Too many Continuity Reboots!

[Avilan the Grey]

DC is doing it again...

Is it just me or is there almost constant reboots and remakes, drastic changes and "Cataclysmic Events" in the Big Two's continuities these days?

I have no memory of having these more than maybe once during my entire childhood, and now they are what? Every 3 years?

Every time I get attached to a comic book these days Marvel or DC decides to either revamp, remove, or kill the characters involved within 24 issues (two years).

[Selrahc]

Every time I get attached to a comic book these days Marvel or DC decides to either revamp, remove, or kill the characters involved within 24 issues (two years).

Marvel has never done a reboot. It does retcons occasionally, but there has never been a universe wide reboot of the marvel verse.

Revamps and deaths though... sure. It's the hazards of comics. The creative team for a given comic might stick around for a year or two, then somebody else comes along with different ideas and the comic changes a bit. It's sad when it happens to a comic you enjoyed but really, if a new writer is forced to keep telling the stories from the previous writer that they don't have any attachment to... it doesn't sound like a recipe for success either.

[Brother Oni]

Well Marvel gets round the issue by setting whole reboots in different universes (the Ultimate series, for example).

The House of M storyline was pretty much a continuity reboot, but was set in a different universe.

[Avilan the Grey]

Marvel has never done a reboot. It does retcons occasionally, but there has never been a universe wide reboot of the marvel verse.

Revamps and deaths though... sure. It's the hazards of comics. The creative team for a given comic might stick around for a year or two, then somebody else comes along with different ideas and the comic changes a bit. It's sad when it happens to a comic you enjoyed but really, if a new writer is forced to keep telling the stories from the previous writer that they don't have any attachment to... it doesn't sound like a recipe for success either.

True; marvel has yet to reboot; they use alternative universes instead (I really enjoyed Ultimate Spiderman until Ultimatum, when I instead went into "why bother" mood).

But yes, there are some heroes that has been, at least, immune more or less (Spider Man especially) but after Cthulhu took over Marvel disguised in human form, Spider Man obviously is no more... I am one of those who enjoy the lighter side of things, (and really appreciate fan service, although I guess I should be above the influence...)

I am one of the fans of Power Girl that now awaits the reboots at DC with dread, and miss the "Fourth Wall Leaning" period that She-Hulk had.

Btw am I the only one that on one hand like Supergirl's new costume, but thinks that the only thing the change of SuperMAN's costume does is highlighting exactly how Ken-doll-like he is? The lack of... well... is somehow MORE highlighted without the red underwear thing.

[Eric Tolle]

I on the other hand, think that periodically rebooting comic universes every 10-20 years is the only solution to the stranglehold of continuity, short of having supers age and be replaced. Right now I won't even bother with Marvel, because the required buy-in for decades worth of continuity gets on the way of my enjoyment of the comics. I don't have enough time or money to develop the required expertise.

For what it's worth, the Timm-verse pretty much counts a reboot, and I don't hear much complaining about that.

[Tengu_temp]

I'll let Linkara speak up on the topic:
http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2011/06/dcu-reboot.html

[Selrahc]

The big difference between Marvel and DC is the company attitude to reboots. DC, they reboot every decade or two. In Marvel they are tied to their continuity to quite a large extent.

I think both attitudes have merit. Although I am glad I got a grounding in Marvel for free from my library.




Well Marvel gets round the issue by setting whole reboots in different universes (the Ultimate series, for example).

The House of M storyline was pretty much a continuity reboot, but was set in a different universe.

Not just house of M, but Heroes Reborn, the Ultimate Universe, Marvel 2099, M2, Age of Apocalypse... Marvel has a habit of spinning off Alternate Universes. Partly because the big thing you miss out on in a rigidly defined continuity is the ability to retell the classic stories with a new spin.

[Mina Kobold]

I on the other hand, think that periodically rebooting comic universes every 10-20 years is the only solution to the stranglehold of continuity, short of having supers age and be replaced. Right now I won't even bother with Marvel, because the required buy-in for decades worth of continuity gets on the way of my enjoyment of the comics. I don't have enough time or money to develop the required expertise.

The odd thing about that is that DC already does that. There's been five or so Flashes and at least three Robins, just to mention the well-known ones.

Although I do believe they have magically de-aged Batman and similar stuff. But it's still odd that some people grow up and even grow old yet their old friends remain in their thirties. :smalltongue:

[Lurkmoar]

The sliding time scale... after all, Batman is still, what? 35, yet has already had one kid side kick grow up, the second one is also an adult (who was dead and then came back to life because Superboy punched reality), the third seems to have aged to an adult and has a new side kick, one that's his kid.

Sometimes the Simpsons approach to continuity seems better. Then I remember the dreadful episode about Homer and Marge not being married in the 90s. Feh. Suppose I'll go by a case by case basis, but most Marvel and DC titles have lost my interest.

[Traab]

The problem as I see it is, that a really long running single storyline is like a soap opera, its hard for new readers to jump into it and follow along because there are so many callbacks to events that happened several years ago (in real life time) that its hard to follow. Also, the plus side to reboots, as I think someone else said, is that its a nice way to do a what if to the story line. What if superman was adopted by a prostitute and her caring pimp instead of two farmers? What if batman had to watch his mother get abused before being killed and so became even darker? Whatever. It gives us a way to go through the old content and make it all new again by adding in fundamental changes.

Its also easier than doing it the marvel way and creating a new comic universe instead because now they have two series to write for instead of one. Thats actually a large part of why I stopped reading marvel, because I started getting confused with which series I was reading and which where different. I didnt read steadily, I used to have a family member who would collect garbage bags full of comics, all the various series, and when eh got done with them he would give them to me. So I got confused easily between uncanny xmen, ultimate xmen, xmen unlimited, gah I cant even remember all the spinoffs.

[kamikasei]

I tried getting in to DC a while back after finding the... third? Teen Titans series (the one with Starfire and Cyborg mentoring Cassie, Tim and Connor) interesting. I bought Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis and scrounged up a few of the other tie-ins set between them. And it was interesting, albeit confusing, but Wikipedia could help with that. I bought the first three volumes of 52.

And then it just didn't end. I thought Infinite Crisis was it and 52 was the aftermath and that was the big reboot/retcon done and dealt with and they could get on with telling actual stories with the characters which weren't about how hard it was to tell stories with the characters. Instead I hear of Countdown and Final Crisis and I Can't Believe It's Not Crisis, and as I look back trying to understand the histories of the characters being introduced I see Zero Hour and Hypertime and I'm left with the impression that since the mid-eighties DC has been trying to have its cake and eat it. They discard continuity to free themselves from its shackles, but then want to reference and reintroduce characters and injokes that defeat the entire purpose of starting afresh. And while I wouldn't mind stories set in a rich, dense continuity where I have to look up some characters online to fully appreciate what happened, and while I wouldn't mind picking up a new book set in a blank-slate reimagining of the DC universe(s)... I very much do mind being asked to pick up a series after its "fresh start" only to find its entire plot is a lead up to the next "fresh start" in two years' time, and nothing that happens in it will actually be kept around.

It's like DC is a giant, overstuffed mansion full of clutter and tchotchkes, and periodically the family decide they'll clean up and dump all the old stuff they don't use any more, but each member has one or two gewgaws they can't bear to let go so after the big clear-out everything that was dumped has migrated back inside and nothing changes except a lot of wasted effort - and visitors who thought they knew their way around the mess have to relearn where all the obstacles are.

(I was similarly annoyed by the Star Trek reboot's approach to continuity. I didn't mind a reboot, or divergence from canon - canon was messy and confused and often kind of stupid. What they actually did, though, established that all that confusion still existed and they could still validly be accused of contradicting it, leaving them in the worst of both worlds.)

I don't think it's a coincidence that my favourite comics have generally been limited series with only a loose connection to continuity. Honestly I think the whole meta-franchise would probably be better served by giving up on the attempt to keep everything in strict continuity - a doomed task when you have dozens of creators working with hundreds of characters across decades of history - and just focus on telling good, interesting, self-contained stories focusing on a few characters at a time, using the rest of the shared universe as a backdrop instead of a minefield.

[Giggling Ghast]

Is Superboy Prime pounding on the walls of reality again?

[Zevox]

Is Superboy Prime pounding on the walls of reality again?
Nah, the Flash is screwing with the space-time continuum this time.

Anyway, from what I've heard the Green Lantern continuity is going to be basically unaffected by the reboot, so I'm not really being bothered by it myself. Although even I got kind of annoyed hearing they were reverting Oracle to Batgirl. Even someone as completely apathetic about Batman and characters related to him as me knows that Oracle has become an icon in her own right, so that just seems like a downright stupid move.

