An Experiment Of Sorts

Deliverance
American History X
Pulp Fiction
The cover to FLASH #9

All things with images of male rape.

C'mon, look at it...

Held down on the left...



Held down on the right...



Held at knife point and held down from behind...



Then there's the full cover with the titling...






Which all combines for:



I'd be interested how many folks can't "unsee" that perspective on the cover now.

Look, I'm sure it wasn't intentional or desired...and it takes some finagling to see it this way. But the elements are there and I thought it'd be funny to share.

Until next time, when we go over the cover where Dreamgirl lures Brainaic 5 into being tentacle raped...

Dueling Justice League Teams? Or Dueling Batmen?

DC has seemed to pride themselves on consistency of editorial message with their relaunch. There's supposed to be great continuity.

Of course, that's questionable, as Justice League's opening arc, set five years ago, appears to conflict with other titles running at the same point in the timeline. But that's the sort of thing that can get overlooked.

Titles that are in the same line try to keep a pretty tight relationship. We've had Frankenstein and OMAC crossover, while Swamp Thing and Animal Man have been swapping background info in prep for their crossover. The Bat family is crossing over shortly. For some reason, Stormwatch, Grifter and Superman are all going to throw their lot in together on a Daemonite arc.

But the one place we don't seem to have continuity is in the Justice League franchise.

In the top right, you'll see a page from Justice League International, where Batman is clearly shown to be a member of the team. He's been in the whole time and rather publicly, too.

So why did Geoff Johns write the following exchange into Justice League?


He's a member of the team he calls a joke. It has only ever existed with him as a member in the current continuity. In fact, he's had chances where he could have let it crumble on its own, but he fought to keep them together. There's no one else as Batman in the current continuity and, even if there were, it'd seem silly for him to have one of his incorporated bunch on the team, but still deride the whole function.

So what's the deal? Johns and his editor can't really be that ignorant of the character's membership on the team he's actually shitting on, can they? I mean, he's on covers, for fuck's sake.

I Won't Go Home Again

David Brothers ripped Newsarama pretty badly a month or so ago. While I don't agree with all of his points on the matter that led to the 'Rama editorial, I do tend to agree with a lot of what he's said about problems there and with comics journalism in general.

Allow me to put a finer point on it.

When the BLACKEST NIGHT finale came out, Newsarama wanted to do a feature article where as many Best Shots members as possible would contribute their review. Troy Brownfield had moved over to running Blog@, while David Pepose had taken over Best Shots. Due to scheduling concerns, Lucas Siegel was going to be handling the article on the day of release.

I had my review in hours before the article would run...yet my review was nowhere to be found in the article. Come to find out later that a fellow contributor had their review dropped, too.

We happened to be the only two voices in the crowd that had written negative reviews about the finale.

At the time, Lucas Siegel was actively pitching comic book work. I know for a fact that one of the publishers he was pitching to was DC.

To his credit, David offered to run the long review with day-after-release shorter reviews or with the Monday Best Shots column, but I really had no interest at that point. I didn't stop contributing to the site immediately, though I wish I had, since I wound up taking out a good deal of this frustration on Pepose at a later date (sorry, again, sir).

It should be noted: David Pepose made it clear that he disagreed with my conclusion that my review was left out due to the opinion expressed within it.

Brothers' piece and/or the comment thread it generated takes broad shots at members of the comics journalism community pitching while they're covering it. I can tell you that, despite later work towards careers writing comic books, neither Matt Brady or Troy Brownfield ever bumped my work or tried to dissuade me from a negative review (even with the headaches I would often cause Brady). I'd take a bullet for either of them. David Pepose never did such things, either, but I'm not aware of whether he plans on pursuing that sort of career and, if I'd worked under his lead longer, would probably feel the same about blocking the path between him and a gun.

I happen to very much enjoy the work of Marc Bernadin, who often positively covered DC Comics (Warner Bros) while writing for Entertainment Weekly (Warner Bros) before writing for WildStorm (Warner Bros). I wouldn't question the honesty of any of his work just because of that chain of events, nor do I feel it is fair to make assumptions about anyone in a similar position.

While I feel that pitching interests of "comic book journalists" can be a concern, I find the active pitching by site editors to be a larger one...dwarfed only by so many of the sites being beholden to the big publishers (for "exclusives" and "previews" to generate their income) that they make wholesale changes to how they do business. Articles blending right into message boards and comment sections become links to forums become suggestions that you friend them on Facebook and comment there, with the initial impetus for the movement being that publishers and creators didn't like seeing people criticizing them or their product right under their interview.

