Foster (Thor...now Valkrie) are still being published as solo titles. Riri Williams (Ironheart) is getting canceled with issue 12. Amadeus Cho (Hulk) wasn't successful, although the character is still sorta around...kinda. Sam Wilson (Captain America) went back to Falcon. Did I miss anyone?

Anyway, we'll see if it's Jane Foster or if it was Jason Aaron's writing with Valkrie (I strong suspect it was Jason Aaron)

10/8/19 4:27 PM
3/7/05
Posts: 31438
Even with the Jane Foster example she is not remaining Thor right? She is Valkyrie now. And Kamala has an exception creative team in addition to that name had been dormant a long time. Carol Danvers has moved on so it was not so much a replacement of an existing, used identity.
10/8/19 5:11 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 47897
BigWilliam - Even with the Jane Foster example she is not remaining Thor right? She is Valkyrie now. And Kamala has an exception creative team in addition to that name had been dormant a long time. Carol Danvers has moved on so it was not so much a replacement of an existing, used identity.

Fair points. 

G. Willow Wilson is no longer writing Kamala Khan, and the new writer (name escapes me) is only on issue 7 or 8, I think. And Valkyrie is on issue 2 or 3.

If I was a betting fellow, my guess is Kamala will be ok. The character is established enough to be considered a success. But I don't think Jane Foster is going to make it without Jason Aaron.

10/9/19 11:59 AM
8/20/16
Posts: 514
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.


1. I believe Dan Didio was around when Dick Grayson became Batman. Regardless, if even a casual fan like me knows DC's done this before, anyone who works for DC should know DC has done this before. (Hell, DC animated the whole "Death of Superman/Return of Superman" within the last year or two)

2. Dunno if this is fair point or not, because characters have been replaced all the time as pointed out that DC has done this before. That said, IF DC is doing this because they think when Marvel did it, it was successful from a sales perspective, they are crazy.

Off the top of my head, only Kamala Khan (Ms. Marvel) and Jane Foster (Thor...now Valkrie) are still being published as solo titles. Riri Williams (Ironheart) is getting canceled with issue 12. Amadeus Cho (Hulk) wasn't successful, although the character is still sorta around...kinda. Sam Wilson (Captain America) went back to Falcon. Did I miss anyone?

Anyway, we'll see if it's Jane Foster or if it was Jason Aaron's writing with Valkrie (I strong suspect it was Jason Aaron)

1. I'm not defending them. In my mind, it's a condemnation that they're led by a crew who have no respect for the characters and have not learned any lessons from the past.

 

2. I find that DC and Marvel copy each other's moves within a year or two of each other, from character twists to events to everything else. It's not enjoyable as a fan.

10/9/19 12:18 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 47905
blabbermouth - 
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.


1. I believe Dan Didio was around when Dick Grayson became Batman. Regardless, if even a casual fan like me knows DC's done this before, anyone who works for DC should know DC has done this before. (Hell, DC animated the whole "Death of Superman/Return of Superman" within the last year or two)

2. Dunno if this is fair point or not, because characters have been replaced all the time as pointed out that DC has done this before. That said, IF DC is doing this because they think when Marvel did it, it was successful from a sales perspective, they are crazy.

Off the top of my head, only Kamala Khan (Ms. Marvel) and Jane Foster (Thor...now Valkrie) are still being published as solo titles. Riri Williams (Ironheart) is getting canceled with issue 12. Amadeus Cho (Hulk) wasn't successful, although the character is still sorta around...kinda. Sam Wilson (Captain America) went back to Falcon. Did I miss anyone?

Anyway, we'll see if it's Jane Foster or if it was Jason Aaron's writing with Valkrie (I strong suspect it was Jason Aaron)

1. I'm not defending them. In my mind, it's a condemnation that they're led by a crew who have no respect for the characters and have not learned any lessons from the past.

 

2. I find that DC and Marvel copy each other's moves within a year or two of each other, from character twists to events to everything else. It's not enjoyable as a fan.