I am happy to hear that Firestorm is getting his (their?) own book after the reboot, since Brightest Day got me interested in the character(s) - although apparently there was going to be one before the decision to do the reboot was made anyway, and it was going to be written by Brian Clevinger (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2011/06/11/the-firestorm-of-firestorm/), so now I'm kind of split on that, wondering just what we'll miss now that more regular DC writers are on that instead.

Zevox

[hamlet]

I kind of look forward to it, speaking as a guy who likes the idea of comics, but could never get into it since I could never find a decent starting point. Everything depended on vast amounts of prior knowledge to even have the foggiest idea of what the hell was going on.

Starting over again at the beginning is kind of cool. I'll probably subscribe to a few for the first time ever.

[Areswargod139]

Honestly I think the whole meta-franchise would probably be better served by giving up on the attempt to keep everything in strict continuity - a doomed task when you have dozens of creators working with hundreds of characters across decades of history - and just focus on telling good, interesting, self-contained stories focusing on a few characters at a time, using the rest of the shared universe as a backdrop instead of a minefield.

A very good post! I'm pro-reboot myself.

I gave my two cents on another thread and I'll repost them here:
Hi Jamie!


I for one am going to defend the recent reboot plans. What people forget about DC is that they do a reboot every 20-30 years or so. From what we've seen of Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, and Marvel's Ultimate timeline it's a good policy to have.

DC has done this a few times: once in the sixties, once again in the eighties, and one now.

People are making a big deal of this, yet as far as I know, this is standard operating procedure for DC.

And...

Sure, but from a writing and business perspective, it makes a lot of sense. Again, see Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek.


I gotcha. On a similar note, I wonder what would have happened if there had been the kind of nerd culture now during the early sixties when the new Green Lantern, Flash, and campier Batman were introduced? Would there be a HEAT-like fangroup clambering for the return of Alan Scott to being the Green Lantern?


Ah. See, this is where we disconnect. I'm 28, old enough (barely) to have been a comic reader when Superman got rebooted and depowered back to his Golden Age levels, where Batman got the steel in his belly back, and when super heroic MULLETS REIGNED SUPREME. This is a, well, dynastic change that occurs very rarely. Enjoy it! It's like seeing Haley's Comet! lol. People complained about the then new Iron Age, talking about how the new (actually original, pre Silver Age) Batman and Superman began having buttoned-down adventures compared to the campy out-there-ishness of the Silver Age.

And don't forget the uproar over Barry Allen's death. RUINED FOREVER indeed.

[JonestheSpy]

Yeah, DC just does this way too often. I'm incredibly annoyed because the only superhero book I buy nowadays, Gail Simone's amazing Secret Six, is being canceled as part of the shake up. It's a book with truckloads of critical acclaim, a hardcore fanbase and decent sales overall, but it doesn't fit into whatever Geoff Johns's idiot new vision is, so it's thrown overboard. Argh.

[kamikasei]

Starting over again at the beginning is kind of cool. I'll probably subscribe to a few for the first time ever.

A very good post! I'm pro-reboot myself.
See, I might be pro-reboot if I trusted DC to stop once they'd done it. I don't. So I have no interest in picking up any of these new #1 titles while expecting their storylines to all get smooshed together and half-uncreated over the next two or three years in time for the Next Silver Bullet.

On the other hand, digital delivery lowers the effort required by enough that they might not have to do as much as they otherwise would to overcome my skepticism. We'll see.

[Velaryon]

I've seen Star Trek mentioned a few times in this topic as evidence that reboots are a good thing. What's so bad about Trek continuity? Admittedly I haven't followed it diligently since the TNG days, but I tuned in semi-regularly to the next two shows. But I don't remember Star Trek continuity being anywhere near the convoluted mess of Marvel.

[Areswargod139]

See, I might be pro-reboot if I trusted DC to stop once they'd done it. I don't.
Like I pointed out, DC has events and a few retcons, but out-and-out reboots are actually rare, typically being used by fans to mark the beginning to a new age of comics. DC had a reboot in the 60's starting the Silver Age, Crisis on Infinite Earths started the Iron Age--I leave out the Bronze Age as its kind of murky when it started or ended. If you look at DC and franchises like Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, or even the LotR movies, it looks like 20-30 years is the magic number range for a reboot to a successful franchise. This is like Haley's Comet, a rare occurence that's kind of sad, but is an important nerd event.

The people I get after are the ones (not you) who whine about loosing their characters or the continuity they hold dear while not realizing this happened twice before, the second time being during my lifetime (1986 and the Iron Age). We Iron Agers got a new Green Lantern, new Flash, and a Golden Age-level Superman who could actually be physically challenged by baddies.

Heck on a separate note, the Iron Age really wasn't the total pile that many people (like the writers of Kingdom Come) like to claim.

[The Glyphstone]

I've seen Star Trek mentioned a few times in this topic as evidence that reboots are a good thing. What's so bad about Trek continuity? Admittedly I haven't followed it diligently since the TNG days, but I tuned in semi-regularly to the next two shows. But I don't remember Star Trek continuity being anywhere near the convoluted mess of Marvel.

Trek's only had one real reboot, the J.J. Abrahms movie. And that wasn't a reboot so much as an alternative universe, but it's still got a lot of fans divided even now.

[Axolotl]

Reboots aren't a bad thing when they're done well (this is somewhat of a tautology I'll admit). Star Trek for example, it wasn't really a reboot (except the new one) it just changed the setting to what they felt would work better, everything that had happened before had still happened, it just wasn't happening now.

You just have to remember why you're rebooting, if it's because the contnuity is a mess then after the reboot you need to make a concerted effort not to let it become a mess again and to keep it clean and streamlined. This is where previous DC reboots failed (sometimes from the start). Now an out and out reboot with a totally new DC setting with a fresh start for all characters cold be a good thing, as long as they don't do something stupid like reboot Sandman or anything similarly dumb.

[Avilan the Grey]

I on the other hand, think that periodically rebooting comic universes every 10-20 years is the only solution to the stranglehold of continuity,


Oh I agree, but that's my point. Now you get one of those "cataclysmic events" roughly every 7-16 month. When I was young (boy do I feel old typing that) those happend once every 10 years or so.

My basic problem is that you really can't expect to be able to follow a comic book character(s) for longer than that anymore. No long story arcs, no cute personal side stories that you find funny or adorable or cute or just cool will survive longer than that, and then some new hack comes in and makes the character "theirs" for 12 new months before it all resets again. It's basically a case of over-hyping I think. Someone noticed that the Death Of Superman sold comics, so now we have to repeat that crap in larger or smaller scale every 7-16 months.

Edit: just finished reading the column / blogpost linked to above and I agree, and tie it in with what I wrote above: It's the constant hunt for the "New Reader" (they got a few when Superman died and they think they can get new ones every time now) who doesn't exist that basically ruins comics.

[Joran]

I've seen Star Trek mentioned a few times in this topic as evidence that reboots are a good thing. What's so bad about Trek continuity? Admittedly I haven't followed it diligently since the TNG days, but I tuned in semi-regularly to the next two shows. But I don't remember Star Trek continuity being anywhere near the convoluted mess of Marvel.

It's not a convoluted mess, but it's still limiting, especially if you're starting from a prequel, like the J.J. Abrahms films are. For instance, we know that the entire crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise and the Federation survive into the future, peace is made with the Klingons, and the Borg and Ferengi shouldn't show up yet, among a raft of other plot points in future TV series.

By rebooting (or in this case, an alternate universe), you're giving the writers a fresh start and less limitations. So, you can brutally murder Sulu if it makes sense plotwise or make the Romulans the one the Federation unites with instead of the Klingons or any other changes you want, without having your most devoted fans saying "Wait, this contradicts previous canon."

P.S. Enterprise tried to do this by having a "temporal cold war" going on, but it didn't go far enough. The J.J. Abrahms film was basically handing the reins of Star Trek from the old generation to the new generation (Old Spock to Sylar/Spock).

[Mina Kobold]

I kind of look forward to it, speaking as a guy who likes the idea of comics, but could never get into it since I could never find a decent starting point. Everything depended on vast amounts of prior knowledge to even have the foggiest idea of what the hell was going on.

Starting over again at the beginning is kind of cool. I'll probably subscribe to a few for the first time ever.

A good series let you pick it up from issue one no matter the continuity. I could start on the Teen Titans eith the aforementioned series with Starfire, Beast Boy and Cyborg mentoring Wondergirl, Robin and Superboy without having the read the previous stories and it plays out like any story with any or no continuity.

