-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5036727]Most people don't seem to be reading new stories that they like in continuity from the bulk of the posts talking about it...[/QUOTE]
I mean, sometimes the negative voices are very loud (and for good reason) but if you look around I think you'll find people who are also enjoying some of the current stuff.
-
There is a large majority of things that should still be canon from pre Flashpoint. But I would be lying if I didn't say there's a lot I'm happy is gone.
-
[QUOTE=Bored at 3:00AM;5036688]
Just stick with a vague broad strokes continuity that includes the greatest hits that everyone knows and loves and proceed from there. [/QUOTE]
It seems deceptively simple but it really would be that easy. DC could feasibly start 2021 with either one giant-sized issue that details the broad strokes of the universe's history, or a bunch of Issue 0 type stories preceeding each of the titles they plan on launching, and then just get on with it.
My main question would be-should the DC universe be aware that their past has been changed, or should this new amalgamation just state the status quo as it exists in living memory? (For example: does a panel showing the beginning of the JLA show 3 panels with the Silver Age JLA, Year One JLA, and New 52 JLA before settling on one? Or does it just show whatever version editorial want going forward?) I thought the "10 years were stolen from us" explanation was pretty simple but maybe it isn't.
-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5036721]1. Your first paragraph really doesn't need to be dripping in sarcasm and condescension does it?
2. I never meant to imply that those stories didn't still get referenced or didn't still matter to continuity, just that the biggest ramification of death no longer mattered to today's audience - if iconic deaths can't stick in this new era, you can't expect death to impress anyone now. So I never once said that it was all undone and whatever you think I meant, I only meant that because of those decisions it won't leave an impact when death happens in new stories.
3. It doesn't matter that not respecting the characters ruined their deaths, them coming back to life was inevitable in modern comic books.
And a lot of the impact you're talking about now is the new characters that sprung up - that can happen in good stories without relying on the death gimmick.[/QUOTE]
1. I didn't mean to be condescending. I apologize if it came across that way.
2. I think you're conflating two separate arguments here. The loss of meaning around death because of constant resurrection does not equate to all continuity therefore being useless because a) there are still impacts from those deaths (i.e. the emergence of Tim Drake, Hal Jordan becoming Parallax, etc.) and b) there's a lot more to past stories than just iconic deaths. There are a lot of iconic DC stories that center around something other than a specific character's death or, if there is a death, it's not even the most memorable takeaway. So I think that it's just an incredible oversimplification to say that since there's a revolving door of death and rebirth in comics, that continuity might as well be thrown out the window.
3. Again, see above, and the point still stands that without those deaths and/or story events, those characters wouldn't exist. I mean, think about it: Kyle Rayner would not exist without the Death of Superman even though his debut wasn't a direct consequence of that story and he didn't first appear until after Clark returned from the dead. Jason Todd came about not because Dick Grayson died, but simply because Marv Wolfman wanted to write Dick growing up and assuming leadership of the NTT. See, that's the point: each character's history and mythos relies on the other characters and their histories and whatnot. It's an interconnected universe where every cog relies on one another.
-
Pre-Flashpoint continuity was dead in the water by the time it ended. Some of the stuff we got after was definitely better, but seeing as how it was managed by the same crew that screwed up the previous continuity, it's not surprising that the New 52 and Rebirth ran into several of their own problems before fizzling out.
Honestly, strict serialized continuity may not be worth it anymore. It's too unwieldy and only appeals to an increasingly niche audience that isn't going to be sustainable forever. Just tell good stand alone stories (like the Black Labels books, but with a wider age range) that don't require an encyclopedic knowledge to jump into and can't be tainted by the stupid crap going on elsewhere in continuity.
-
What's the highest selling DC titles?
After Watchmen, TDKR, Batman Year One, Killing Joke and COIE
Business-wise you should form the continuity based on those most popular best selling titles, and then fit what can be fitted in between them
-
[QUOTE=Restingvoice;5036848]What's the highest selling DC titles?
After Watchmen, TDKR, Batman Year One, Killing Joke and COIE
Business-wise you should form the continuity based on those most popular best selling titles, and then fit what can be fitted in between them[/QUOTE]
I think half the appeal of Watchmen and TDKR is that they aren't tied to the main continuity. They are self contained and be read on their own. TDKR only requires you to have a broad knowledge of Batman.
More books along those lines for all their characters would be great, but I think trying to coordinate them and tie them together in continuity would defeat the purpose.
-
[QUOTE=Green Goblin of Sector 2814;5036840]1. I didn't mean to be condescending. I apologize if it came across that way.
2. I think you're conflating two separate arguments here. The loss of meaning around death because of constant resurrection does not equate to all continuity therefore being useless because a) there are still impacts from those deaths (i.e. the emergence of Tim Drake, Hal Jordan becoming Parallax, etc.) and b) there's a lot more to past stories than just iconic deaths. There are a lot of iconic DC stories that center around something other than a specific character's death or, if there is a death, it's not even the most memorable takeaway. So I think that it's just an incredible oversimplification to say that since there's a revolving door of death and rebirth in comics, that continuity might as well be thrown out the window.
3. Again, see above, and the point still stands that without those deaths and/or story events, those characters wouldn't exist. I mean, think about it: Kyle Rayner would not exist without the Death of Superman even though his debut wasn't a direct consequence of that story and he didn't first appear until after Clark returned from the dead. Jason Todd came about not because Dick Grayson died, but simply because Marv Wolfman wanted to write Dick growing up and assuming leadership of the NTT. See, that's the point: each character's history and mythos relies on the other characters and their histories and whatnot. It's an interconnected universe where every cog relies on one another.[/QUOTE]
1. No worries, I often come across a bit rough without meaning to myself. I have been trying to work on it though.
2. Fair enough - however largely the discussion that some stories are famous for their continuity enabled ramifications still doesn't quite fit how comics and audiences work today. For that reason I still contend good stories trump strict adherence to continuity.
