Comics are Awesome II

[Sparky Prime]

I can keep going, but in every one of these examples, the big crossover event did not restart the DC universe from day one, as Flashpoint and the New 52 have done. DC has had a cycle of continuing retcons/continuity tweaks, but nothing as drastic as we've seen this past year. The changes have been largely unprecedented. This is not just the latest reboot in a continual cycle of starting over every few years, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Flashpoint/the New 52 really isn't any different from any of those previous crossover events. It might have been more drastic with the amount of characters it rebooted than other events have been, but it didn't completely restart the DC universe from day 1 either. Books like Batman, Green Lantern, Aquaman and Swamp Thing goes to show that much, as they picked up right where their storylines left off before Flashpoint. Some of them really don't even appear to have had any retcons or tweaks to their continuity. Not unlike previous event storylines.

[Onslaught Six]

One key thing is that a reboot--literally any reboot--is going to keep some elements in some fashion or another. Transformers always have an Optimus Prime and a Megatron. Ninja Turtles always have four turtles. He-Man is always almost naked. GI Joe nearly always fights Cobra. And so forth. It's just that comics have been going for so long that it rarely makes sense to retell the origin story from the very beginning since everyone's seen it in some fashion...even though doing just that would probably be best for the franchise.

I mean, you don't have to sit there and worry about what parts of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies "count" now, do you?

[Sparky Prime]

You mean do you have to worry about what from the Sam Raimi films "count" towards the Marc Webb film? No. But then Webb's film does not take place in the same fictional universe as the Raimi films so of course you don't have to worry about what counts from those films.

The New 52 is not like that. It is the same DC universe fans have been reading about for years, only it was altered by the events in Flashpoint. Think of it more like if you retold G1 if Megatron had killed Optimus Prime during the Beast Wars. Some events would still count while other events would obviously change as a result. Now it's a bit more complicated than that with the DC universe in that a couple universes were incorporated with the main DC universe and Earth 2 splitting off into it's own universe again and some pretty drastic changes for many characters... But being essentially still the same universe, you do have to worry about some events that still count from before the reboot. They did not restart everything from scratch here.

[Dominic]

DC hasn't rebooted roughly every 7 years though. You're averaging the number of events by 30 years, not the actual time between those events. 9 years, 11 years and 6 years between when each reboot event began. That's an average of about 9 years.

Over the course of ~30 years, DC has rebooted 4 times and..... Oh fuck it.

DC has never actually rebooted before, not in the strict sense of "starting over from scratch". Yes, they have events every so often that make retroactive changes to continuity, but in no way can it be said that they reboot every X years.

DC has done this several times. (And, no, I do not think that anybody cares about going in circles on the differences between a reboot and a reset and a retcon and just being retarded.)

"Crisis on Infinite Earths" was a massive rewrite of every single book in DC's line. McGuffins and history that had been a given part of the settings for years were swept away. And, guess what? Some people (generally the guys who had been reading comics for years) complained because their comics were gone. Barry Allen got killed off. All of that extra stuff from Superman was *gone*. If anybody liked Silver Age "Batman" comics, (which is hard to comprehend, but there probably a few), they were shit out of luck. "Oh noes, their childhood was raeped!!11!!" If somebody liked "All Star Squadron" or "Infinity Incorporated", they were likely unhappy with CoIE. Not only did their books change, but the stuff they liked in those books was over-written. In story, the characters went back to the dawn of time to rewrite history in order to save some kind of existence. In real life, DC tossed old context.

"Zero Hour" slid the time line around a bit and involved no small amount of back-writing. (Remember "Triumph" and "Damage"?) But, most of the back-writing was forgotten shortly after. "Zero Hour" was also the cleanest of the reboots.

The Crisis Trilogy (Identity, Infinite and Final) more or less undid CoIE. Some of yester-year's characters were killed off or otherwise written-out. Power Girl's history was re/de-written. (And, hey, I hope that nobody had an attachment to the idea of Superboy Prime and those other guys making a heroice sacrifice and living happily every after!) Even before the multiverse was established as having returned, Johns established that some elements of the characters' histories had changed. (Superman was active before going to Metropolis, albeit not as Superboy. "Batman Year 2" was back in context. Wonder Woman re-replaced Black Canary...and some other stuff was changed.)

"Flash Point", like CoIE, involved history being changed by time-travel. And, when history was set right, it was different from what it was before. And, the real reason is the same. DC wants to streamline and rebrand. Some characters are changed. Some are wiped out entirely. There is no in-story reason for why Earth 2 would have changed after "Flash Point". Barry Allen's time travel should not have effected that timeline. But, it did because DC wanted/needed it to. The whole point was that DC wanted to go in a different direction.