If not for the great friendships I forged along the way, I swear I'd wish I never wound up on the "professional" coverage side of the divide. Once you've seen behind the curtain, it all starts to lose its magic. And once you see how the sausage is made, it starts to turn your stomach.

DC Cutting Back On Subscriptions?

Heidi MacDonald's THE BEAT has noticed that DC has dropped the number of titles that they offer for subscription on their site. I posted the following as a comment there, but since it is something I've attempted to call attention to a number of times here, I figured I'd slap it in its own blog entry:

Funny, just about a week ago, they offered a drastically reduced subscription to Aquaman through Tanga. It was $11 for a full year. I've been skipping that book, but got sucked into subscribing at that price. I've linked to a screen cap of the offering if anyone doubts it. I've kind of wondered how happy retail partners would be about them offering a decent section of their books at a 67+% discount (and no tax). BATMAN, BATMAN & ROBIN and BATMAN: THE DARK KNIGHT ($12) have all been offered (I don't recall DETECTIVE making it on the site yet). JUSTICE LEAGUE, GREEN LANTERN and GREEN LANTERN: NEW GUARDIANS have, also, been offered.

I know the argument for the 30-35% discount not being an instance of them competing with the DM is based around the inconsistent delivery dates and possible damage, but doubling that discount (which is something no retailer can match) has to open that back up to concern, no?

Not This Time, Tanga!

You already set me up with BATMAN and BATMAN & ROBIN, Tanga. Expecting me to fall for this offer is foolhardy at best, even at $11.99.

Damn You, Tanga!

I'd quit Aquaman. The same "water/fish/etc" jokes were getting used repeatedly and I felt like it was more to take aim at fans to make fun of them rather than make them laugh. I generally like the character and this is the first time I can recall dropping a Johns book.

But then Tanga went and threw it up as an $11 subscription.

At least I don't have to feel as guilty about this one, as I'd not have been buying it at the LCS currently.

Moore Should Have Known Better...Maybe

Each time Rich Johnston trots out talk of the WATCHMEN contract, I get a reader (I know, I was shocked that I still had any, too) pointing out to me that some of his statements about graphic novels in print are false.

To wit:

No one has ever cited that Marvel collected the Dark Phoenix Saga in trade in 1984 (wikipedia is wrong about the first version; the first was in '84 with a Sienkevich cover). And that went into multiple printings. Marvel also released their "graphic novels" (Death of Captain Marvel, etc.) to bookstores, and those had more than one printing. In the '70s and early '80s, Marvel did a number of bookstore books (Origins of Marvel Comics, Son of Origins, Bring on the Bad Guys, etc.).

By the time Watchmen came out in September of 1986, Marvel had done upwards of 22 of the Marvel Graphic Novels. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Graphic_Novel
DC put out its first collection of RONIN the same month that Watchmen ended.

So, there were graphic novels in print and previously serialized monthly works that were put into continuously reprinted trade 1-2 years before WATCHMEN saw publication.

I'm not necessarily saying Gibbons and Moore went into this with eyes wide open, but that half the shutting would be due to their own lack of observing the market. I still don't like the deal and think that rights should revert to them, but I no longer have as solid an objective case for it as I once used to.

Worst DC Relaunch Ever

And before I saw the photo-variant cover, I had said, "finally, some New Gods stuff!" ;)
Found here!

DC 52: On the 1s & 2s: Frankenstein

About, oh, two weeks ago, I asked folks for examples of DC 52 books they might be interested in seeing reviews for. I had the idea for reviewing two issues of a series at once, largely because I wanted to use the "on the 1s and 2s" phrase, but, also, because it has felt like there isn't always enough meat to the single issues of this relaunch to fairly judge just one. The first up is Frankenstein: Agent of S.H.A.D.E.


The first thing I noticed when going over this selection was how at odds the cover art seems to be with the interior. Employing JG Jones on covers doesn't just give you art that is at conflict with the interior pencils, but suggests practically a brand difference.