If the story seem to pull something out of it's backside, then that's poor writing, not messy continuity. :smallsmile:

That's a great place to start on DC, by the way. It's the third Volume of the series (It's on Wikipedia as Volume tree, running from 2003-2011) :smallsmile:

[bloodtide]

The problem as I see it is, that a really long running single storyline is like a soap opera, its hard for new readers to jump into it and follow along because there are so many callbacks to events that happened several years ago (in real life time) that its hard to follow.

The problem I have with this view, and it's a view shared by too many in the comic/film/TV industry, is that the average reader/viewer is dumber then a box of rocks. I hate when the all might writers/owners/produces/whatever talk down to the little people.

What is better, especially for a younger reader: An easy to understand bland story that they can just sit back and turn off their brains for or a hard, complex story that that forces them to think.



Also, the plus side to reboots, as I think someone else said, is that its a nice way to do a what if to the story line. What if superman was adopted by a prostitute and her caring pimp instead of two farmers? What if batman had to watch his mother get abused before being killed and so became even darker? Whatever. It gives us a way to go through the old content and make it all new again by adding in fundamental changes.

This is bad too, as often they just 'modernize' the story to make it all 'hip and cool' so that mindless kids will like it and go 'wow'. It's rare they make things better, it's more often they make them worse.

For example, you will notice the way they tone down any 'adult' stuff the adult fictional characters do, just to make the Mad Moms happy. And the way they have to ruin everything with science....like 'nanabots' everywhere.



And the most obvious answer anyway....is that companies just do it to make money. When people see Batman #783 they get sad that there are 782 Batman stories that they will never be able to read, but when they see Batman #1 they get all excited like they are the very special, very first Batman reader. And they buy 2 or 3 in case they are worth more money too.

The cover blurb counts for a lot. The Standard ''See Batman fight King Kroc...again'' is boring, but the ''The whole universe is changing...find out how inside'' is a big draw.

[Eldan]

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is one of the two reasons why I never bothered with DC/Marvel. Well, I got some Vertigo titles, that probably semi-counts as DC. But still.

The other reason being that I can't get them here the normal way and shipping and taxes make them way to expensive.

[Tanuki Tales]

The one reason I'm not looking forward to this reboot is because DC can finally give Vertigo the shaft. For years they've flipflopped between whether the events of titles like Sandman or Swamp Thing or Hellblazer took place in DC proper or not but now they can finally and firmly say no. And the DCU is greatly diminished because of it.

[Eldan]

Eh, there was already barely a connection between Vertigo and DC, from what I can tell. There were about three mainstream DC people in Sandman and, as far as I can tell, no one at all showed up in Lucifer, despite **** going down big time.

[Psyren]

What is better, especially for a younger reader: An easy to understand bland story that they can just sit back and turn off their brains for or a hard, complex story that that forces them to think.

You don't need some long-running comic line with a convoluted story and dozens of callbacks for complexity. Books seem to manage just fine without that problem.

[Tanuki Tales]

Eh, there was already barely a connection between Vertigo and DC, from what I can tell. There were about three mainstream DC people in Sandman and, as far as I can tell, no one at all showed up in Lucifer, despite **** going down big time.

Didn't Lucifer take place outside the entire sphere of DC though?

And I thought the storm during At World's End was Zero Hour.

Then you had Daniel showing up during Justice League of America and Day of Vengeance and Destiny showing up in Brave and the Bold with Hal Jordan, Lobo, Supergirl and the Challengers of the Unknown.

But the holy grail for me is Death showing up in Action Comics following Blackest Night, basically saying that Nekron was below her and not everything that happens is her fault.

[Reverent-One]

You don't need some long-running comic line with a convoluted story and dozens of callbacks for complexity. Books seem to manage just fine without that problem.

Which is why the good comics don't have a convoluted storyline and dozens of callbacks and simply call that complexity. As Keveak said, a good series lets you pick it up from issue one no matter the continuity.

[Joran]

The problem I have with this view, and it's a view shared by too many in the comic/film/TV industry, is that the average reader/viewer is dumber then a box of rocks. I hate when the all might writers/owners/produces/whatever talk down to the little people.


For TV shows, it's definitely something they worry about. For long running serial dramas, the audience always goes down, rather than up. Some people get bored or don't like the direction and quit the show, but eventually no one new starts watching, it's just too much of a burden to get through. Case in point, Lost where the audience diminished heavily after Season 2.

For instance, I've heard great, great things about Doctor Who, to the point that I want to start watching... Okay... where do I start? What do I need to know? I'm sure that someone can give me an answer, but it's pretty daunting.

[Eldan]

Didn't Lucifer take place outside the entire sphere of DC though?

And I thought the storm during At World's End was Zero Hour.

Then you had Daniel showing up during Justice League of America and Day of Vengeance and Destiny showing up in Brave and the Bold with Hal Jordan, Lobo, Supergirl and the Challengers of the Unknown.

But the holy grail for me is Death showing up in Action Comics following Blackest Night, basically saying that Nekron was below her and not everything that happens is her fault.

As I said: never read a mainstream DC comic. So, I wouldn't know any of that. All I know is what happened in the Sandman comics. I don't know what Zero Hour is. Or Blackest Night, beyond having seen people talk about it. I don't know Nekron, or Hal Jordan, or Day of Vengeance or Lobo or Supergirl. What I know is that someone mentioned Batman once, and that some other dude named Sandman showed up for a while.

[Tirian]

And I thought the storm during At World's End was Zero Hour.

That's what people suspected as the story was being told, as the two stories were being told in the same timeframe. But it was pretty clear in the final issue that the reality storm was Morpheus' funeral.

[Jerthanis]

The thing is, these continuity reboots seem to require you read and understood the story where the reboot took place, and to understand it you have to know who most of the players are anyway. And then the stories immediately after the reboot are just cleaning up and referencing the events that led TO the reboot.

If you went back and read all the iconic comic stories, if they're a good story, they should stand pretty well on their own, even if you don't know their continuity.

For example: Infinity Gauntlet was a great story because even if you don't know who Thanos or Adam Warlock are, the story communicates these characters really well and the story stands without any in-depth knowledge of previous events involving these people. In spite of its complexity, it was followable.

[comicshorse]

Yeah, DC just does this way too often. I'm incredibly annoyed because the only superhero book I buy nowadays, Gail Simone's amazing Secret Six, is being canceled as part of the shake up. It's a book with truckloads of critical acclaim, a hardcore fanbase and decent sales overall, but it doesn't fit into whatever Geoff Johns's idiot new vision is, so it's thrown overboard. Argh.

With this and losing Oracle (and Simone from Birds of Prey) you can count me fully in the 'hate this idea' side.

[Velaryon]

Trek's only had one real reboot, the J.J. Abrahms movie. And that wasn't a reboot so much as an alternative universe, but it's still got a lot of fans divided even now.

I see. Thanks, that clears up my confusion.

I'll refrain from giving my opinion of the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie because it's off-topic, and because I'm not sure I could do so without being modded for language.


As a general rule, I'm against reboots. To me it often smacks of laziness (we can't come up with new ideas so we're going to reboot and do the old ones again). Retcons, on the other hand, are sometimes necessary and even good. The Star Wars expanded universe, for example, would benefit greatly from someone (not George Lucas) retconning a great deal of material, especially the more recent stuff.

[Lurkmoar]

I see. Thanks, that clears up my confusion.

I'll refrain from giving my opinion of the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie because it's off-topic, and because I'm not sure I could do so without being modded for language.


As a general rule, I'm against reboots. To me it often smacks of laziness (we can't come up with new ideas so we're going to reboot and do the old ones again). Retcons, on the other hand, are sometimes necessary and even good. The Star Wars expanded universe, for example, would benefit greatly from someone (not George Lucas) retconning a great deal of material, especially the more recent stuff.

The films or the Expanded Universe stuff? Because I know that Palpatine never cloned himself, Han shot first and Chewbacca died of a ripe old Wookie age. Yup. And I could think of even more, that's just off the top of my head.

[Zevox]

Like I pointed out, DC has events and a few retcons, but out-and-out reboots are actually rare, typically being used by fans to mark the beginning to a new age of comics.
The thing is, from what I understand, this is really more of a mass retcon than a true reboot. Not all continuity is being thrown out - I know that Geoff Johns' run on Green Lantern is remaining in-continuity, for instance, which is most of the last decade worth of the series, back to 2004 with Green Lantern: Rebirth. Heck, Johns has apparently said that the ending of the current arc, War of the Green Lanterns, will affect the book's status quo much more so than the reboot. Meaning that the best idea for someone looking to get into Green Lantern will likely remain picking up trades from years ago, at least back to the Sinestro Corps War, not jumping right into whatever the next storyline after Flashpoint is.