Can you elaborate on item #2? 

I'm struggling to think of a time when Marvel copied something from a DC movie

10/9/19 3:26 PM
8/20/16
Posts: 516
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.


1. I believe Dan Didio was around when Dick Grayson became Batman. Regardless, if even a casual fan like me knows DC's done this before, anyone who works for DC should know DC has done this before. (Hell, DC animated the whole "Death of Superman/Return of Superman" within the last year or two)

2. Dunno if this is fair point or not, because characters have been replaced all the time as pointed out that DC has done this before. That said, IF DC is doing this because they think when Marvel did it, it was successful from a sales perspective, they are crazy.

Off the top of my head, only Kamala Khan (Ms. Marvel) and Jane Foster (Thor...now Valkrie) are still being published as solo titles. Riri Williams (Ironheart) is getting canceled with issue 12. Amadeus Cho (Hulk) wasn't successful, although the character is still sorta around...kinda. Sam Wilson (Captain America) went back to Falcon. Did I miss anyone?

Anyway, we'll see if it's Jane Foster or if it was Jason Aaron's writing with Valkrie (I strong suspect it was Jason Aaron)

1. I'm not defending them. In my mind, it's a condemnation that they're led by a crew who have no respect for the characters and have not learned any lessons from the past.

 

2. I find that DC and Marvel copy each other's moves within a year or two of each other, from character twists to events to everything else. It's not enjoyable as a fan.


Can you elaborate on item #2? 

I'm struggling to think of a time when Marvel copied something from a DC movie

Moves, not movies. I meant that the moves one company makes with their comics, the other will surely dupilcate within a few years. Sorry, I realize that was confusing.

10/10/19 9:16 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 47907
blabbermouth - 
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -
blabbermouth - 
paw -

I'm really confused by this.

DC has done this in the past - replaced Superman (with 4 different "Supermen", replaced WW with Artemis, and replaced Batman with Azrael and Dick Grayson (twice). I might be completely wrong, but none of those moves were big sellers.  So why try something (again) that wasn't successful?

It really feels like DC's planning consists of trying stuff that didn't work in the past and hoping that it all turn out ok this time.

What's the definition of insanity again?

1. Is there anyone leading DC who was around when they did all this stuff the first time? I'm thinking not.

 

2. They see Marvel doing it and just HAVE to do it. It seems like that goes both ways with terrible ideas between the companies.


1. I believe Dan Didio was around when Dick Grayson became Batman. Regardless, if even a casual fan like me knows DC's done this before, anyone who works for DC should know DC has done this before. (Hell, DC animated the whole "Death of Superman/Return of Superman" within the last year or two)

2. Dunno if this is fair point or not, because characters have been replaced all the time as pointed out that DC has done this before. That said, IF DC is doing this because they think when Marvel did it, it was successful from a sales perspective, they are crazy.

Off the top of my head, only Kamala Khan (Ms. Marvel) and Jane Foster (Thor...now Valkrie) are still being published as solo titles. Riri Williams (Ironheart) is getting canceled with issue 12. Amadeus Cho (Hulk) wasn't successful, although the character is still sorta around...kinda. Sam Wilson (Captain America) went back to Falcon. Did I miss anyone?

Anyway, we'll see if it's Jane Foster or if it was Jason Aaron's writing with Valkrie (I strong suspect it was Jason Aaron)

1. I'm not defending them. In my mind, it's a condemnation that they're led by a crew who have no respect for the characters and have not learned any lessons from the past.

 

2. I find that DC and Marvel copy each other's moves within a year or two of each other, from character twists to events to everything else. It's not enjoyable as a fan.


Can you elaborate on item #2? 

I'm struggling to think of a time when Marvel copied something from a DC movie

Moves, not movies. I meant that the moves one company makes with their comics, the other will surely dupilcate within a few years. Sorry, I realize that was confusing.


I did indeed misread that. Sorry.