I don’t care how they work together, I just want good stories with them involved.

I love JMS work for the most part, and I know it’s beyond late, but he promised to finish The Twelve. I wonder if that’s been permanently shelved.

Straczynski talked about THE TWELVE last month, and said this:

Newsarama: Moving over to talk more about your Marvel work, your sole project with them currently is finishing up The Twelve. Where would you say you are with that project?

J. Michael Straczynski: Tom Brevoort will have something happy to announce about this sometime probably next month. And that’s all I’m going to say about it for now.

Posted using Google Chrome. I had the browser installed months ago, but it never worked. Turned out this week that the problem was due to registry errors that System Mechanic missed, but System Mechanic Professional fixed. If I had a Mac, there wouldn’t have been registry errors, I guess.

SRS

Let’s see….talking gorillas, modernized gods floating in and out without much purpose, Genocide, crossover interference from Amazons Attack, the Heinberg and Picoult abortions, and Blackest Night….seems about evenly matched with forced debris from editorial which had to be excised. The problem is that most of this stuff simply took too long to resolve itself, leaving the title character wildly unfocused much of the time.

“That’s not the most constructive way to talk about a star character — or is he being brutally honest?”

Who knows at this point? Perhaps he’s merely being honest…or simply uncertain himself what to do with the character. God knows too many writers always talk a good game about “core of the character” or such other rubbish and eventually wind up burying said character under yet another layer of useless periphery (see current Superman fare).

This is a strong, mythic, powerful character who for some time now has been kind of drowning under the weight of her own mythos, so I’m looking forward to paring away some of the layers of debris and undergrowth that have piled up around her in order to get to the core of the character.

That’s not a tribute to the character. It’s a reworded version of Byrne’s “Back to the basics” approach. The reason all the “debris and undergrowth” are there is that past writers have found the “core of the character” uninteresting, or at least insufficient. How much of that “debris and undergrowth” came from Simone’s stories? That’s not the most constructive way to talk about a star character — or is he being brutally honest?

SRS