Heck, if what I've been hearing from a friend of mine who is a much bigger comic fan than I (as in "spends an average of $80 a week on comics") is true, what's going to be in and out of continuity after Flashpoint in some cases sounds like a mess. For instance, Cry For Justice, which I know of from Linkara's reviews, is out - mostly. Apparently some aspect of it is being kept, but they haven't specified what. My friend speculated that it was the bomb going off in Star City, since Brightest Day, as part of Johns' run on GL, is still in continuity, and part of it involves a forest that is grown in the crater that resulted from that bomb. Meanwhile he mentioned that at least one other apparently much-hated series, Identity Crisis, has been confirmed to remain canon completely.

Yeah, if his information is any indication, a "reboot" like this might just serve to make the DCU's continuity even more confusing.

Zevox

[Cristo Meyers]

As a general rule, I'm against reboots. To me it often smacks of laziness (we can't come up with new ideas so we're going to reboot and do the old ones again). Retcons, on the other hand, are sometimes necessary and even good. The Star Wars expanded universe, for example, would benefit greatly from someone (not George Lucas) retconning a great deal of material, especially the more recent stuff.

I agree that reboots should generally be avoided, but honestly some of these franchises have just gotten so bloated that it's almost the only option left (if they could stick to it, anyway...)

You brought up the Star Wars universe: perfect example. How much retconning are you going to do before it just becomes better to say "screw it, let's just start over"? YMMV on what does and doesn't need to go, but it seems like a popular opinion is somewhere between "Everything but the first 3 movies" to "Everything but the first 3 and the Thrawn trilogy."

[Lord Seth]

For TV shows, it's definitely something they worry about. For long running serial dramas, the audience always goes down, rather than up.That's true for practically all non-serial dramas as well, so I'm not sure what your point here really is. What recent non-serial dramas had noticeable viewership gains after, say, the fourth season? (you stated "long running," I'm certain that that's going to mean at least five seasons) There's NCIS, and...uh...nope, got nothing else.


Some people get bored or don't like the direction and quit the show, but eventually no one new starts watching, it's just too much of a burden to get through. Case in point, Lost where the audience diminished heavily after Season 2.Or for a counter-example, 24, whose audience went up as time went on, through season 5. Yes, it dropped afterwards (most likely because season 6 is generally considered the worst season of the series) but the serial nature certainly didn't stop it from gaining viewers until then.

You claim that it's the serial nature that prevents new viewers from coming in, but...can't it just as easily be claimed that it's the fact viewers find it less interesting that prevents new viewers from coming in? I never watched Lost enough to know, but isn't the third season generally considered inferior to the first two? (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) If viewers are deserting a show because they don't think it's as interesting, I don't think new viewers would be lining up to take their places, because they'd be driven away for the same reason. This is true whether the show is serial or episodic.

[Avilan the Grey]

The thing is, from what I understand, this is really more of a mass retcon than a true reboot. Not all continuity is being thrown out - I know that Geoff Johns' run on Green Lantern is remaining in-continuity, for instance,

It seems a lot of the really dedicated readers do treat it as a "reboot in denial"; meaning the changes are so big that they are in effect a reboot, even if DC denies it.
Of course I might be reacting stronger than necessary with this one because I am loosing some good reads (Birds of Pray, quite possible Power Girl (DC only say "she will appear" but nothing about if she will keep her own title, etc).
I have already lost Wonder Woman (well not really, I still read it, I just don't find much enjoyment in it at the moment).

I don't read Supergirl, but the little I have seen I really like this (the present) incarnation; although I like the new suit (though I like the present one better).

They also ax JSA, who are not "gone" apparently just "resting without a title" meaning the characters in that team will not be appearing anywhere nor have a title of their own BUT still remain in the continuity. Somehow.

Also as far as I understand it, just like Green Lantern the whole Bat Family Tree will still be going through the changes already started there.

[alchemyprime]

It seems a lot of the really dedicated readers do treat it as a "reboot in denial"; meaning the changes are so big that they are in effect a reboot, even if DC denies it.
Of course I might be reacting stronger than necessary with this one because I am loosing some good reads (Birds of Pray, quite possible Power Girl (DC only say "she will appear" but nothing about if she will keep her own title, etc).
I have already lost Wonder Woman (well not really, I still read it, I just don't find much enjoyment in it at the moment).

I don't read Supergirl, but the little I have seen I really like this (the present) incarnation; although I like the new suit (though I like the present one better).

They also ax JSA, who are not "gone" apparently just "resting without a title" meaning the characters in that team will not be appearing anywhere nor have a title of their own BUT still remain in the continuity. Somehow.

Also as far as I understand it, just like Green Lantern the whole Bat Family Tree will still be going through the changes already started there.

This is why I'm swearing off New DC until they rubberband back, and keeping my DC related stuff over in DC-N (http://community.livejournal.com/dc_nation) (which I will admit I had previously mentioned here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201718).

I'm not pleased. Everything is wrong, they got Jim Lee to make the new costumes (and not someone who understands what looks good... god, I'd take Nightwing's Disco Collar over these...) though I am happy Jaime may get some new readership.

But when it gets to the point that the fanfiction looks better to me than the official stuff?

What's left on my pull? What? Two IDW books and an Image title? There is something very wrong in the world. Very very wrong.

At least Tiny Titans isn't going anywhere.

[Zevox]

It seems a lot of the really dedicated readers do treat it as a "reboot in denial"; meaning the changes are so big that they are in effect a reboot, even if DC denies it.
Eh, from what I've heard, for some titles they are that big, for some they're not. I know they aren't for Green Lantern, and now that you mention Batman I recall hearing that the "Batman Inc" storyline is continuing as well, though I suppose for all I know that could be undergoing major changes. With Blackest Night and Brightest Day still in-continuity I imagine the Firestorm book will be picking up much where they left off, save with the characters apparently being younger now (in high school instead of college). The same probably goes for other characters resurrected in Brightest Day, like Aquaman (especially since Johns is writing that particular book).

For others, yeah, it'll amount to a reboot. Though honestly with how little I know about anything but GL I can't really guess at which those will be, and which others are keeping significant amounts of continuity.

Anyway, as I said earlier it largely doesn't affect me, since I only really read Green Lantern and that isn't being touched, so I'm mostly just watching with curiosity at the whole going-on and the reactions to it myself.

Zevox

[Tirian]

[...]now that you mention Batman I recall hearing that the "Batman Inc" storyline is continuing as well, though I suppose for all I know that could be undergoing major changes.

Without a doubt, it will be undergoing the major change that Bruce Wayne is going to be Batman again. (Imagine my shock.) The press releases talk about two NEW Batman titles but not yet any removals. There is also a picture of someone one would assume to be **** Grayson wearing essentially Robin's costume from Batman and Robin, but whether that makes him Nightwing or the Batman of Bludhaven or the new coordinator of Batman Inc has evidently not yet been revealed.

My bet is that the idea is going to have to go away, since it seems like a big breach to have everyone know that Bruce Wayne is the funding stream for Batman but expect that no one would recognize that he's also the guy in the cowl.

[Areswargod139]

I agree that reboots should generally be avoided, but honestly some of these franchises have just gotten so bloated that it's almost the only option left (if they could stick to it, anyway...)
Agreed. This is something that Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, and DC comics (twice!) have done before. BTW Hi! We're finally on the same thread!


You brought up the Star Wars universe: perfect example. How much retconning are you going to do before it just becomes better to say "screw it, let's just start over"? YMMV on what does and doesn't need to go, but it seems like a popular opinion is somewhere between "Everything but the first 3 movies" to "Everything but the first 3 and the Thrawn trilogy."

I recently got all three Thrawn books at a used bookstore in Havana. I'm on the last one now. It's good!

[Mina Kobold]

For TV shows, it's definitely something they worry about. For long running serial dramas, the audience always goes down, rather than up. Some people get bored or don't like the direction and quit the show, but eventually no one new starts watching, it's just too much of a burden to get through. Case in point, Lost where the audience diminished heavily after Season 2.

For instance, I've heard great, great things about Doctor Who, to the point that I want to start watching... Okay... where do I start? What do I need to know? I'm sure that someone can give me an answer, but it's pretty daunting.

I've been trying to track down the very first series from 1963 myself, since I want to see all of it anyway, but presumably you should be able to start at the beginning of any series that interest you. All you'd need to know would be that there are different incarnations of the Doctor that are different but still the same and that should be it. Presuming the writing is as good as they say it is. :smallsmile:

I've personally seen plenty of series or movies with absolutely no continuity that does the exact same that is usually blamed on decades of continuity, so I don't think reboots will make any difference unless the writing improve. Not to say stories relying on continuity can't have good writing, just that it's bad writing not to help new readers.

[Tiki Snakes]

Doctor Who has a pretty natural jumping in point whenever a new main companion or Doctor is introduced, I find. It's also easy enough to drop in at the start of any series of it, given that they generally boil down to a largely self-enclosed arc.

