Being the bad guys is not really an issue. We still watch all all those American WWII movies & shows. What an issue would be that anything that might be seen as gloryfing wars (especially WWII) or making it seem rather harmless would have no chance in Germany.

From a German view, any fiction that is related to war must leave you utterly depressed by the time you are done with it and give you the the urge to reject any kind of violance.

Those OUR ARMY AT WAR stories fit that bill. In almost all cases, the war is shown as something terrible that is hopefully to be survived, not perpetuated. Soldiers on both sides are often shown as human beings tolerating terrible situations while fighting for a cause, not a love of violence or death. In many ways, it is a more healthy view of the world than the simplistic philosophy generally presented in superhero comics, where a few well-placed punches solve all problems and no one is ever really hurt. Sgt. Rock's adventures can pretty easily be classified as anti-war comics.

_________________

From a neutral view that might very well be the case, but the bar is simply much higher, even more so since it is a comic book (movies, even computer games would have it easier, at least now). To be really viewn as an anti-war comic it would need to be from the perspective of a "victim" not an someone who has an "active part" in it (unless for example you tell the story of a teenager who gets drafted against his will and his forced into the war and has to endure it's horrors for example).

I am not trying to say you are wrong (because you're not) but try to explain how such a medium (or war & military) would be seen over here. For a large part we don't even like the idea of having an Army in the first place. Using it (even on peace-keeping missions) is even more controversial.

Although the situation is alien to me, I understand that we consider "anti-war" fiction wouldn't necessarily meet your standard. Sgt. Rock is certainly no victim. That point of view is almost entirely absent from American popular consciousness, from comics to movies. It inherently runs counter to the popular myth of the "American Dream." No one ever wants to be a victim -- I don't think that is just an American prejudice, but a universal one -- so our famously narrow-minded audiences are unsympathetic, even hostile to the perspective.

I'm not going to attempt to defend American philosophy against the world. I'm just going to say that as a child, it was easy for me to understand that the heroic Sgt. Rock was firmly opposed to the horrors of war, just or otherwise. But he was inarguably still fighting in one. His comic was, after all, titled OUR ARMY AT WAR. And from a certain perspective -- whether I agree with it or not -- it could be argued that it glorified the very thing that it was trying to warn against.

_________________

I found this (admittedly older) video about the DCnU and thought it was interesting.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/4132-Continanity-Rebooted

_________________
1-800-BOO$TER
...please leave a message

With Keith Giffen returning to BB, so does a small portion of my hope that the title might become closer to the way it was before the reboot. Though even if..how much longer will the title survive on those numbers...

Honestly, DC must have some reason for keeping BB around, as it barely skims above 15,000 monthly sales. I'm guessing it's the minority-hero angle. I can't imagine that this title will make next quarter's round of cuts.

You know, if DC had aimed at a younger audience with this book, it could probably have slid comfortably into the Johnny DC imprint where 15,000 books is a blockbuster.

_________________

The only reason I could come up with right now would be an already planned event involving the series.

reply to Boosterrific's comment here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&p=2816#p2816

(after all it is not really about Booster or the Smallville comic)

I did not even realize that those two were Digital First comis. Legends of the Dark Knight focuses to my understanding on Batman's early adventure before he started collecting orphans, correct? I have to say that would make it less interessting to me. While I don't dislike Batman (like for example Hal Jordan), I find his "support cast" usually far more interesting than him.

With Superman I have a much harder time to explain why I find him not that interesting, though who knows, maybe his new movie gets me in the moot to read about him again.

Neither do I find the premise of Green team interesting..though I do have to admit that I am playing with the idea of giving it a try just on the basis that DC trying something new (instead of another Lantern or Bat-title) in itself should be rewarded.

Yes, LotDK does focus on pre-Robin Batman. I actually prefer Batman without the large supporting cast. (I like Dick Grayson and Tim Drake, but actively dislike every other Robin.) I think the "collecting orphans" aspect of his adventures has gotten ridiculously out of hand, and therefore distracting to my suspension of disbelief. I want to read about Batman being the World's Greatest Detective, not the soap opera drama that his extended "family" creates.

To each his own.

_________________