|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2019 5:58:51 GMT -5
I really wasn't sure how to phrase this topic! I was reading this 1979 comic for the first time recently:  There's a scene where Superman is thinking about the fight he had with Muhammad Ali. And when I read that, it reminded me of how, prior to COIE, everything was canon. And how it sort of feels - and I say this as a fan of JB's Man of Steel - that a reboot wipes away all that came before. Which is kind of sad. True, those stories remain. In our minds and our back issue boxes. But there was something special about a character referencing something that happened earlier, whether that be DC or Marvel. I always liked it when Banner/Hulk would refer back to something that had occurred early on in his "career". There's a certain "comfort zone" in a pre-rebooted DC. Everything is canon. You have certain stories that are explained away as having taken place on another Earth, for instance. And there were "imaginary stories", which I like the concept of. But within 99% of the mainstream books, everything was part of some rich canon, some rewarding tapestry. And I think we lost that after COIE. The post-COIE Superman could never have flown about Metropolis while thinking about his fight with Muhammad Ali; pocket universes aside, the post-COIE Superman could never refer to the time he, as Superboy, took down Lex Luthor in Smallville; the post-COIE Superman could never refer to the time he faced Mister Miracle for bragging rights. We must always look forward, of course. And whatever reboots a comic company throws at us, the stories, including pre-COIE, will always be with us. The aforementioned issue of DC Comics Presents doesn't disappear into dust, Infinity War-style, when a reboot occurs. It's there for me to enjoy. However, I feel there is something to be said for uninterrupted canon. Incidentally, in the late 80s, UK publisher London Editions Magazines had the licence to reprint DC within the UK. They began by reprinting post-COIE stories. In 1991, though, they put out a reprint title called Heroes:  Although London Editions Magazines was exclusively reprinting post-COIE stuff, Heroes was exclusively devoted to pre-COIE stuff. At the time, the editor said something like, "There were many fine pre-COIE tales and it's important they aren't forgotten." So even with the official reprint licensee, they acknowledged the fondness for pre-COIE. |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Feb 1, 2019 9:15:28 GMT -5
I'm overall not a fan of reboots. To me it cheapens good stories like Aunt May's death in Amazing #400. (Yeah I have been mentioning that a lot lol) But I can see their purpose so to speak. But at the same time, it just seems editorial okays most anything writers want to do with characters and then that complicates things. If editorial staff said no to writers wanting to do something that contradicts past history of a character, then there would be no need to wipe the slate of previous history.
At the same time, all publishers are in it to make money. So if they think a story is going to sell, why not erase history and take a chance? From a business and financial perspective it makes perfect sense? Sure they might piss off some people. But some of the hardcore fans are just going to bitch but keep buying the product. So why not as they say?
One of my favorite things getting into comics in the 90's was the little editorial references to specific comic issues when a character would reference something that didn't happen in the issue it was mentioned in by a character.
Spidey: I defeated you once Doc Ock and I can do it again! I know your weakness!
Doc OcK: You shall find I much more formidable that I was the last time we met!
Editorial note: See Spec Spiderman #35
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 1, 2019 9:36:07 GMT -5
The main offender to this is DC. How many reboots have there been since COIE?