In some respects, Doctor Who is less damaged by the continuity issue than almost any other show though, due to how comprehensively they can change, refresh and reboot without actually damaging continuity at all. It's got to be a large part of the secret behind it's extra-ordinarily long run, really, as you have perfect licence to entirely re-invent the thing every few years.

It's almost expected.

[Eldan]

Yeah, Doctor Who is a special case. They can do what are basically reboots (i.e. NuWho, as some call it, and, kinda, Series 5 and 6 of it, now), without losing too much continuity. Why? Because the main character is a time-traveling, shapechanging alien.

Good, more recent starting points:

New Who (the series that started in 2005 after a break of many years), from Series 1. Clean break, new actors, writers and directors, continuity is explained whenever it comes up.

If you want to go more recent, from Series 5 on, when the showrunner changed and they made kind of a break again. Thematic, and in the team, including the actors.

[Zevox]

Without a doubt, it will be undergoing the major change that Bruce Wayne is going to be Batman again. (Imagine my shock.)
:smallconfused: Hadn't they already brought Bruce back from his death-but-not-really before the reboot?


There is also a picture of someone one would assume to be **** Grayson wearing essentially Robin's costume from Batman and Robin, but whether that makes him Nightwing or the Batman of Bludhaven or the new coordinator of Batman Inc has evidently not yet been revealed.
Er, they've already announced that **** Grayson is Nightwing now (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2011/06/13/septembers-batman-solicits/), even I know that much just from perusing DC's site. Robin is apparently someone named Damian.

Zevox

[Cristo Meyers]

Agreed. This is something that Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, and DC comics (twice!) have done before. BTW Hi! We're finally on the same thread!


Been a long time, man. Still running that sweat shop?


Doctor Who has a pretty natural jumping in point whenever a new main companion or Doctor is introduced, I find. It's also easy enough to drop in at the start of any series of it, given that they generally boil down to a largely self-enclosed arc.


Yeah, you can jump in pretty much anywhere and the only continuity you may miss out on is only confined to that Doctor.

[Joran]

Or for a counter-example, 24, whose audience went up as time went on, through season 5. Yes, it dropped afterwards (most likely because season 6 is generally considered the worst season of the series) but the serial nature certainly didn't stop it from gaining viewers until then.

You claim that it's the serial nature that prevents new viewers from coming in, but...can't it just as easily be claimed that it's the fact viewers find it less interesting that prevents new viewers from coming in? I never watched Lost enough to know, but isn't the third season generally considered inferior to the first two? (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) If viewers are deserting a show because they don't think it's as interesting, I don't think new viewers would be lining up to take their places, because they'd be driven away for the same reason. This is true whether the show is serial or episodic.

24 is an interesting case actually. I'd argue that the reason why Season 4 and 5 have higher average ratings because they ran all 24 episodes in a row rather than the normal Fall -> re-runs -> Spring. Serial television has the issue that if you miss an episode somewhere in the middle, it's hard to jump back in, while interrupting the flow of the season can upset people as well.

But yes, point taken, we'd need access to more ratings data (which is not public information I think) to establish a correlation.

[Tirian]

:smallconfused: Hadn't they already brought Bruce back from his death-but-not-really before the reboot?


Yes, but he decided to retire from being Batman all the same. That's what Batman Inc. was about, Bruce Wayne publicly declaring that he's been underwriting Batman all along and now he was going to franchise vigilante justice around the world.


Er, they've already announced that **** Grayson is Nightwing now (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2011/06/13/septembers-batman-solicits/), even I know that much just from perusing DC's site. Robin is apparently someone named Damian.

Yeah, Damian Wayne is Bruce's son by Talia al Ghul. So now we've got Robin, Nightwing, Tim Drake is Red Robin, and Jason Todd is Red Hood after the reboot. No word on Stephanie Brown yet from what I've seen, for all I know she'll go back to being Spoiler. Oh, and of course the other immense news is that Barbara Gordon is finally getting cured of her spine injury and is going back to being Batgirl.

[Traab]

The problem I have with this view, and it's a view shared by too many in the comic/film/TV industry, is that the average reader/viewer is dumber then a box of rocks. I hate when the all might writers/owners/produces/whatever talk down to the little people.

What is better, especially for a younger reader: An easy to understand bland story that they can just sit back and turn off their brains for or a hard, complex story that that forces them to think.



This is bad too, as often they just 'modernize' the story to make it all 'hip and cool' so that mindless kids will like it and go 'wow'. It's rare they make things better, it's more often they make them worse.

For example, you will notice the way they tone down any 'adult' stuff the adult fictional characters do, just to make the Mad Moms happy. And the way they have to ruin everything with science....like 'nanabots' everywhere.



And the most obvious answer anyway....is that companies just do it to make money. When people see Batman #783 they get sad that there are 782 Batman stories that they will never be able to read, but when they see Batman #1 they get all excited like they are the very special, very first Batman reader. And they buy 2 or 3 in case they are worth more money too.

The cover blurb counts for a lot. The Standard ''See Batman fight King Kroc...again'' is boring, but the ''The whole universe is changing...find out how inside'' is a big draw.

1) Why does it have to be bland to be easily understood? My main point was, if I pick up a new issue of xmen for example, I wont know any of the history involved. I wont know who is paired off with who, who hates who, where the hidden drama is, what the motivations are, what the various powers may be in this version, I wont know anything. Yeah I could pick it up and start reading, and within a few issues id have a decent grip on whats going on now, but I wouldnt be able to know any references made to past events, it wouldnt have the same impact when random villain 226 crawls out of some rubble and makes an "I HAVE RETURNED!" speech, because I didnt know how he ended up there in the first place. Starting over from scratch gives me a chance to get in on the ground floor so I CAN follow along with everything. Thats why I say reboots can be a handy thing.

2)Yes, often its a modernization and that can suck, but other times its to make it so kids today can follow along with the characters backstory. Some things do change over the course of 40 years, a 10 year old boy may not find the idea of a scrawny young man who wants nothing more than to go fight nazis and fight off communism as enthralling today as it was when captain america first came out. I agree with you about placating the worried mummies out there who dont want their darling baby boys to see *gasp* blood though.

[Lord Raziere]

hmmmm...perhaps it would be better to have superheroes whose powers are inherently passed on like Exaltations or something than all this continuity stuff...

I could see it now.... the hero dying when the writer is done with them, their power leaving and seeking out a new person, new writer comes in and makes the power go to a new person they want and picks up the whole thing again with a new villain or something....

[Lurkmoar]

hmmmm...perhaps it would be better to have superheroes whose powers are inherently passed on like Exaltations or something than all this continuity stuff...

I could see it now.... the hero dying when the writer is done with them, their power leaving and seeking out a new person, new writer comes in and makes the power go to a new person they want and picks up the whole thing again with a new villain or something....

They did that with the Flash in a way. Barry Alan (Silver Age Flash) died, and the torch was passed to his sidekick, Wally West. That was cool. And best of all, Barry stayed dead for a good long time. He would show up every now and then thanks to time travel (long story that I'm not sure on the specifics of...) but Wally West was allowed to be his own hero.

Then they brought back Barry Alan... for what? Now there's three Flashes (Golden Age Jay Garrick, Silver Age Barry Alan and I guess... Bronze Age? Wally West)running around, not including other speedsters like Kid Flash (who was aged up, died, then returned to life) Johnnie Quick and his daughter Jessie Quick and Max Mercury. And I don't even read the Flash! I picked up that much from reading Crisis on Infinite Earths and some issues of JSA.

[Mina Kobold]

1) Why does it have to be bland to be easily understood? My main point was, if I pick up a new issue of xmen for example, I wont know any of the history involved. I wont know who is paired off with who, who hates who, where the hidden drama is, what the motivations are, what the various powers may be in this version, I wont know anything. Yeah I could pick it up and start reading, and within a few issues id have a decent grip on whats going on now, but I wouldnt be able to know any references made to past events, it wouldnt have the same impact when random villain 226 crawls out of some rubble and makes an "I HAVE RETURNED!" speech, because I didnt know how he ended up there in the first place. Starting over from scratch gives me a chance to get in on the ground floor so I CAN follow along with everything. Thats why I say reboots can be a handy thing.

The Teen Titans series I picked up had a villain I had never heard of do something like that.

Was it confusing and did I not care about it? Nope, it was well.written and fore-shadowed as well as any story with an element involving the heroes' past.

I'm not saying it isn't a bad thing it's happening, just that I don't see why continuity is to blame for poor writing. :smallsmile:

[Traab]

The Teen Titans series I picked up had a villain I had never heard of do something like that.