But then breaking past that initial concern, I'm faced with yet another apparent contradiction. The story elements, on the surface, seem to suggest more action movie than indie drama. But the muddied, moody art (including the way coloring is employed) suggests the type of story you'd see in Vertigo books, where the action is rarely THE THING, but mostly there to service the story. The coloring, in particular, really seems to fit what I more often have seen on Vertigo product than DC Universe: larger sections of one solid color, rather than more intricate detail. Which, separate from a review, makes me wonder if there's some manner of cost savings in such a move, rather than simply being an artistic decision.

This is not to say I don't enjoy Alberto Ponticelli's art at all. I do, despite some of the inconsistencies (namely Frankenstein's monster looking like several different characters throughout the book). His art is always effective, tells the story ably and can handle the blend of action, humor and drama well. One of the strongest stretches for the art appears with a flashback in the second issue. In relating a supporting character's history (and, also, informing us on some of S.H.A.D.E.'s history), the art team perfectly evokes the feeling of old, grainy home movie footage.

The book uses classic horror movie characters, which would seem to suggest the style of art is fitting, as moody/muddied is often found in horror comics. But the cast is really a swerve, as it is much more of a sci-fi book with huge, bloodied battlefields through the first two issues; a sort of "sword and raygun" fantasy that might be better served by cleaner pencils.

The writing is very strong. I'll be honest: despite my warning above regarding single issues being hard to judge a property by in DC's 52, I had decided to stray away after the first issue, until this book was suggested for review. I'm very glad for the opportunity, as the additional installment casts the whole in a different light. It's difficult to pinpoint where and why there was a change, but suddenly everything clicked much more nicely once I was several pages into #2. Ideas seem less thrown out there, but are, instead, part of well-executed world building and character depth. Not every note is perfect (the gag about no one telling the doctor that Frankenstein's monster was such a gentleman comes to mind), but, somehow, the accumulation of bits between the issues starts to gel, without there being anything to put my finger on as being done differently from one issue to the next.

Lemire deftly weaves horror concepts into sci-fi properties and makes some of his sci-fi concepts feel all too real. Whether we're talking their base of operations, the prison within it, the communications system or the nature of the external threat in this first arc, all of the ideas just work.

Except when it comes to lettering. Of all the things to still have difficulty adjusting to, it was the method of delivery for S.H.A.D.E.net communications. The lettering was an x-on-black style (where x could be white or, more commonly, some other color that was used in large amounts elsewhere on the page) that was a bit of an irritant to my eyes. Why the purpose was clear (setting itself apart from other captions/bubbles), the combination of using it in such dark areas of art and often using non-white colors (making it stand out slightly less well on the black) was a source of frustration. Hopefully, it is something they can adjust and I can adjust to going forward.

Overall, this is an enjoyable series with a talented creative team. I think I'll be adding this to my regular purchases going forward.

George Perez: Out Of Steam?

According to Newsarama, that's exactly what editor Matt Idelson implied by saying, "sometimes there's enough gas in the tank and sometimes there's not," at NYCC this past weekend.

There are many different ways to try to politely explain why a legendary creator is quickly jumping off a title. Even if the above quote is accurate, it isn't the smartest thing to announce to the world. The likelihood that it will be taken negatively is far too high.

You frame it better than that.

"As excited as he was to be writing Superman, he had a yearning to get back to full pencils on an upcoming project that we can't yet announce."

Something similar to that winds up true and is much hard to spin into a negative or have taken the wrong way. I know that, if I were Perez, I wouldn't appreciate the way the move was communicated, as it paints me as being clearly unable to last beyond (or maybe even UP to) six issues.

I'm confident that Idelson didn't dream the statement could be misconstrued as a negative commentary on Perez's ability to follow through on such an assignment, but, when you're at a convention that is essentially a four day press conference, you really have to be more conscious of controlling the message than that.

Here's hoping a more detailed and flowery explanation for the change up is forthcoming.

Superman & #OWS

I was reviewing tweets with the hashtag #ows and I was reminded that Grant Morrison has described his Superman in Action Comics as being a man of the people who is striking against corporations. Seems like a perfect match for Occupy Wall Street.

In the first issue of DC's relaunch of Action Comics, Superman bursts into the penthouse of the biggest corporate "rat" and attempts to force a confession out of him regarding all the laws he has broken. He does this with cops chasing HIM down, telling him to stop.

(spoken by Superman in continuation from above; panel cropped to focus on dialogue)

He resorts to dropping the guy off the balcony to scare him (with the corporate "rat" never in danger, as Superman will save him) and gets his confession. The crimes?