And, in 15 years or so, after another reboot or 2, there will be people who liked the New 52 complaining about their favourite books being ruined by change.

This is not just the latest reboot in a continual cycle of starting over every few years, not by any stretch of the imagination.

"Flash Point" changed more than "Zero Hour" and the Crisis Trilogy. And, you happen to find more of these particular changes offensive. But, there is objectively nothing unprecedented about this.

I happen to like Byrne's rewrite of Superman. But, I am not going to hand-wave it and say it was not a huge change when a fan of Curt Swan's Superman complains. Byrne's rewrite was huge and (at the time) unprecedented. Think of how much history that the Silver Age Superman had. Now, keep in mind how much of it came through CoIE. (Hey, who wants to talk about "Legion of Superheroes"? Anybody?)

Too bad. I hate to see this kind of slipshod, half-baked attempt at a reboot succeed.

Yeah, I would hate to see the business side of my hobby going well.

So Tim Drake was never Robin? That's another strike against the New 52 as far as I'm concerned.

edit: the pages in question: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/09/16/ ... -titans-1/

Further proof that DC are just making it up as they go along.

Heh, funny that the guy who owns that compilation was clearly trying to preserve the book's spine when he scanned it.

I am okay with DC changing Drake's history. Do we really need a retelling of his origin with minor changes? If nothing else, "Tim Drake as Red Robin" arguably makes Tim Drake a more unique character than "Tim Drake as a former Robin".

However, I do agree that DC is being haphazard. The bat-books have the problems that the "Superman" and "Hawkman" books had in the 80s and 90s. Changes were poorly planned and indecisively executed. DC did not want to make hard choices with the various Robin characters and the history that they require for other characters, not unlike how DC did not want to make hard choices regarding Power Girl and others in the 1980s. DC has changed its mind *after* they should have figured out what they were doing. resulting in post-hoc changes in the last year, not unlike DC needing to fix "Legion of Superheroes" with a fanfic grade "alternate timeline" story right after "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was supposed to rule out that sort of story.

The New 52 is not like that. It is the same DC universe fans have been reading about for years, only it was altered by the events in Flashpoint.

So, it is the same aside from all of those differences and changes?

I am not saying that there is anything wrong with changing things. But, for better or worse, New 52 DC is not pre-"Flash Point" DC. Paul Cornell's run on "Action Comics" is gone. Defining stories like "A Death in the Family" or "Blackest Night" could not have happened as originally presented. If somebody liked the Palmiotti and Grey "Uncle Sam and the Freedom Fighters" book, those characters are gone. (The new Phantom Lady and Doll Man are bastardizations of previous iterations of the characters.)


Yes, "Flash Point" set up for huge changes to DC in context and in terms of what comics they publish.

Are there pre-"Flash Point" elements that I liked? Yes. Visually, I prefer some of the old costumes, (particularly for characters that have that "Image" feel to them now). Is there pre-"Flash Point" history that I would have liked to have seen maintained? Yes. Hell, I would still like to see a comic featuring the Ted Kord Blue Beetle. (Fat chance of that.) And, there were things from before pre-CoIE that (as I discovered them after the fact) I kind of wish DC had kept.

But, complaining about DC moving on from old comics is like complaining that DC does not follow up on "Elseworlds" stories that I happened to like. "Superman: Red Son" is one of my favourite comics. I wish that I could consistently get comics of that quality on a regular basis. But, I am not going to complain that DC needs to put "Red Son" in continuity. (In fact, when DC clumsily attempted to do so during "Countdown", I was sorry to see they tried.)

I am not reading Robinson's "Earth 2" series because I liked the 90s "Justice Society of America" comic. (And, hey, that book likely would not have happened but for "Armageddon 2001", which involved some stuff changing in other books.) I liked that old Justice Society book. But, I am reading "Earth 2" because DC is publishing a more or less self-contained book where the big-events are likely to stick. I have always liked the concept of the Huntress as a character (and the general concept of the original "Infinity Incorporated"). But, I am not reading "Worlds' Finest" because Levitz is not really doing anything with that book.

I am not happy with the fact that the bat-books have so many sloppy edits that they are going to need a round or two of fixes before the next "Crisis Point" story. But, I am ecstatic about getting comics where we do not necessarily know what will happen next.


