This just in from Fan Expo in Toronto:
December will see a one-shot called Shadowland: After the Fall which will lead into a four issue mini-series called Daredevil: Reborn, written by Diggle with art by Davide Gianfelice (and covers by none other than Jock).
It still remains to be seen whether this Daredevil is Matt Murdock or someone else. Go to Comics Alliance for more on this story or check the original live feed hosted by Marvel. UPDATED: Also, take a look at images from the Shadowland panel here (Thanks to superpouvoir.com for the heads up!).
Sorry I couldn’t get to my Shadowland: Moon Knight #1 review today, but will make sure to post it tomorrow!
15 comments
Robert says:
Aug 28, 2010
First off, I’d like to say I love this site. I’ve commented on a few items in the past few weeks and I hate that I always seem to be so negative. I’m usually not a negative person, especially about Daredevil. I wished I’d found this site months ago, hell years ago. I love reading Daredevil. Hell I even love the DD movie, flaws and all, it got me to start collecting DD regularly instead of just reading the occasional story here and there in trade form. Back during Brubaker and Bendis’ runs I’d have been singing nothing but DD’s praises. Diggle’s run started off great and I was really looking forward to what was coming. Then Shadowland was announced and I started to get a bad feeling, and it has gotten progressively worse and worse.
Back to negative mode. This whole scenario f’ing sucks.
Daredevil Reborn, at $3.99 or higher, when you know this could have just been a story arc in, you know, Daredevil, say issues 513-518.
Of course this will lead to a new Daredevil #1 (they might go back to the regular series numbering) at of course $3.99 which is too much to pay for a regular size monthly comic.
I see myself going to exclusively trades that I can get insanely cheap off Amazon. If its Matt Murdock, I will read it, but will go out of my way to pay the least for it.
One other thing, the unmitigated ego of the guys at Marvel. I know they weren’t making a direct comparison to “Born Again” but it was close. It reminded me of when “Civil War” was starting and Quesada or Bendis was saying this would be like Watchmen in years to come in peoples eyes.
No offense to Diggle but, Born Again is like a well grilled sirloin, Shadowland is like a Big Mac.
and Watchmen is filet mignon, Civil War was a day old Krystal burger.
krakkaboom says:
Aug 31, 2010
At this point, I’m fine with killing Murdock during Shadowland if he’ll be reborn directly after and continue to be Daredevil. If Matt Murdock is not the man with DD on his chest or “The Man Without Fear”, I will most likely not buy another Daredevil comic until he is Daredevil again. I love the character and the person. That’s why I read Daredevil, and that’s why many others do, I presume. Daredevil is probably the Marvel character that resonates the most with me. Relating to Matt is what makes DD so powerful. Take out the main ingredient, and you’ll have something tasteless.
I will most likely buy this mini-series, and the one-shot, but if the Daredevil #1 doesn’t have Murdock as Daredevil, I’ll be trading in every one of my DD issues for store credit at my LCS.
krakkaboom says:
Sep 1, 2010
Here’s an excerpt from a Marvel panel at Baltimore Comic-Con:
“One fan voiced his disappointment towards what is happening to Daredevil, saying the character has gone from being a great hero to becoming a “one-note villain.” This was met with some vocal crowd support of the fan, audible bitterness of the path Daredevil is currently on. Brevoort said that he was sorry that the fan felt that way, and that “some interesting things will be happening with Daredevil in 2011.”
First Look At Marvel’s Daredevil Reborn « Panels of Awesome! says:
Sep 1, 2010
[...] If you were in attendance at this year’s Fan Expo in Toronto, you’re undoubtedly aware that Daredevil’s certainly going to be going through some rough times over the next couple of months leading up to the finale of the ongoing Daredevil series. [...]
krakkaboom says:
Sep 2, 2010
Here’s an interview with Andy Diggle that I read today on CBR pertaining to Shadowland and the general direction of DD: http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=28120
The cover for Reborn #1 looks pretty sweet.
This line is troublesome: “…regardless of what the title on the front cover says,” Diggle said.
Hopefully they do what they did in Captain America…do the Reborn mini-series, then continue on with the current numbering.