Corporate crimes. White collar crimes. Hurting the American people in the ways they get hurt in real life, not the way comic book super-heroes do it. And this isn't intended to be a one-off.





What's a better symbol for #OWS right now? He is bigger than a corporate IP, but has embodied truth, justice and the AMERICAN WAY, which are all in jeopardy now and being fought for by the folks in every #OCCUPY movements.

I know it will never happen, but how cool would it be to see a large number of protesters sporting the S shield?

Shazam Returns? Wither Batman: Earth One? (UPDATE)

Update: Well, no sooner did I post this than stumbled upon better coverage of the convention that demonstrated that BATMAN: EARTH ONE is, indeed, still coming and Amazon has it for pre-order.

Original article:
If you check The Source, Captain Marvel is coming back.

The team doing it? Geoff Johns and Gary Frank. It starts as a backup feature in Justice League, but this is the same team that was supposed to have completed the Batman: Earth One by now, with no word of its completion or scheduled publication coming out.

Honestly, if I had to pick one, I'd go with the CURSE OF SHAZAM project (even if the "curse" part has me a bit worried), despite my strong interest in the Batman: Earth One OGN.

DC has been remarkably quiet about the previously planned OGNs, as far as I can see.

Green Lantern At Less Than 1/3 Cover Price

You'll find it for just that price (pops up automatically for me, but some may need the discount code of GREEN to be put in on the final checkout page).

I've been beating this drum for awhile, but the online deal site, Tanga.com, has had several DC relaunch titles for postal subscriptions at less than one-third the cover price.

Snail mail subscriptions are always cheaper, but never before have they regularly beaten even the discount that retailers get in buying the book through Diamond.

If you couple this with the returnability commitment that DC keeps expanding out for additional months, it might seem to indicate that the publishing strategy on the physical side is to increase circulation so that ad buys will be more attractive and/or increase the pool of potential digital subscribers.

Six or so DC titles offered up at a dangerously low price (not quite a loss, necessarily, given DC cutting out retail and distribution, but having to pay lower class mail rates) upping the circulation and putting them in direct contact with the customer in a way that retailers won't be as alerted to as Marvel's "free digital copy for every comic" idea seems like it is good for the reader and possibly the publisher, but not anyone in between.

Whither "Samaritan X"?

I was just talking with some friends online and, after discussing the news about Archie with their Red Circle characters, we wound up on the topic of JMS.

It's my opinion that, with the possible exception of Superman: Earth One, JMS-at-DC has been an unmitigated disaster. Everything has been stops and starts for him, with very little apparent critical or commercial expense to come along with him being such a hyped signing.

One of the hyped announcements regarding his DC work was Samaritan X, announced in March 2010 to fairly wide discussion, as it was an apparent attempt to add a hospital drama to the DC Universe that was, at the same time, somehow creator-owned. When JMS did his whole bowing out from monthly comics thing, he announced that Superman: Earth One was the top priority, followed by Samaritan X (in November 2010).

We're almost at a year since that announcement/update, but we've heard nothing more about the project. Shane Davis, artist of Superman: Earth One, has already been working on the follow-up OGN, so it makes it clear that, if Samaritan X is ANY kind of priority, there should be some movement on it.

From talks about the relaunch, some recounting of events would suggest that JMS was aware the restructuring of DC's main universe was already under way at the time. The OGN was supposed to be set in regular continuity, so it could be that it requires tweaking, that DC is reconsidering the format or it has been scrapped altogether. But you'd have expected it to come up in some way, shape or form by now. Either my Google Fu is weak or it is something completely lacking any updates.

With the relaunch moves and the whole Amazon/Barnes & Noble GN controversy at DC Comics, might this topic get addressed at NYCC?

Why $1 Extra For Digital Is Better For Retailers

Much is being made of the Avenging Spider-Man free digital copy with every print copy. Great for customers, to some extent, but shitty for retailers.

Why?

With the extra dollar charged for the JUSTICE LEAGUE copies that have a digital code, the retailer at least knows they're sending their customer to a competing delivery service and is getting their money up front.

With Marvel's plan, the retailer gets a $.50 credit somewhere down the line for every redeemed code.

But how do they track that?

Is it reliant upon the customer filling out a referral field that says they bought the book at BOB'S BIG COMICS? Or is it reliant upon Diamond records having the right batch assigned as being shipped to the right store and that batch matching up with all the proper codes?