Dom
-gives DC credit for being decisive if nothing else.

[andersonh1]

Flashpoint/the New 52 really isn't any different from any of those previous crossover events. It might have been more drastic with the amount of characters it rebooted than other events have been, but it didn't completely restart the DC universe from day 1 either.

As time goes by, it becomes more and more apparent that it did in fact do just that. Take a look at some of the zero issues. A lot more has changed than was apparent at first.

DC has never made a change to their universe that's quite this drastic. Even Crisis didn't go so far as to restart everyone from scratch.

Books like Batman, Green Lantern, Aquaman and Swamp Thing goes to show that much, as they picked up right where their storylines left off before Flashpoint. Some of them really don't even appear to have had any retcons or tweaks to their continuity. Not unlike previous event storylines.

Batman and Green Lantern pick up where they left off, but it's only recent history that's relatively unchanged. Go back more than a few years and it's apparent that those characters cannot have had anywhere near the same history they had before. Removing Tim Drake as Robin is a massive change to Batman's past, just to pick one example. And did you read Guy Gardner's new origin in GLC?

DC has done this several times. (And, no, I do not think that anybody cares about going in circles on the differences between a reboot and a reset and a retcon and just being retarded.)

There is a difference. Words mean things.

All of that extra stuff from Superman was *gone*.

That happened a few months after Crisis, and would likely have happened anyway.

If anybody liked Silver Age "Batman" comics, (which is hard to comprehend, but there probably a few), they were shit out of luck.

Silver Age Batman had been gone since the 70s. Crisis was 1986.

"Oh noes, their childhood was raeped!!11!!" If somebody liked "All Star Squadron" or "Infinity Incorporated", they were likely unhappy with CoIE. Not only did their books change, but the stuff they liked in those books was over-written. In story, the characters went back to the dawn of time to rewrite history in order to save some kind of existence. In real life, DC tossed old context.

Characters were placed in the same setting and some details were changed, but by and large most characters came through Crisis the same person they were before. Yes, there were exceptions. Yes, individual characters were changed afterwards, as I've said before. It did not compare to the total reset and massive across the board changes we have seen over the past year.

"Zero Hour" slid the time line around a bit and involved no small amount of back-writing. (Remember "Triumph" and "Damage"?) But, most of the back-writing was forgotten shortly after. "Zero Hour" was also the cleanest of the reboots.

I do remember, and I generally agree... except that it wasn't a reboot. It retconned some continuity and established the scale of the sliding timeframe the books operated under, but the characters were largely the same after the story ended.

Yeah, I would hate to see the business side of my hobby going well.

Considering how much they've butchered DC, it's not my hobby any more, so I don't really care if they fail. Maybe a little fallow time, as we saw between the Golden Age and Silver Age books, would inspire some new creativity.

[Sparky Prime]

So, it is the same aside from all of those differences and changes?

I am not saying that there is anything wrong with changing things. But, for better or worse, New 52 DC is not pre-"Flash Point" DC.

There is a difference between not being the same "pre-Flashpoint DC" and being the same DC universe. Yes events have changed, drastically. But it's not an alternate reality. Not a new universe. It's still the same DC universe. It's been altered as a result of Flashpoint, but we know there are events pre-Flashpoint that still counts here.

As time goes by, it becomes more and more apparent that it did in fact do just that. Take a look at some of the zero issues. A lot more has changed than was apparent at first.

DC has never made a change to their universe that's quite this drastic. Even Crisis didn't go so far as to restart everyone from scratch.

Again, the New 52 is not a restart from scratch. Yes, they have made some drastic changes here, more so than previous reboots, but we have also seen plenty of events pre-Flashpoint have, in fact, carried over as well.

Batman and Green Lantern pick up where they left off, but it's only recent history that's relatively unchanged. Go back more than a few years and it's apparent that those characters cannot have had anywhere near the same history they had before. Removing Tim Drake as Robin is a massive change to Batman's past, just to pick one example. And did you read Guy Gardner's new origin in GLC?

We've seen Kyle was still selected to be the last Green Lantern by Ganthet after Hal had decimated the Corps. That's hardly the most recent of events. And his girlfriend Alex DeWitt apparently was still killed same as before, despite Major Force not existing due to The Atom not being introduced in this timeline... as far as we know. And that is the thing. There is a lot about the timeline of the New 52 that is yet unknown. Sure a lot has changed, but that doesn't mean only recent history counts here.