Aaron Kimel says:
Sep 2, 2010
Maybe I’m in the minority here, but why do folks care about the numbering so much? My first comic love was THOR and that series *started* with JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY #83; the first issue of THOR was #126. That series ran to #502 before it was cancelled. (And then in a really weird move, a Thor-less JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY was re-launched – starting at issue #503!) Heck, it was also titled THE MIGHTY THOR for every issue except #491-502, yet no one seems to ever call it that. When THOR (back to THE MIGHTY THOR) was re-launched at #1, ran to #85, *again* was re-launched, and then switched its numbering to #600, I was not in the least bit confused as to where I was in the story. (THOR #600 was really only the 513th issue of a Thor comic; the re-numbered (“Mighty”-less) THOR did not include the newer issues of JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY.) And that’s a much more confusing history than we might get from DAREDEVIL going back to #1 and counting from there for a while. It might seem silly to those of us who have been following DAREDEVIL for a while, but if it keeps the book on the shelves, who cares?
krakkaboom says:
Sep 2, 2010
I see your point, but I think that people are fed up with Marvel’s shenanigans. You could argue that they re-numbered Daredevil with issue #500 to spike their sales, and you could argue the same thing since it’s ending at #512, after just re-numbering the series a little over a year ago. If they were just going to cancel it, why bother re-numbering it at all? So clearly, they’ll be re-launching some incarnation of Daredevil with a fresh #1 and a new price of $3.99 to anger the fans. It’s just a good excuse for them to make a buck, and I’m calling BS.
I understand that if sales dip too much, it’s not good for readers, because then they’ll make drastic changes. However, they’ve done that anyway, and the assumed results are favoring no one but Marvel’s bottom line. I get that they’re all about selling more copies, but it’s their method of doing so that I take issue with. If they’d focus on telling great stories, they wouldn’t need gimmicks and numbering SNAFUs to sucker people.
New Avengers #1 and the recent Wolverine #1 are more examples of pointless re-launches. If Marvel explained their reasons for re-numbering/re-launching, I think the fans would at least understand why they do what they do.
Aaron K says:
Sep 2, 2010
@krakkaboom – I don’t follow your reasoning. Simply because sales may have been aided by going to DAREDEVIL #500 (and when you look at the data, it didn’t help at all outside of that one issue; http://www.manwithoutfear.com/ddSALES.shtml) does not mean that sales won’t be aided *again* or *in a different manner* by re-launching at #1. Folks with familiarity with Daredevil may have jumped on board for #500 to see what was going on; a re-launch at #1 would be targetted at Daredevil neophytes and also at folks who may have an interest in Gambit, Black Panther, etc. There’s no reason to stop marketing the book because a marketing move was made over a year ago. There’s no reason to not always be striving to bring in *new* readers.
I have read explanations as to why series have been re-numbered or re-launched all over the place. The explanation is very simple: it draws attention to a title (thereby drawing in readers) and signals that that title is undergoing some minor/major shift that may bring it within the interest of current non-readers. It also signals a convenient point for folks to jump onto a title without the necessity of picking up 499 back issues. What’s confusing about this?
NEW AVENGERS was re-launched because the status quo had shifted radically: Luke Cage et al. had become legitimate heroes no longer on the run. WOLVERINE was re-launched because that title had been handed over to Daken and both characters merited their own series. Note that DAKEN is also getting a self-titled series. These strike me as perfectly reasonable justifications – as if one was needed! Tom Brevoort has specifically addressed DAREDEVIL on multiple occasions. http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=27942; http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort/q/999156310; http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort/q/981170957
I think you’re being intentionally naive and argumentative to suggest that Marvel is diverting attention from producing excellent comics towards marketing schemes (or “sucker[ing]” people). These are hardly mutually exclusive endeavors and are conducted by entirely different people! Andy Diggle and Antony Johnston are not sitting about thinking of advertising methods to drum up increased readership; they’re writing comic books. Excellent comics – by themselves – don’t always stand up in the marketplace though. To just take recent examples, consider the fates of CAPTAIN BRITAIN & MI:13, INCREDIBLE HERCULES, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, NOVA, S.W.O.R.D., and DOCTOR VOODOO. All of these were quality books that were not maintaining sales numbers sufficient to keep them in print. If re-numbering would have saved these titles, why the heck would you ever object?