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Feb 1, 2019 10:00:26 GMT -5
The main offender to this is DC. How many reboots have there been since COIE? In the new millennium, regime change at DC brought a group of 4th generation comic book fans into creative control who liked the Silver/Bronze Age DC multiverse and decided to bring it back in an organized, pre-planned fashion. Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison seem to be the principal architect of the "New 52" worlds which were introduced in a pair of year-long events running 2006-2008, culminating in a "Final Crisis." A review thread for that series will begin in a couple of weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Feb 1, 2019 10:10:44 GMT -5
When you consider comic books began as entertainment for children then this wasn't so much a problem as the readership was only thought to last between 5-10 years and MOST stories were one and done without much connection or reference to past stories. Stan/Marvel started up the referring to past confrontations and/or stories creating an ongoing interconnected world view that will and has grown unwieldy for both Marvel and DC. There will always be stories reflecting current times and situations in an effort to express what is happening in the world. Maybe there should be a 5-10 year limit though for using or referencing them to prevent future problems where Reboots are necessary. Just don't refer to it anymore and know it was part and parcel of the actual time of the comic being printed so it shouldn't be a problem that our Man of Steel has met or worked with/for how many Presidents over the years since his birth. Why is Batman still driving an automobile (though it looks cool) in current comics when it just wouldn't work as a viable means of transportation; though it did in the 40's when overpopulated cities were not a national thing and there were more suburbs and open highways? Wayne Manor would have to 40 miles of underground
Canon is good as long as it doesn't interfere or ruin a story. Referencing Superman versus Ali was a fun nod for readers/fans at the time but to do so 30 years later, it shouldn't be mentioned. Anything that uses a time/place/person that reflects the actual occurrence(s) when printed is always going to become dated or out of place over the years. Now that comic books/heroes who have been around since the 40's are more than ever become something for older readers with less focus upon new/younger readers this is a concern. Stop with the Reboots and go for the simple fix: quit referring to the long gone out of date past moments and keep focused upon the current to avoid confusion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2019 10:15:06 GMT -5
Comics have not been nearly as much fun for me since 1984 when all the first Crisis stuff started. I prefer the pre-Crisis DC Universe. There are some things I like they came after, but to me, Wonder Girl will always be Wonder Woman's adopted sister, Earth 2 is full of golden age heroes along with Power Girl and Huntress, Paradise Island is Paradise Island, not Themyscira, Superboy was the inspiration for the LSH, Hawkman and Hawkgirl are a happily married crime fighting couple, and Catwoman wears her classic purple dress rather than a dominatrix get up.
I do like Superman and Lois being married and Conner Kent Superboy though!
I see why they do it--to make money and generate interest. I did enjoy reading Crisis on Infinite Earths and Infinite Crisis, but the New 52 was just a big mess (to me). Wonder Woman certainly benefited from the first Crisis although it messed up her affiliation with the Justice League and Wonder Girl's history. Love Byrne's Superman, especially having Ma and Pa Kent back.
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Feb 1, 2019 10:48:56 GMT -5
Love Byrne's Superman, especially having Ma and Pa Kent back. I always though that this was, culturally, one of the most interesting things about the reboot. To a depression audience, or immigrants who came to the US knowing nobody, or children with fathers fighting across the globe, the idea of being "alone in the world" was a distincy possibility (or reality) for many readers.
For the boomer audience, even Superman needed to know he could move back home if he had to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2019 11:04:29 GMT -5
Thanks for the thoughtful responses, people. I am proud to be a member of this forum.
Referencing things does have to stop at some point. Didn't Reed Richards mention Korean War or WWII service at some point? Of course that'd be absurd nowadays.
Regarding how many reboots there has been since COIE, do we count "Zero Hour"? I only bought a few "Zero Hour" books.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 1, 2019 11:42:51 GMT -5
Good topic, excellent insights.Another aspect of re-booting I don't like is that it's essentially like yelling "DO-OVER!" in a game that isn't going your way.
I heard a composer of movie soundtracks being interviewed the other day and in response to a question about the difficulty of having to make his work exactly, say, three minutes and 47 seconds to match end credits or a particular sequence in the movie, responded that "Limitations are freeing."
Having to work within borders, so to speak, forces the creator to be even more imaginative. Certainly more than just wiping the slate clean and getting to start anew.
Because the readers don't have their memories wiped at the same time.
At DC, that's what parallel universes were perfect for... and that was great. If anything, having just one Universe and one Earth made continuity a far bigger mess than it had ever been, exactly the opposite of what Crisis was supposed to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2019 11:51:44 GMT -5
Yes, I agree about creativity.
