|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2015 18:07:10 GMT -5
At one stage continuity was a good thing, but with over 50 years of conflicting events, or just the sheer quantity of fights each character has had there comes a time when it pulls you out of the story. The idea that Daredevil (well fill in the name of your favourite) has been beaten, stabbed, and shot X amount of times makes me wonder how he walks, let alone runs and fights anymore. How the hell could Batman have ever fought every one of those people AND his JLA appearances AND the Outsiders AND all his guest appearances AND find time to waste as Bruce Wayne ? I agree with that. But this doesn't make me think continuity in an ongoing dramatic series should be abandoned. I think this means crossovers, multiple titles, team books, shared universes, and the cultivation of intellectual property as a priority should be abandoned. Issue 49 can still lead into issue 50, but there should probably be no issue 700. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jan 16, 2015 0:42:30 GMT -5
The entire concept of the Eternals and the Celestials has indeed suffered from its integration in the Marvel Universe (even if I thought that Thor #300 was a very good example of a successful retcon). The Celestials as envisioned by Kirby were truly awesome, and remained so for a very long time; but when they started showing up along other "cosmic powers" they lost a lot of their mystique. I believe I even saw Celestial thought balloons in a fairly recent review (from Hickman's FF, maybe?) The Eternals could really (and should have really) remained their own thing, without being spliced into the regular Marvel Universe. Regarding how we view older stories as they get modified by later additions and retcons, I am a bit ambivalent. While I don't mind changes that cause extensive "damage" to an anterior concept if the change is well done and leads to more interesting possibilities than it destroyed (Moore on ST, Miller on DD), I think it often leads to a very cavalier attitude toward a shared universe,s history. I'm sorry, but retcons like Sins past, Original sin and Magneto's ever-changing parental status do very little to enhance my reading enjoyment; they mostly cause headaches (when I bother to read them at all, since some of them -looking at you, One More Day- cause me to permanently lose all interest in a character). I think it can be argued that virtually every specific mythos loses something (yet gains something) by its association with anothers in a shared universe. Daredevil's feats might technically pale in comparison to Thor's, but in context, DD's adventures are just as compelling. Then again, there is something appealing and amusing about a universe where the Punisher and Galactus could technically meet. I do agree that some character universes function better than others in a shared universe. I think it's clear that Kirby's creative impulses took him away from traditional superheroes with New Gods and the Eternals (not to mention The Demon and OMAC) and it can be argued that each would be better served existing apart from the Marvel and DC universes. Yes, it was a bit unfair of me to use those two examples: it's pretty clear that Kirby only did them at Marvel and DC because he had little or no choice at the time. But one of the things I miss about Marvel back in the 70s - not so sure about DC since I didn't follow their series as much - was that characters like Dracula, Shang-Chi, Conan, etc, could effectively exist in their own fictional "universes" while being ostensibly set in the same MU as the Avengers and Spider-Man. Which made the occasional crossover or team-up, when it did happen, all the more interesting and fun: it could be seen as a cool experiment that might or might not work, a special treat for the fans - and then the character would go back to his or her own horror or spy-thriller or sword & sorcery world where they were really worked to their full potential. In contrast, in today's Marvel, everything seems more homogenised: all superheroes, all the time. Shang-Chi is a relatively unimportant superhero and Dracula is a B or C-list supervillain, and there is no variety of genre. Too bad. I see I've strayed from the thread topic of continuity a bit, but perhaps this homogenisation, this flattening of the fictional landscape is one of the side-effects of an over-emphasis on continuity in the sense of wanting everything to be connected together. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2015 2:46:20 GMT -5
I think it's more a result of super heroes dominating the direct market. Not just in available product, but in demand as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on Jan 16, 2015 6:24:57 GMT -5
I think the homogenisation is also a by-product of 50 years of universe building, each character has met numerous times, have done the same things multiple-multiple times.
We do still get books that divorce themselves from the rest for a while, but theyre all drawn back in eventually, like Bru's Captain America was. Its nice while it lasts, but that great big hungry production line demands constant new fodder, and thats where it all starts getting old.
This is why I really liked the Ultimate Universe when it started, its potential for NEW was there, and it delivered for a while, until they killed every interesting hero there bar Miles, and now its stuck in SUCK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2015 18:38:40 GMT -5
Well, in the late 90's there was a great purge of diversity at Marvel. No more cartoon comics, no more non super hero adventure comics. No more Epic line. No more anything but super heroes, until relatively recently. Now they're doing a couple licensed comics. Dexter and Star Wars. But at one point they let GI Joe, Transformers, Star Wars, Conan, Red Sonja, and Groo go. I think they're slowly starting to gravitate toward their more diverse ways of the 80's and earlier at this point, but only because of the shift in popularity among consumers. They can't ignore Walking Dead and Saga anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jan 20, 2015 0:32:03 GMT -5
Well, in the late 90's there was a great purge of diversity at Marvel. No more cartoon comics, no more non super hero adventure comics. No more Epic line. No more anything but super heroes, until relatively recently. Now they're doing a couple licensed comics. Dexter and Star Wars. But at one point they let GI Joe, Transformers, Star Wars, Conan, Red Sonja, and Groo go. I think they're slowly starting to gravitate toward their more diverse ways of the 80's and earlier at this point, but only because of the shift in popularity among consumers. They can't ignore Walking Dead and Saga anymore. Early '90s, really. But, yeah, I was sad to see all those go. Especially Barbie and Barbie Fashion, the cancellation of which were kind of symbolic of Marvel's "Girls are TEH ICKY" policy which lasted to fairly recently - But does seem to be going away now. |
|