Was it confusing and did I not care about it? Nope, it was well.written and fore-shadowed as well as any story with an element involving the heroes' past.

I'm not saying it isn't a bad thing it's happening, just that I don't see why continuity is to blame for poor writing. :smallsmile:

Continuity isnt a bad thing, not at all, its just those long running comics are harder to get into than a reboot, that was my only point really. A reboot lets those of us interested in comics, that havent been able to get into the long established ones, get in on the ground floor.

[Areswargod139]

Been a long time, man. Still running that sweat shop?

I run a sweat EMPIRE now. Oh, how I recall our misadventures in the past Cristo...remember that time we fought and defeated your evil brother (http://www.kraftfoodscompany.com/brands/largest-brands/brands-o/oscar-mayer.aspx)?
And then that one time when we battles each other on top of the Andes over the hand of a winsome maiden? ha-HA!...Btw, I want my knuckle-bones back. You can keep the pirate treasure though (it might turn you into a immortal zombie though).:smallcool:

On Topic: I'm still putting my vote in for the occasional reboot. And it is true that DC's reboots have retained some of its previous elements (the silver age still had the golden agers, just in their own world for instance) I'd still call this and the ones before reboots. Batman is still going to know who the Joker is, its just that now we don't have to assume he must be 87 years old based on how many comic book years he's been fighting him.

On that note, some have complained that the heroes look younger. It seems interesting that Western (mainly DC really) comics have many heroes that are vaguely middle-aged, while Japanese comics have absurdly young adolescent heroes. How about a nice middle ground? Where are all the mid 20's early 30's heroes (other than on TV pretending to be high schoolers...HA!).

[Lord Raziere]

well see my idea establishes a compromise between continuity and reboots:

you'd keep continuity because each hero would die and their story would be completely wrapped up, at the same time new people would be included as they would be in the same position as the new character, who is also figuring things out.

at the same time, its easy to satiate older fans: new people with the same powers having to fight different threats in different situations and locations mixes it up a lot and keeps people on their toes, preventing things from becoming predictable.

and finally the new writer can do anything they want as long as they stick to how the powers work, making their own story without messing up others- each hero's story would be self contained in a way, separate from the ones that came before or after.

[Traab]

well see my idea establishes a compromise between continuity and reboots:

you'd keep continuity because each hero would die and their story would be completely wrapped up, at the same time new people would be included as they would be in the same position as the new character, who is also figuring things out.

at the same time, its easy to satiate older fans: new people with the same powers having to fight different threats in different situations and locations mixes it up a lot and keeps people on their toes, preventing things from becoming predictable.

and finally the new writer can do anything they want as long as they stick to how the powers work, making their own story without messing up others- each hero's story would be self contained in a way, separate from the ones that came before or after.

The hard part would be the villains. I could see, barely, a few generations worth of superheroes inheriting their powers, even stuff like batman training a replacement to wear the cowl and cape, but then there are the villains. Would joker raise himself a grinning psycho of his own to take over when bruce retires?And then there are the super powered types. How do you create another person with the same powers as the original without getting lame? Something like the green lanterns is easy, its not an inborn skill, its a cracker jack decoder ring. But what about the static shocks, the beast boys, the xmen? Without going into goofy bastard cloning stories for everyone, or alternate versions brought into our world, etc, how do you reproduce the next generation in a unique way for so many characters?

[The Glyphstone]

Sounds sorta like Power Rangers.

[Reverent-One]

The hard part would be the villains. I could see, barely, a few generations worth of superheroes inheriting their powers, even stuff like batman training a replacement to wear the cowl and cape, but then there are the villains. Would joker raise himself a grinning psycho of his own to take over when bruce retires?And then there are the super powered types. How do you create another person with the same powers as the original without getting lame? Something like the green lanterns is easy, its not an inborn skill, its a cracker jack decoder ring. But what about the static shocks, the beast boys, the xmen? Without going into goofy bastard cloning stories for everyone, or alternate versions brought into our world, etc, how do you reproduce the next generation in a unique way for so many characters?

To my understanding, Batman Beyond handled that pretty well.

[Lord Raziere]

well I'm thinking of evil powers the corrupt people when the first owners die.

so it 'd be more like Joker dies, and this power-spirit-thing exits from his body then finds a new person to to possess, thus infecting him with Joker madness and joker genius.

but see, the powers would have some room for variance depending on the writer- they would be the same powers, they just be a different version of them, the powers adapted to the new person, and a new writer.

but of course, recurring villains are always nice to, so I'm thinking of this skeleton guy that just keeps coming back from the dead, but that his memory is really bad combined with this hallucinatory insanity see? So he keeps coming back to life, he keeps trying to find out why and his hallucinations and insanity just keep getting in the way...or something along those lines anyways.

[comicshorse]

well I'm thinking of evil powers the corrupt people when the first owners die.

so it 'd be more like Joker dies, and this power-spirit-thing exits from his body then finds a new person to to possess, thus infecting him with Joker madness and joker genius.

but see, the powers would have some room for variance depending on the writer- they would be the same powers, they just be a different version of them, the powers adapted to the new person, and a new writer.



Finally a reason the cops haven't just shot the Joker dead when they find him tied up with a note from the batman stapled to his chest by a batarang :smallsmile:

[Cristo Meyers]

Sounds sorta like Power Rangers.

Which, ironically enough, worked out kinda well, actually...

[Traab]

To my understanding, Batman Beyond handled that pretty well.

Sort of, joker became an entire army of gangs, not a single bad guy. I dont recall what happened with the others, though i think there was a clay face.
As for the evil powers corrupt thing, eh, I dunno, it adds a lot of mysticism to comics that dont deal much with them, like batman. What the hell kind of odd twist would it take for the joker to turn out to be possessed by some psycho evil entity spirit thing like the hyena primal spirit in buffy the vampire slayer?

I suppose it could be interesting to discover that there is a balance between good and evil, and this is how it is maintained. Champions of good and evil are chosen and invested with powers, then when they fall a new one is chosen, that sort of thing. It would even make a lot of sense, and be a way to explain why gotham never seems to get a bad guy batman cant handle, or why supermans villains would likely crush most other good guys and yet they never actually go elsewhere to take over.

[The Glyphstone]

Which, ironically enough, worked out kinda well, actually...

That was my impression - I'm not a PR fan, but the seasonal reset formula seems to work out well for it.

[Lord Raziere]

Finally a reason the cops haven't just shot the Joker dead when they find him tied up with a note from the batman stapled to his chest by a batarang :smallsmile:

unfortunately? probably would never become canon. the Joker is too mundane.

even more unfortunately, the power-spirit would leave anyways if the Joker died of old age. the heroes I'm imagining would be far from immortal and resurrection would not be possible in such a universe- at least for good people, evil guys of course would probably do all sorts of crazy immoral stuff for resurrection. :smalltongue:

@ balance between good and evil: PLEASE keep that concept away from this conversation, I hate it. they are just spirit-powers that go around looking for people to wield them, nothing more.

[Traab]

unfortunately? probably would never become canon. the Joker is too mundane.

even more unfortunately, the power-spirit would leave anyways if the Joker died of old age. the heroes I'm imagining would be far from immortal and resurrection would not be possible in such a universe- at least for good people, evil guys of course would probably do all sorts of crazy immoral stuff for resurrection. :smalltongue:

@ balance between good and evil: PLEASE keep that concept away from this conversation, I hate it. they are just spirit-powers that go around looking for people to wield them, nothing more.


Aww come on!!!! Can you think of a BETTER reason metallo doesnt go to gotham and take over? Or that lex and bruce never seem to square off in the corporate ring? Its an actual justification for one of the biggest plotholes in dc comics, where all the heroes and villains share the same world, and yet never seem to realize there are better pastures for them to take over.

*EDIT* Also, they dont have to be Angel style Powers That Be. Just intrinsic forces of nature that maintain the balance so neither good nor evil can ever have a final victory.

[Psyren]

Finally a reason the cops haven't just shot the Joker dead when they find him tied up with a note from the batman stapled to his chest by a batarang :smallsmile:

relevant link (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/stolen-pixels/7220-Stolen-Pixels-172-Gothams-Latest-Superhero)

[Lord Raziere]

Aww come on!!!! Can you think of a BETTER reason metallo doesnt go to gotham and take over? Or that lex and bruce never seem to square off in the corporate ring? Its an actual justification for one of the biggest plotholes in dc comics, where all the heroes and villains share the same world, and yet never seem to realize there are better pastures for them to take over.

*EDIT* Also, they dont have to be Angel style Powers That Be. Just intrinsic forces of nature that maintain the balance so neither good nor evil can ever have a final victory.

two words, better reason: bad writing.