Characters were placed in the same setting and some details were changed, but by and large most characters came through Crisis the same person they were before. Yes, there were exceptions. Yes, individual characters were changed afterwards, as I've said before. It did not compare to the total reset and massive across the board changes we have seen over the past year.

Just because Flashpoint was much more drastic in how it changed characters than previous events doesn't make those events any less of a reboot.

[andersonh1]

We're not going to agree on this, clearly. I'll just say that I was reading DC for just about every event except Crisis and none of them have made as many revisions and reversions as the New 52 has. Every "crisis" style story that I read made changes that were mainly cosmetic, while the New 52 has cut huge chunks of history and characters out of the picture. It's night and day, and I'm honestly surprised that none of you see that. It really is very different this time around.

Anyway...

Star Trek TNG Hive #1
I didn't think IDW had the license to publish anything to do with Voyager (and I still think they must be limited for reasons I'll get to shortly), but there's Seven of Nine on the cover with Picard and the Borg Queen. This is a post-Nemesis story written in part by Brannon Braga, who gets a lot of flack from Trek fans even though he's got at least as many good scripts as poor ones. The art is decent when it comes to likenesses, which is a must in a comic like this. The Borg want PIcard back as Locutus for some reason, and face an alien threat with the same resistance to assimilation and MO as species 8472 from Voyager, but they look different and have a different name, which is what leads me to think that IDW can't use story elements from Voyager. So how that translates to being able to use 7 of 9 as a character is beyond me. Despite being prominent on the cover she barely appears until the end of the story and then she's back to being a Borg. This story reads like another of Braga's mind-screw plots, which can be quite good when he's on form.

Daredevil 18
If I was familiar with Marvel villains I could probably figure out who's messing with Matt Murdock's head here, but as it is I don't have a clue. I don't know if he's affected by illusions that only he can see, or if something else is going on. And I guess Marvel must ship two issues a month (which I hadn't noticed) because I've been reading a year and started at issue 1, and here we are with 18 issues already.

AvX #3
This issue was sold out when I went back to read the series, but a reprint was on the shelf today so I picked it up to fill in the gap. I love Spider Man's reaction to Wolverine's regeneration, and surprisingly the cover was accurate. The issue does indeed contain a fight between Captain America and Wolverine.

[Sparky Prime]

We're not going to agree on this, clearly. I'll just say that I was reading DC for just about every event except Crisis and none of them have made as many revisions and reversions as the New 52 has. Every "crisis" style story that I read made changes that were mainly cosmetic, while the New 52 has cut huge chunks of history and characters out of the picture. It's night and day, and I'm honestly surprised that none of you see that. It really is very different this time around.

The "Crisis" stories also made some fairly significant changes to the DC universe with the alterations to characters and histories. You don't merge the remains of a multi-verse together and not get some pretty big changes to the one remaining universe as a result. As well as separating some of those universe again. The only difference here is that the New 52 was more drastic with the changes it made, but they are all still the same type of rebooting storylines. Refreshing the characters all over again, making some degree of tweaks or outright changes to their stories.

[Dominic]

Thanks to a hectic schedule (picked up a temporary second job and still have to keep up on studying), I did not get to the comic shop yesterday. And, with 3 wrestling shows this weekend, I hesitate to say that I will be getting there this weekend either.


Magneto -Not a Hero:
I picked this up months ago. Truth be told, it might be old enough to be in the retro comics thread. But, with Marvel's unchanging stasis quo, it is hard to determine relevance and currency. In any case, the high concept here is "man/mutant versus himself", with Magneto confronting a brain-washed Joseph (the ret-conned clone from the 90s stuff) after Joseph makes very public and messy work of some anti-mutant protestors. Aside from the art being inconsistent and unclear in places, this is not a bad comic. The biggest problem with the writing is that this has not only been done before, but it follows on the kind of round-about and convoluted history that comics seem to accumulate when having "the big event that changes everything while everything stays the same in the long term". (Remember, Joseph is a retcon of Magneto, and he had to brought back from the dead and turned heel to make this story work and oi.....) After the main story, there are MU entries for Magneto and Joseph, which manage to both clarigy specific plot points and show how convoluted a mess the "X-Men" books are.
Grade: C

This is a post-Nemesis story written in part by Brannon Braga, who gets a lot of flack from Trek fans even though he's got at least as many good scripts as poor ones.

How good is is good and how bad is his bad?

art is decent when it comes to likenesses, which is a must in a comic like this.

Not sure why character models have to be more sacrosanct when the comic is based on a TV show. I have seen comics that look like they were traced from production stills. The artist is not really drawing anything so much as they are just duplicating another image.