And what system could possibly be in place for a retailer to be assured that they're getting the full credit they earned? Seems like it comes down to "hey, trust us, we're Marvel...have we EVER done you wrong?"

Reason #18373 I'm Not A Brevoort Fan

When DC hit with their 20 pages for $2.99 move, Marvel hit with all kinds of spin.

Brevoort indicated DC could make the cut because they didn't need to make a profit directly off publishing, but Marvel needed the $3.99. This despite someone from Marvel corporate already having told shareholders that they initially raised prices on their titles to see how inelastic they were.

The prices went up on their most popular titles first, not the books that were less popular but having hardcore audiences (like his suggestion that the same folks buying DC's Booster Gold at $2.99 would buy it at $3.99).

But what brings us here today is the sentiment expressed first, I believe, by CB Cebulski and echoed by Brevoort: DC's $2.99 move would hurt the talent, because they'd be getting their rate on 20 pages instead of 22.

Brevoort has, also, defended Marvel's raising prices to $3.99, despite the recession concerns of the retailers and their customers.

Yet Marvel has slowly but surely moved more books to 20 pages, while still charging $3.99 for a lot of them.

That's not the real impetus for this post, though. This is...

According to Richard Pace, he's "been told Marvel cut everyone but the top names' page rates and dropped two pages as well."

So, now the high and mighty Marvel gives less work per issue for their contractors to earn from AND pays less per page?

If there was any doubt that their claims to the moral high ground were false and full of spin, let this put an end to it.

Note: my problems with Brevoort started with his lying on behalf of Marvel to claim that refusing to tell retailers about the massive Civil War delays until Monday or Tuesday of the week the latest issue was supposed to hit was done "for the retailers". That was the first incident where my outspokenness resulted in Marvel's ire being directed at Newsarama. I went back and forth at Brevoort as a fan, since my Newsarama work involved no pay at the time and left me feeling that it would be unfair for Marvel to hold my opinion against them (I was not their employee) or for the 'Rama to feel I should bite my tongue on their behalf.

DC Comics: Quietly Undercutting The Direct Market

A big deal has been made about digital pricing, with an eye towards how DC will try to discount the cost of electronic comics to increase readership. Currently, the pricing is identical to the printer cover price for the first four weeks of release, which essentially makes it cost more than the print version, given the assorted discounts that can be found at brick and mortar shops as well as online retailers.

Enter Tanga.com.

If you search for Tanga and DC Comics on some of the discount deal sites, like SlickDeals.net, you'll find them offering full year subscriptions to their physical books FOR LESS THAN A DOLLAR PER ISSUE. That is a discount that beats anything an actual retail partner could ever afford to regularly offer.

At the link above, you can see they have made this offer on Batman & Robin, Batman (twice!) and Swamp Thing. They've done this for Justice League and Green Lantern, as well. Some of the offerings came before the relaunch books were on the shelves, but I believe all came after the relaunch push was announced.

I could be wrong, but I believe at least four of the five are among their "greater than 100k sold" titles in the relaunch, with Justice League purportedly being well in excess of 200k. To put the fine point on it: they're largely cherry picking what are their bread and butter titles for the direct market to push for an obscene direct-to-the-customer discount.

You can name all the postal subscription drawbacks you like, but at a greater than 66% discount, you're increasingly likely to find a reader willing to make that sacrifice for a sweetheart deal.

DC Comics: Exactly How Many Cooks Do They Need?

DC just announced the promotion of Eddie Berganza to Executive Editor.

That's on top of Didio & Lee being co-publishers. And Geoff Johns having his fancy title & Hollywood focus.

If you'll recall, Executive Editor was the position filled by Dan Didio for years when DC didn't have an Editor-in-Chief and only one man (Paul Levitz) as Publisher.

But now they have two men filling the Publisher role, another man in the previously-unfilled EiC role and yet another in the Executive Editor spot (which has not, to my knowledge, existed simultaneously with an EiC previously at the company).

The need for all of these high management positions escapes me at first glance. It seems to be a sign of bloat.

I wrote the proceeding paragraphs at least 24 hours ago. Now I've read (oddly on CBR and NOT on Newsarama) that Mark Chiarello was announced as a new VP at DC...and I think it's absolutely outstanding news, with no negatives to be found. Does that make me (more of) a hypocrite (than usual)?