While I did like the multiple earths concept, that also can go to an extreme, I feel, e.g. we screwed this story up, but let's say it's a Superman from Earth-1650 or something.
Definitely preferable to what came out of COIE, though.
I mentioned the Superboy screw-up, requiring the "pocket universe" explanation. And I know "Zero Hour" had to fix a hiccup or two. Were there any other noticeable errors post-COIE?
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Feb 1, 2019 11:54:15 GMT -5
Thanks for the thoughtful responses, people. I am proud to be a member of this forum. Referencing things does have to stop at some point. Didn't Reed Richards mention Korean War or WWII service at some point? Of course that'd be absurd nowadays. Yes, there were tons of contemporary references. The FF's origin was tied to the 1960s Cold War space race. Charles Xavier and his stepbrother Cain Marko were in the same platoon in the Korean War, for instance, and Xavier's parents worked on the Manhattan Project. Magneto's origin was tied to the Holocaust, so they rebooted him into a younger body a couple of times. Nick Fury of course was a WW2 veteran. Etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 1, 2019 12:00:26 GMT -5
Yes, I agree about creativity. While I did like the multiple earths concept, that also can go to an extreme, I feel, e.g. we screwed this story up, but let's say it's a Superman from Earth-1650 or something. Definitely preferable to what came out of COIE, though. I mentioned the Superboy screw-up, requiring the "pocket universe" explanation. And I know "Zero Hour" had to fix a hiccup or two. Were there any other noticeable errors post-COIE?I pretty much gave up on the post-COIE era, reading only a few titles, almost none from the old days. I stuck to Batman and Detective for a bit b/c I could read past whatever little bit had changed there. Otherwise it was Watchmen, Swamp Thing, Question, and an occasional continuity mini-series. As my kids grew older, I always picked up the "Adventures" titles for them. I liked them, too. They were better than the dark, angsty, post-modern, deconstructionist crap that flooded the stands back then. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Feb 1, 2019 13:24:15 GMT -5
As someone who didn't really get into DC until Crisis, I have kind of a skewed view of that first, big reboot. But I can certainly empathize with those who grew up with the books that came before. If Marvel ever did something like that (have they? I know of Heroes Reborn, which was eventually reversed), I'd be crushed--if I still read their comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2019 13:49:06 GMT -5
I guess Heroes Reborn was a "have your cake and eat it" soft reboot.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Feb 1, 2019 14:24:51 GMT -5
Reed Richards served in the OSS, in WW2 and fought alongside the Howling Commandos, in an adventure. The FF were trying to beat the Russians to the moon. Marvel's had plenty of reboots; they were just what some call "soft reboots." They tweaked timeframes. A mission to the moon became a mission to Mars, Ben Grimm is a veteran pilot, rather than a war veteran, etc. We had constant reveals that such and such was not the truth, or those were Doombots or Skrulls or whatever. DC did it too, periodically. Superman's origin would be retold and refined, though key elements remained the same. Leslie Thompkins is the woman who comforts Bruce Wayne, after the murder. She is, at first, just someone from the crowd. Later, she is a family friend and colleague. little changes; but, the same role. I never had a problem with that. For a big reboot, if you don't start from square one, what is the point? Crisis didn't and it was a mess, for many titles. Some, like the JSA, lost their uniqueness. Huntress floundered for sometime. She went from being the daughter of hero and villain, using both connections and carrying on a legacy, to just another vigilante, whose father was a criminal. She didn't quite fit into the Bat world anymore, no matter how much Batman mentored her. That connection was lost.
I'd rather have soft reboots, where timelines are updated and maybe lesser characters are given new angles. The major reboots end up mostly being momentary noise, followed by a lot of silence. The success of DC post-Crisis was down to motivated and compensated talent, not the Crisis stunt. I think the results would have been the same, without merging the worlds. Some of it would have been better.
Continuity mattered less when you had a mass medium, as there were far more casual readers buying comics. The more it became devoted to a narrower audience, the more it became gospel.
|
|