[Lord Seth]

Aww come on!!!! Can you think of a BETTER reason metallo doesnt go to gotham and take over?Because then Superman would just follow him there, or possibly other superheroes would. Besides, Batman being Batman, he'd figure out some way to handle him.


Or that lex and bruce never seem to square off in the corporate ring?I'm pretty sure they have on at least some occasions.


Its an actual justification for one of the biggest plotholes in dc comics, where all the heroes and villains share the same world, and yet never seem to realize there are better pastures for them to take over.Thing is, there's superheroes all throughout the country (heck, the world), so trying to take over any other city will just run into the same problem as taking over Metropolis. Maybe it'd be other superheroes you'd have to deal with, but you'd have to deal with them.

[Zevox]

You know, I thought of a change I hope the reboot does do to the GL comics: give the Star Sapphires a new costume. I mean, it looks like more than half of DC's characters are getting one, so why not take the opportunity to get them into something less embarrassingly skimpy and stupid looking?

Zevox

[Traab]

Thing is, there's superheroes all throughout the country (heck, the world), so trying to take over any other city will just run into the same problem as taking over Metropolis. Maybe it'd be other superheroes you'd have to deal with, but you'd have to deal with them.

Yeah, but each superhero has his own turf. For example, batman comes all untethered if another hero dares enter gotham. There are villains that are currently fighting tier one heroes like superman, who could curb stomp their way through say, static shocks territory. And yet there is always a balance. There is always a superhero capable of fighting whatever level of bad guy is in his area. And the bad guys are always able to put up a good fight, and keep coming back over and over again despite the fact that they always lose in the end. By claiming its a natural function of the universe to maintain balance, it becomes justified.

Otherwise, the world would fall into chaos. Darkseid would stop trying to invade the earth by way of frigging metropolis, slade might give detroit a shot for takeover, and the justice league would almost be forced to form to deal with the shifting battle lines. Now THAT would make for an awesome reboot! The justice league is formed because bad guys arent staying put, and the heroes need a way to stay in contact with each other so they know which bad guy is where and can pass along warnings and call for help if they cant handle it.

[Mina Kobold]

Continuity isnt a bad thing, not at all, its just those long running comics are harder to get into than a reboot, that was my only point really. A reboot lets those of us interested in comics, that havent been able to get into the long established ones, get in on the ground floor.

I remind you, the Teen Titans comic I started on was volume three. Meaning it had decades of continuity behind it. It was no harder getting into than Runaways, which I started from the beginning on.

Unless there are series that go on for decades without ever taking a break to let new readers care, but that sounds rather silly. Silly-silly even.


Aww come on!!!! Can you think of a BETTER reason metallo doesnt go to gotham and take over? Or that lex and bruce never seem to square off in the corporate ring? Its an actual justification for one of the biggest plotholes in dc comics, where all the heroes and villains share the same world, and yet never seem to realize there are better pastures for them to take over.

I think Superman fights his villains outside of Metropolis too, Batman might just call him in if Metallo arrived. Or just beat him up since he'd have a better understanding of the technology and be immune to Kryptonite. :smalltongue:

Personally I think it may be explained a lot by the fact that Superman's brawl won't be much use against the Joker or Riddler while Batman's detective skills and strategy isn't needed against Brainiac or Luthor. To a degree they fight who they do because they're the best for the job in the neighbourhood. :smallsmile:

It's not a perfect explanation, though. ^_^'

[Lurkmoar]

I think Superman fights his villains outside of Metropolis too, Batman might just call him in if Metallo arrived. Or just beat him up since he'd have a better understanding of the technology and be immune to Kryptonite. :smalltongue:

Minor quibble, Kryptonite is still radioactive. It gave Lex Luthor cancer, so he had to clone himself. I think he put his brain in the clone's body and posed as his own son for a while.

The first Teen Titan comic I read was a very special episode about drugs with Speedy. I didn't have any problems following the story. Starfire was upset about not being able to help a kid that ODed, Speedy talked about his past problems with heroin and they beat up some drug deals in the Antarctic. Continuity was there, but the story was self contained enough that I didn't need to know their history to get into it.

So, is the Secret Six going to cease publication too? I really liked that book.

[Mina Kobold]

Minor quibble, Kryptonite is still radioactive. It gave Lex Luthor cancer, so he had to clone himself. I think he put his brain in the clone's body and posed as his own son for a while.

Well aware of that, but he got cancer after wearing a ring of Kryptonite for months or even years. So Batman is effectively immune, since the effects won't hit him before Metallo is in pieces. Although I suppose I was imprecise :smallsmile:

[Avilan the Grey]

OKay... Flashpoint Specific complaints:

Apart from the fact that I hoped the whole DC constand Reboot / whatever disease would be temporarily cured with the Blackest Night / Brightest Day stuff...

Rob Liefeild will come back and be involved in several comics. For the love of God, WHY???!!!???

Barbara Gordon will become Batgirl again (cured? Younger? I don't know). I am a fan of Stephanie Brown so no thank you.*

The costume debate has been going on too long already but basically all of them are for the worse, it seems.
It also seems like a sign that DC has done too many of these when most fans I talk with don't care about the actual Flashpoint Series (which apparently are set in an alternative world anyway) but everyone is worried about the impact on their favorite comic when this is over, in 2012. Basically you are doing it wrong if your readers don't go "cool!" but rather "yeah yeah whatever... just tell me what this will mean for X after all this hoopla is over with".

Most comics will be restarting as issue #1. Again... Well I guess I will stay out of DC comics until that happens like I usually do with these things (stop reading the comics involved until after the crisis is over. Saves lots of money since you don't have to buy titles you don't usually care for just to keep up, etc.

*This is another thing that bugs me about the constant rebooting: Why bother setting up new characters, and new situations, if you know you will wipe them out in 12 months time?

[Mina Kobold]

Rob Liefield. The pouchmaster and creator of the nineties over-muscled anti-heroes... Is back?

WhagaWHATwhy?HurrrghGAH! whywhywhywhy!

Ahem, sorry. I needed to freak out about that.

I don't read anything involving Batgirl but retconning every subsequent one after Gordon and removing her form her position as Oracle is just a sad waste.

Luckily I have plenty of DC comics to catch up on before I even reach Stephanie Brown becoming Batgirl, so hopefully things are better once I do. :smallsmile:

[Tirian]

Now I'm reading a new release (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=39851) that says that Batman and GL aren't even going to be rebooted. Buh? I mean, I'd have trouble thinking of two titles that are more convoluted and are drawing new comic readers, and they're the ones where you need a Ph.D. to understand what's going on.

I can't fathom who DC thinks they're pleasing with putting Barbara Gordon back in the Batgirl costume (aside from Barbara Gordon herself). Sure, she deserves to walk again in a world where even death is a revolving door, but Oracle is ten times as awesome and influential and historical as Batgirl ever was, and going back to it is as horrible as trying to shove a butterfly back into a cocoon.

[Avilan the Grey]

Now I'm reading a new release (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=39851) that says that Batman and GL aren't even going to be rebooted. Buh? I mean, I'd have trouble thinking of two titles that are more convoluted and are drawing new comic readers, and they're the ones where you need a Ph.D. to understand what's going on.

I can't fathom who DC thinks they're pleasing with putting Barbara Gordon back in the Batgirl costume (aside from Barbara Gordon herself). Sure, she deserves to walk again in a world where even death is a revolving door, but Oracle is ten times as awesome and influential and historical as Batgirl ever was, and going back to it is as horrible as trying to shove a butterfly back into a cocoon.

Regarding GL I can understand it because of the two year turmoil it just went through (Blackest Night / Brightest Day). Even DC might realize it would be too much.

Regarding Bats... Maybe it's just a matter of Popularity-shield? As for Barbara... I don't mind her donning a suit, but it should be as BatWOMAN, not BatGIRL.

[Tirian]

Regarding Bats... Maybe it's just a matter of Popularity-shield? As for Barbara... I don't mind her donning a suit, but it should be as BatWOMAN, not BatGIRL.

There's already a Batwoman now. Don't ask, I don't even.

If she puts on a suit and starts fighting crime on the street, it should be an Oracle costume. She is far more than a derivative of Batman, so she shouldn't be dressing like him.

[Avilan the Grey]

There's already a Batwoman now. Don't ask, I don't even.

If she puts on a suit and starts fighting crime on the street, it should be an Oracle costume. She is far more than a derivative of Batman, so she shouldn't be dressing like him.

Oh I am aware of that... character (Batwoman). What she really needs is a bird name so she can join the Birds Of Prey proper.

[Lurkmoar]

So if Barbs is going to be un-paralyzed, does that mean the events of the Killing Joke are now out of cannon, still cannon and Barbs buckled down got some cyborg treatment or what("It's magic! We don't have to explain!")? I'm getting confused just thinking about it.