JMS, Guggenheim & Acton Comics

Death: What Happens To Some Pitches

Rich Johnston did a little interview with Marc Guggenheim to help promote his new book, Halycon. In it, he addressed some of the rumors that had surrounded his leaving Action Comics before he really got started.

A few interesting notes:

1. Guggenheim, like JMS before him, stresses in his response that the two never talked about the situation. This is arguing against a straw man: no part of the rumors have anything to do with the two parties having words at all. When you refute an accusation that isn't being made, it implies you're doing so because you can't directly refute what's actually being said.
2. In not being able to personally attest that no mandate was requested that Superman not appear elsewhere, he basically indicates that the pitch JMS made more or less requires Joe getting Kal-El all to himself. It's almost as if Guggenheim is saying, "I'm sure JMS is telling the truth when he says he never specifically asked for control of Superman...he let his pitch do the asking."
3. The official version of Guggenheim leaving Action Comics said his pitch turned into something that he felt he wasn't the best writer for. Guggenheim's answer seems to suggest that Superman being out of Action happened sometime between his being picked for Action and JMS being announced on Superman. So HIS pitch was something else before editorial informed him that Superman would be confined to his self-titled monthly. 
4. The pitch that he wound up not fitting was what was a mix of him trying to make lemonade out of the situation and taking editorial direction. "In fact, I'd worked out a whole story that would lead up to Superman's triumphant return to Metropolis -- in it's darkest hour, natch -- that turned his absence into a virtue. But then, as these things often happen, discussions ensued and ideas evolved and the focus started to fall more on Lex and the story started to become more about Lex's quest for a Black Ring... and I realized that while the story had become extremely cool, it had also evolved itself out of my wheelhouse." See right there? His own pitch, even after the JMS developments, was to focus on setting up Metropolis's darkest hour, not so much Luthor's jaunt across the globe and universe trying to find a black ring. Writers don't generally pitch something out of their own wheelhouse, but have feedback from above that steadily pushes it out. 
5. It would seem that what led Guggenheim to not be a part of Action Comics was a combination of JMS taking advantage of his position in pitching an angle that required his owning Superman and editorial having strong feelings about what they wanted the title to be used for after the Kryptonian was subtracted from the mix. Which, when you boil things down, just reduces to Guggenheim being off the title because DC Comics kept changing the circumstances around the assignment until he was no longer comfortable with it. The discussion of the rumors have always seemed to center around it being JMS's fault, but that's ignoring that he only has the power to make a pitch, not accept the pitch and, by doing so, put limitations on the work of others. When you factor into it that Guggenheim seems to have been happy enough to stay on the title without Kal-El, the driving factor in his leaving would seem to be editorial taking even more of the freedom to tell his story away. 

But what's the point of the rumors if there's no malice behind the story?

It looks to me like Straczynski had a genuine idea that he wanted to execute. DC had an earnest desire to let him take a crack at it in hopes that it would move units. Guggenheim was still able to have enough enthusiasm to keep bouncing around ideas on where to go. Then DC seemed to want to hedge their bets by using Action to accomplish some other goal besides just telling interesting stories. 

Given the sales on the traditional Superman titles in the recent past when they didn't have Superman in them, you can't blame them for possibly having thought, "if we're going to risk pissing away money on the book, we can at least do so in a way that maybe helps re-establish a historically important supporting cast member while hopefully telling good stories." It's obviously a shitty spot for Guggenheim to have been caught up in, but the kind of bad situation that happens to good creators all the time. Tough decisions are made every day that pull sweet gigs out from under freelancers. I guess you could say the silver lining here is that it happened to a creator that is so successful in other avenues that he could afford to bow out of the project, rather than suffer from working on stories he had no interest in or having his reputation tainted by such stories that he felt ill-suited for. 

The surprise for me is that Cornell seems to have been given so much of the direction he's working on. He's still executing it in a very entertaining fashion, as even Guggenheim seems to agree. But I was more inclined to think he came up with much closer to 100% than it turns out. 

The way that both JMS and Guggenheim devote so much energy to denying that they ever talked about this leads me to feel that there may have been some degree of a debate or power struggle...SOMETHING that would explain their need to create a straw man here. But there's no way of confirming that happened right now and it's not likely to be a "sexy" enough story to encourage the effort it would take to dig it up. 

Uh-Durrrrrrrr

(or why I hope the CGI is still being tweaked in a movie I'm otherwise fairly excited to see)