DC/Marvel: continuity role reversal

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

From an Ain'tItCool.com panel discussion of the Infinite Crisis stuff: There's a history at DC. One that is respected. It's a story that has a beginning and may one day have an end. And since I'm reading a lot of DC, I feel a kinship with all of that, moreso than with the continuity-free way Marvel is functioning these days.

Oh, how times have changed.

― M. V. (M.V.), Sunday, 23 October 2005 17:43 (twenty years ago)

God bless Marvel for throwing continuity out the window! It allows for creativity and differences in tone as opposed to the brainless homogeny of contemporary DC.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Sunday, 23 October 2005 18:25 (twenty years ago)

I kind of fear they're bringing it back in though, all this "tentpole event" talk.

I also dearly hope that the one year later re-start thing at DC will allow a bit more vision and difference back into their line.

― Tom (Groke), Sunday, 23 October 2005 18:58 (twenty years ago)

I don't understand any of this. This is because I don't read enough. Is Marvel really not paying attention to continuity now? There seems to be plenty of it in what I read. What does 'tentpole event' mean? And what is the 'one year later re-start'?

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:00 (twenty years ago)

And what is the 'one year later re-start'?

After Infinite Crisis, all regular DC titles will jump one year, and pick up from there (in DCU time, they won't stop publishing for a year or anything like that of course)

― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:04 (twenty years ago)

Oh, so there'll be the intention of stopping most of the running plots and subplots, so kind of starting afresh. That does seem to offer some good opportunities - most of which will probably be wasted.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:06 (twenty years ago)

And there'll be a weekly series called "52" that will fill in what happened during the gap, yes?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:08 (twenty years ago)

hang on, so hey will have to anchor the fresh start stories to some company-level crossover series? Suddenly that room for new ideas is vanishing.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:12 (twenty years ago)

I would like to hope that the existence of 52 is to soften the blow for the more jittery fans. So if in the first week of One Year Later, Dick Grayson is Batman, they can say "Don't worry, it will all become clear at some point in 52". And then when 52 reaches that point, some of the fans won't like the story, but they'll have gotten used to the new Batman by then. I am probably being wildly optimistic about the level of changes they'll get away with.

But anyway I think the idea is that 52 is in service to the new ideas, not vice versa.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:24 (twenty years ago)

I also dearly hope that the one year later re-start thing at DC will allow a bit more vision and difference back into their line.

Ha, this would seem like more of a likely possibility if Geoff Johns wasn't still going to be writing and/or supervising most of the DCU after Infinite Crisis.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Sunday, 23 October 2005 19:36 (twenty years ago)

In fairness, while he is near the bottom of the list of people who I'd ask to whip me up a universe, he is sharing it with Grant Morrison, who's at the top. Though I guess we've had this before

Actually someone who might be good at the job is Kurt Busiek, if he didn't get to write the stories.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Sunday, 23 October 2005 20:02 (twenty years ago)

I don't understand, if they're trying to relaunch DC as all shiny happy non-dickish heroes, why is the journey that takes us there so incredibly grim?

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Sunday, 23 October 2005 20:52 (twenty years ago)

A last hurrah for dickishness? Or maybe they are trying to get the fans totally sick of dickish superheroes so that the new versions will seem like a breath of fresh air?

My guess: Nothing will change because Geoff Johns is going to be in charge.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Sunday, 23 October 2005 20:55 (twenty years ago)

I fear that the panelist up top may be deluding himself about the nature of this "story" and the respect that the company higher-ups feel for it, if not his kinship to it. Is this a hell that Roy Thomas has wrought?

― Chris F. (servoret), Sunday, 23 October 2005 21:15 (twenty years ago)

Matthew, please unclench on the Johns thing for two seconds and allow for the fact that he's not the only one in charge.

― David R. (popshots75`), Sunday, 23 October 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, but having him planning it all out along with brilliant guys like Grant Morrison, Mark Waid, and Keith Giffen is kinda like making a really nice salad and dressing it with oil paint. It's going to taint the entire endeavor.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Monday, 24 October 2005 01:17 (twenty years ago)

Grant Morrison, Mark Waid, and Keith Giffen - a trio of men who are no stranger to having all of their good ideas thrown out the moment they leave a title!

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Monday, 24 October 2005 01:20 (twenty years ago)

Matthew OTM

― kit brash (kit brash), Monday, 24 October 2005 02:54 (twenty years ago)

i read the first issue of infinite crisis while i was at my friend frank's house in glasgow and couldn't understand a bluddy word of it

so i went back to reading his stack of ultimate spiderman gns and had a high old time

― Ward Fowler (Ward Fowler), Monday, 24 October 2005 10:58 (twenty years ago)

Someone on the Marvel messageboards was actually pointing out that House of M is the final stage in the business of reversing all the changes Grant Morrison made on New X-Men, which started basically the month after he left. No more X-Statix levels of fame if everyone thinks there are no more mutants.

They didn't actually say penultimate.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 24 October 2005 11:21 (twenty years ago)

And, after I rewrote the sentence, neither did I. Bah.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 24 October 2005 11:21 (twenty years ago)

It's going to be amusing to see them go the other way in a few years when they realize that all the fans want a return to Morrison and never really wanted to go back from that starting point.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Monday, 24 October 2005 12:16 (twenty years ago)

it all sort of retcons morrison whilst also retconning the previous retcons, though, which is at least grimly amusing.

hrm zpost

― tom west (thomp), Monday, 24 October 2005 12:21 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, and the tragic thing is that they aren't replacing the old ideas with new ones or going off in any kind of discernable direction. It's like the late 90s all over again.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Monday, 24 October 2005 12:28 (twenty years ago)

one year passes...

General Silver Age continuity query:

The couple Showcases that I've read (Superman 1, Batman 1) have been almost exclusively one-and-done affairs, and when there's any sort of inter-issue continuity, it's mostly limited to reusing a character introduced in issue X or referring, in passing, to events that occurred in issue Y, events which don't necessarily affect what's going on in the current issue. Am I right?

Whereas reading Essential FF vol. 3, I've noticed right away that we've already got multi-issue arcs. Without having read any earlier Marvel books, can I say that Marvel did more multi-issue arcs during the Silver Age?

― Leee, Monday, 19 March 2007 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

Yup. Way more.

― M.V., Monday, 19 March 2007 21:35 (nineteen years ago)

rare exception (and seeds for company-wide crossover event) was the Zatanna's Quest biz.

― Dr. Superman, Tuesday, 20 March 2007 15:23 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.