Daredevil 18
If I was familiar with Marvel villains I could probably figure out who's messing with Matt Murdock's head here, but as it is I don't have a clue. I don't know if he's affected by illusions that only he can see, or if something else is going on. And I guess Marvel must ship two issues a month (which I hadn't noticed) because I've been reading a year and started at issue 1, and here we are with 18 issues already.

Mysterio maybe?

DC has never made a change to their universe that's quite this drastic. Even Crisis didn't go so far as to restart everyone from scratch.

You are under-selling the scale of "Crisis on Infinite Earths", likely because you (like the rest of us) are not old enough to have had a visceral attachment to DC's Silver Age. The biggest difference between post-CoIE and the New 52 is that the New 52 involves more visual changes to main characters. But, the changes to context and history were as drastic in CoIE.

The changes during and after the Crisis Trilogy, particularly "Infinite Crisis", were never fully exploited and realized. But, CoIE was indisputably huge.

There is a difference. Words mean things.

The differences are largely questions of degree more than substance.

That happened a few months after Crisis, and would likely have happened anyway.

DC spent the better part of a year after CoIE trying to figure out what they were going to do with "Superman". Mark Waid has referred to this as "a time when Action Comics was ruining live", because a script that was ordered one week would be unusuable a week later.

Silver Age Batman had been gone since the 70s. Crisis was 1986.

Yeah, but CoIE made a point of knocking the Silver Age books out.

I do remember, and I generally agree... except that it wasn't a reboot. It retconned some continuity and established the scale of the sliding timeframe the books operated under, but the characters were largely the same after the story ended.

Batman is still Gotham's Dark Knight. The changes to Superman, aside from this costume redesign, are no more severe than the changes Byrne made to the character in 1986. Wonder Woman got a significant rewrite in '86 as well. But unlike the changes in 1986, the current changes are to what you remember personally.

Again, the New 52 is not a restart from scratch. Yes, they have made some drastic changes here, more so than previous reboots, but we have also seen plenty of events pre-Flashpoint have, in fact, carried over as well.

What Anderson and I are saying is that even the stuff that has carried over has been significantly altered. Your example about Kyle Rayner applies here. Rayner got the ring from Ganthet and Alex got stuffed in to a refridgerator. But, either Major Force is much different, or maybe it was not Major Force at all. "Blackest Night" could not have happened as originally presented.

Any history to the "New 52" is effectively "some stuff happened 5-10 years ago", but it is most likely new or significantly changes.

Post-"Flash Point" DC =/= pre-"Flash Point", which is effectively a whole new setting/history for the characters.

I'm honestly surprised that none of you see that. It really is very different this time around.

I see it. I just do not mind it. (If anything, I am happy to be getting *new* comics and am suprised that so many long-time readers want to same comics over and over.) And, I recognize that "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was a huge change as well.

The New 52 is not like that. It is the same DC universe fans have been reading about for years, only it was altered by the events in Flashpoint.

In terms, that makes post-"Flash Point" DC a new universe.

Yeah, I like joking about "so that is what Barry Allen really thought of Starfire and Jay Garrick" as much as anyone else. But, in real terms, Johns and Lee mandated a clean break from the old stuff. The new comics are not supposed to be tied to the old comics.


Dom
-likely not getting to the comic shop until next week.

[Sparky Prime]

What Anderson and I are saying is that even the stuff that has carried over has been significantly altered.

You don't know that definitively. Sure some events it's obvious must have happened somewhat differently given some of the changes we have seen thus far, but that doesn't necessarily mean all of the things that have been carried over has been significantly altered or even altered at all. DC really hasn't gotten into that much detail to know how things may or may not have changed.

Your example about Kyle Rayner applies here. Rayner got the ring from Ganthet and Alex got stuffed in to a refridgerator. But, either Major Force is much different, or maybe it was not Major Force at all.

Or for all we know Major Force is the same. We've seen nothing to suggest anything one way or another about it. All we know for sure is that she still died the same way.

Any history to the "New 52" is effectively "some stuff happened 5-10 years ago", but it is most likely new or significantly changes.

Again, you don't know that definitively for all of the events that carry over.

Post-"Flash Point" DC =/= pre-"Flash Point", which is effectively a whole new setting/history for the characters.

That is not true for all of the characters from what we have seen so far.

In terms, that makes post-"Flash Point" DC a new universe.

No it does not. Altering the events of the universe just alters the events of the universe, but it is still the same universe.