I could certainly understand being upset and disappointed with having DAREDEVIL cancelled, but we’re both assuming that a re-launch will occur in the relatively short term. (I’d guess within a year of #512′s publication, and that includes the time DAREDEVIL: REBORN is running.) Given that situation, I see no reason for you to object to Marvel’s behavior. You may not like the particular story they’re telling, but that’s something else entirely.
Let me ask this: how do you suggest that Marvel get more readers on board for DAREDEVIL? I recommend against your saying, “Write better stories”.
Robert says:
Sep 2, 2010
Its these absurd price increases that Marvel (and DC) keep shoveling out. The renumbering gimmicks is total crap, but is a symptom of a much larger disease. DC seems to focus on the fans who have been reading comics since before 1980. Marvel seems to focus on the fans who started reading in 2009. Both companies need to realize that the answer is somewhere in the middle.
And I’m gonna be in the minority on this, but the two ways to get prices back down:
1 – quit paying prima donna writers like bendis and splash artists who can’t do a monthly book.
2 – Get rid of the high quality paper and covers. Go back to printing on newsprint. Make comics less than 2 dollars again. People will buy more.
It is absurd to pay these prices for 22 pages of story that takes less than 4 minutes to read. The average book on the shelf these days, I can read in under 5 minutes, and thats wordy writers like Morrison and Brubaker. The average comic from 20 years ago took about 20 minutes to really read through. Creative teams knew how to produce sequential story telling, not just 22 pages of poster art. (I’m looking directly at Shadowland with its generic backgrounds and full pages of Ghost Rider looking all “badass”)
6 years ago, I was buying around 12 books a month. Up until two weeks ago, I was buying 3.
I’ve already dropped DD and Shadowland. I’m finishing out The Return of Bruce Wayne, then I’m going exclusively with trades if I buy anything.
The people running Marvel (and DC) need to take a basic business class and realize what a self-destructive path they are on.
I can read my monthly comics by going to Books-a-Million a couple times a month (which i do anyway) and reading what I want (again in a couple of minutes), put it back on the shelf and buy the trade later for future reading off of amazon.
Yeah, I’m gonna be that guy. I’m fed up with being screwed.
krakkaboom says:
Sep 2, 2010
“I think you’re being intentionally naive and argumentative to suggest that Marvel is diverting attention from producing excellent comics towards marketing schemes (or “sucker[ing]” people).”
Maybe it’s my contempt for management/consumerism that influences my viewpoint. I feel insulted by Brevoort, especially, who scoffs at fans’ suggestions and has an “I know best” attitude. Lest we forget that Brevoort was one of the gurus that brought us “One More Day”. All of the teasers that Marvel has fallen in love with this year have only served to enrage fans. It’s as if Marvel’s motto is “no press is bad press”. By that I mean that they don’t care if their teasers infuriate their fan base, because it proves to them that it was effective. As long as people are talking about it, then it worked. Regardless of how they react.
“These are hardly mutually exclusive endeavors and are conducted by entirely different people! Andy Diggle and Antony Johnston are not sitting about thinking of advertising methods to drum up increased readership; they’re writing comic books.”
I’m not blaming Diggle and Johnston here. I’m blaming the execution and handling of the Daredevil title. Also, I’m not saying that D&J are writing a terrible story and should raise their game, as I haven’t read Shadowland #5 or Daredevil #512 yet. Yes, I’m speculating about the ending, so maybe I should stop. However, when Marvel releases teasers such as the recent Daredevil-related ones that prompts all kinds of people to flame them, then can’t understand why…it really makes me wonder what goes on in the minds of some of the power-wielders at Marvel. When readers are dropping DD and Shadowland in the middle of the event because your teasers are either spoilers or anger the reader into reacting as such, you’ve failed.