Darn it, we don't need another super heroine, Oracle has a bigger impact then a woman punching thugs in the street.

[Avilan the Grey]

So if Barbs is going to be un-paralyzed, does that mean the events of the Killing Joke are now out of cannon, still cannon and Barbs buckled down got some cyborg treatment or what("It's magic! We don't have to explain!")? I'm getting confused just thinking about it.

Darn it, we don't need another super heroine, Oracle has a bigger impact then a woman punching thugs in the street.

More importantly, if they are re-starting 52 titles(?) from issue #1, will they simply repeat events with newer art and slightly updated plots? As in Barbara will be paralyzed by Joker in approx 6-24 issues time?

[Zevox]

Rob Liefeild will come back and be involved in several comics. For the love of God, WHY???!!!???
Several? Really? I noticed he was going to be the artist for the new Hawk and Dove comic, but they actually put him on multiple comics? What else got stuck with him?

Zevox

[DomaDoma]

So if Barbs is going to be un-paralyzed, does that mean the events of the Killing Joke are now out of cannon, still cannon and Barbs buckled down got some cyborg treatment or what("It's magic! We don't have to explain!")? I'm getting confused just thinking about it.

Darn it, we don't need another super heroine, Oracle has a bigger impact then a woman punching thugs in the street.

Depends on how the whole Knightfall thing worked, I guess? </noob>

I agree, though, Oracle is ten times the awesome that Batgirl ever was.

[Tirian]

I agree, though, Oracle is ten times the awesome that Batgirl ever was.

I just read a spot-on blog that noted that Barbara has been Oracle longer than she's been Batgirl.

It just goes back to the idiotic thought comic book presidents have that seems to go "In order for comics to be as popular as they were when I was a kid, they need to return to the same dynamics that interested me when I was a kid." Not just here, but evidently we're dying to go back to the days when Lois Lane would say six times a year "It's funny that you never see Clark and Superman toge -- ooh, a squirrel! Wait, what was I just saying?"

[Mina Kobold]

So if Barbs is going to be un-paralyzed, does that mean the events of the Killing Joke are now out of cannon, still cannon and Barbs buckled down got some cyborg treatment or what("It's magic! We don't have to explain!")? I'm getting confused just thinking about it.

Darn it, we don't need another super heroine, Oracle has a bigger impact then a woman punching thugs in the street.

They can't actually do that without introducing a rather major plothole.

She already declined getting any treatment that wasn't available to everybody.

So either they make such a treatment public and change the world or they ignore her heroic attitude because everything was better on their Earth.

...

They're going to do that, arent they? :smallfrown:

[Zevox]

They can't actually do that without introducing a rather major plothole.

She already declined getting any treatment that wasn't available to everybody.

So either they make such a treatment public and change the world or they ignore her heroic attitude because everything was better on their Earth.

...

They're going to do that, arent they? :smallfrown:
Either that or just erase the story that crippled her from the timestream/canon.

Yeah, as I mentioned before, even as someone who doesn't care about Batman or related characters and has never read their comics, that one kind of irks me. Even I know that Oracle has become an icon in her own right at least as much so as Batgirl, and unlike Batgirl it's not for being a knock-off of another, more popular character. There just doesn't seem to be a good reason to change her back, at all.

Zevox

[Avilan the Grey]

Several? Really? I noticed he was going to be the artist for the new Hawk and Dove comic, but they actually put him on multiple comics? What else got stuck with him?

Zevox

...Um... Feeling stupid again... I can't find the link right now.
Btw has he learned to draw?

[Zevox]

...Um... Feeling stupid again... I can't find the link right now.
Btw has he learned to draw?
Judging by the Hawk and Dove cover (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/files/2011/06/hkdv_cv1_r3asdmai-9hjd.jpg)... eh. He's improved from a lot of what I've seen on Atop the Fourth Wall, but a good number of things still seem rather "off." Particularly with Hawk.

Zevox

[turkishproverb]

The big difference between Marvel and DC is the company attitude to reboots. DC, they reboot every decade or two. In Marvel they are tied to their continuity to quite a large extent.

I think both attitudes have merit. Although I am glad I got a grounding in Marvel for free from my library.


Well, marvel also plugs it's ears and goes LALALALALA CAN"T HEAR YOU LALALALALA about their continuity, so you get a LOT more mistakes in a given period (IE, Strange saying chaos magic doesn't exist, OMD's constant plot holes, the Hudlin BP in general, etc...)

[Tirian]

Judging by the Hawk and Dove cover (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/files/2011/06/hkdv_cv1_r3asdmai-9hjd.jpg)... eh. He's improved from a lot of what I've seen on Atop the Fourth Wall, but a good number of things still seem rather "off." Particularly with Hawk.


That is surprisingly only partially crappy. Perhaps he doesn't realize that Dove is a woman now. :smalltongue:

[Lurkmoar]

Well, marvel also plugs it's ears and goes LALALALALA CAN"T HEAR YOU LALALALALA about their continuity, so you get a LOT more mistakes in a given period (IE, Strange saying chaos magic doesn't exist, OMD's constant plot holes, the Hudlin BP in general, etc...)

Do you actually WANT them to acknowledge those plot holes? I like to pretend that things that don't make sense are the characters involved not remembering things correctly. Of course, it helps that I stopped buying Spider-Man. I'll wait until the current editorial mandate gets lifted before bothering to take a look again.

[turkishproverb]

...my point is these plotholes are so severe and constant at this point, due to both the impossibility of complete research in some ways as well as the lack of effort, that it's no different than a universal reboot, and in many ways worse for the dishonesty.

[Avilan the Grey]

Well, marvel also plugs it's ears and goes LALALALALA CAN"T HEAR YOU LALALALALA about their continuity, so you get a LOT more mistakes in a given period (IE, Strange saying chaos magic doesn't exist, OMD's constant plot holes, the Hudlin BP in general, etc...)

As I said I actually prefer reboots, but the problem is that they used to do them every decade or two, and now they do them every 2-5 years. THAT is my problem.

[DomaDoma]

Hm. Maybe they could have Barbara stay on as Oracle, but with the capacity to kick some physical ass in a pinch? Is that too optimistic?

[Reverent-One]

...my point is these plotholes are so severe and constant at this point, due to both the impossibility of complete research in some ways as well as the lack of effort, that it's no different than a universal reboot, and in many ways worse for the dishonesty.

Individual plotholes (even a lot of them) still aren't equivalent to a universal reboot, as a universal reboot wipes anyway everything, while dealing with plotholes leaves things not explictly retconned intact.

[Velaryon]

The films or the Expanded Universe stuff? Because I know that Palpatine never cloned himself, Han shot first and Chewbacca died of a ripe old Wookie age. Yup. And I could think of even more, that's just off the top of my head.

Sorry to reply to something from several pages ago, but I didn't see this til now.

I would keep all the EU novels released by Bantam, as well as the New Jedi Order series, with significant changes (for starters Chewie lives, and Jacen Solo dies within the first 50 pages). Granted there were a lot of bad books released by Bantam, like Crystal Star, Darksaber, the Black Fleet Crisis trilogy, and some more, but they generally didn't do any lasting harm to the franchise. And it's worth keeping the gold that is the X-Wing series, Thrawn Trilogy, and the other good books.

I would scrap everything that comes after the NJO series because it's all garbage. I'd scrap all the comics as well because I've never found a Star Wars comic that was very good. I'd see the prequel trilogy redone, following some of the same basic ideas but fixing the myriad problems with the movies we got. Both Clone Wars cartoons would go, as would anything written by Karen Traviss. As for the rest of the PT-era novels, I would have to read more of them before I could form an opinion, but at best they'd need massive retconning to fit with a redone prequel trilogy.

Once that is done I'd steal George Lucas's fortune and use it to bribe Timothy Zahn to write as many Star Wars novels as he can. Mike Stackpole as well, and Aaron Allston if he can get back to the level of quality he used to have with the Wraith Squadron books. And last but not least, there would be armed guards keeping Karen Traviss and Troy Denning away from anything even remotely connected to the Star Wars franchise.

[Tirian]

Hm. Maybe they could have Barbara stay on as Oracle, but with the capacity to kick some physical ass in a pinch? Is that too optimistic?

In a word, probably. Heck, Oracle can alreadydo that, just not swinging in on a Bat-rope.

On the other side, Gail Simone is writing the story, so it's hardly going to be as bad as the 60's image of Batgirl riding a tricked-out purple motorcycle and getting stuck in sexy deathtraps. Still, she'll have marching orders, and those will probably involve putting Barbara back to work on the sisyphean task of stopping muggers in Gotham along with all the other Batman assistants instead of her old job where she got to stand out and make a difference across the entire DCU.