I’d like to see the Shadowland story arc end at #512, then have the Reborn mini (with the Daredevil title on hiatus), then start again with #513, much like they did with Captain America. We don’t need a new “Man Without Fear”, we don’t need someone other than Matt Murdock as Daredevil. No fans want that, so why even waste the time and effort on silly teasers/promos? They are gimmicks and cop-outs designed to sell more books. Let the stories speak for themselves, or come up with better marketing that is more like DC’s recent Brightest Day variants (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/files/2010/08/w_lntrn_var_w_logos.jpg) that actually make you think, rather than insult intelligent readers. I hope that I’ll look back on my posts and laugh at myself for being naive, as you (possibly) rightly suggest.
“Excellent comics – by themselves – don’t always stand up in the marketplace though. To just take recent examples, consider the fates of CAPTAIN BRITAIN & MI:13, INCREDIBLE HERCULES, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, NOVA, S.W.O.R.D., and DOCTOR VOODOO. All of these were quality books that were not maintaining sales numbers sufficient to keep them in print. If re-numbering would have saved these titles, why the heck would you ever object?”
I wouldn’t object, but those titles don’t need re-numbered. You can say I’m hypocritical for saying that, but it’s not fair to compare them to titles that have been around for 40 or 50 years. For a company like Marvel to cancel some of the aforementioned titles after 3 or 4 issues is just ridiculous. I agree, most of the titles you mentioned were very good reads. I could argue that they’re owned by Disney and have no excuses for discontinuing smaller titles, but that seems trite. The fact is, they don’t really care about what the fans want, and probably never will. They are right, we are wrong, and if we have a problem with it, it’s on us.
Aaron K says:
Sep 2, 2010
@krakkaboom – I think you and I are just starting from different assumptions. I am assuming that Diggle devised a story that (a) *he* wanted to tell and (b) he thought was new, interesting, and compelling based upon where the book was left by Brubaker. You seem to be assuming that Diggle’s decision to write SHADOWLAND came down from editorial/management (at least in part), forcing Diggle to write a story that would be sensationalist and upset the DAREDEVIL status quo. Likely, the truth is somewhere in between, though I believe (naturally) that it’s closer to my assumption than yours.
@Robert – While I’m sure we’d all like less expensive books, I can’t second your vote for returning to newsprint. I think the glossy paper really improves my reading experience. It also preserves the quality of the book longer, allowing me to re-read it over time with no loss. And while it did take longer to read comics in the 60s, I don’t think that made them *better*; it just made them wordier. The bulk of that text was narration or thought bubbles that operated as narration. I don’t think that would fly as good writing in 2010. (There’s a reason Christine and others make fun of Silver Age DAREDEVIL as much as they do.)
Robert says:
Sep 3, 2010
Aaron, your mostly right. Though I said 20 years ago. The late 80s and early 90s were hardly the silver age.
Everything Marvel is doing right now reminds me of one thing: Image Comics circa 1995
krakkaboom says:
Sep 3, 2010
“I think you and I are just starting from different assumptions. I am assuming that Diggle devised a story that (a) *he* wanted to tell and (b) he thought was new, interesting, and compelling based upon where the book was left by Brubaker. You seem to be assuming that Diggle’s decision to write SHADOWLAND came down from editorial/management (at least in part), forcing Diggle to write a story that would be sensationalist and upset the DAREDEVIL status quo. Likely, the truth is somewhere in between, though I believe (naturally) that it’s closer to my assumption than yours.”
Fair enough. I believe that Diggle pitched an outline of the direction that he was going to take Daredevil, but I feel like it could have simply been told within the Daredevil title. I believe that Marvel are the ones that made it into an event, and there is where I become irritated. Once it becomes an event, all bets are off, and meddling by management/editors begins. That’s what I take out of it. I could be completely wrong.
krakkaboom says:
Sep 7, 2010
Around the 35:50 mark, Jamie D suggests exactly what I have. Comic Geek Speak has a good discussion about Daredevil and Shadowland. Check it.
krakkaboom says:
Sep 7, 2010
Forgot the link: http://comicgeekspeak.com/episodes/comic_geek_speak-1170.php