3. Yes, but you can still create popular characters without resorting to needing continuity. Carrie Kelly and Harley Quinn for example. Plus the fact that these characters can't and in my opinion shouldn't grow old and retire or die means eventually all that mythos gets squeezed into an impossibly short time - I'm sorry but Batman just shouldn't be in his 50s to me.
-
[QUOTE=Dred;5036796]There is a large majority of things that should still be canon from pre Flashpoint. But I would be lying if I didn't say there's a lot I'm happy is gone.[/QUOTE]
(Cough)Identity Crisis(Cough).
[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;5036846]Honestly, strict serialized continuity may not be worth it anymore. It's too unwieldy and only appeals to an increasingly niche audience that isn't going to be sustainable forever. Just tell good stand alone stories (like the Black Labels books, but with a wider age range) that don't require an encyclopedic knowledge to jump into and can't be tainted by the stupid crap going on elsewhere in continuity.[/QUOTE]
Or just tell good stories in general.
-
[QUOTE=sifighter;5036282]Superboy has been erased from existence so how do we know he died fighting Superboy prime,
[/QUOTE]That's pre-Flashpoint Conner, who is explictly back in the current Young Justice series. The problem isn't his death, it's the fact his resurrection was thanks to a now overwritten Legion of Super-Heroes.
[QUOTE=Green Goblin of Sector 2814;5036579]And Superman was never going to be permanently dead. But the impact of the Death of Superman arc is huge, even if it only gave us Doomsday. But, as we know, it gave us a lot more than Doomsday. If not for that arc, we wouldn't have Cyborg Superman, Hal wouldn't have become Parallax setting the stage for like the next twenty or so years of Green Lantern continuity, etc.[/QUOTE]We also wouldn't have John Henry Irons, Natasha Irons, or Conner Kent.
-
[QUOTE=Agent Z;5036482]We pretty much have the same problem now. Arguably to a worse extent.
By Didio's own account, people are reading older DC stuff anyway.[/QUOTE]
Yeah DC is basically at Pre-Flashpoint sales levels again. It’s why I’m expecting another relaunch after Death Metal. Gotta use a massive shake up to reignite interest after the pitfalls of the last year or so.
-
No. Putting aside the New 52 as that's barely an influence anymore outside of a very few specific details, what they've done is gone back to a post-Crisis default. And that's a mistake. If they want to look back for inspiration they need to go further back, to pre-Crisis. Look to what made these properties great in the first place. It didn't just magically happen after 1986. Resting their laurels and defaulting to post-Crisis norms was never going to return them to prominence. Rebirth was never a long-term solution. And indeed sure enough its already fallen back down. Why? Because the post-Crisis default is played and tired. Sure, once upon a time the pre-Crisis norms were played too, hence why they changed things up in the first place so long ago. But I'm just talking a general inspiration to move forward to something that hopefully could be somewhat new in its own right. Not to mention that at least the pre-Crisis stuff has been on ice for nearly three decades anyway. The post-Crisis norms got a 5 year break then was thawed back out even though nothing had changed in regards to the fact it had still gone sour. There should be no surprise that the fanfare of its return in Rebirth didn't last; it was still a spoiled piece of meat they were throwing back on the burner.
-
[QUOTE=SiegePerilous02;5036846]Pre-Flashpoint continuity was dead in the water by the time it ended. Some of the stuff we got after was definitely better, but seeing as how it was managed by the same crew that screwed up the previous continuity, it's not surprising that the New 52 and Rebirth ran into several of their own problems before fizzling out.
Honestly, strict serialized continuity may not be worth it anymore. It's too unwieldy and only appeals to an increasingly niche audience that isn't going to be sustainable forever. Just tell good stand alone stories (like the Black Labels books, but with a wider age range) that don't require an encyclopedic knowledge to jump into and can't be tainted by the stupid crap going on elsewhere in continuity.[/QUOTE]
I would default to the way things were during the Pre-COIE Bronze Age. *Just* enough continuity to keep everything afloat, but not enough where it became a burden.
[COLOR=RED]Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)[/color]
-
[QUOTE=Vakanai;5036727]That's what I was trying to suggest when I responded to you, because how you worded what came before did not sound like this. The earlier post gave the impression that continuity would be the big heavy convoluted focus.
Most people don't seem to be reading new stories that they like in continuity from the bulk of the posts talking about it...[/QUOTE]
Oh I like a lot of stuff in the current continuity; Hawkman, Young Justice, Legion of Superheroes, Death Metal, Justice League Dark, Flash Forward, Green Lantern, Shazam and etc.
I just call out continuity because I would at least like some understanding of a characters history or the events that actually took place to inform a character or even just as simple as did that character actually exist. A story to me is something I read and enjoy at any moment, the continuity is something more of the web that connects stories and on occasion unite them into something bigger such as Legacy.
-
[QUOTE=Bored at 3:00AM;5036688]You can still tell great accessible stories with decades of continuity behind them as long as the cart isn't leading the horse. The story comes first. It also helps that DC regularly freshens up their continuity, which also frees up creators from having to stick with outdated details from decades old stories.
Just stick with a vague broad strokes continuity that includes the greatest hits that everyone knows and loves and proceed from there.
And, from now on, spend less time focusing on the stories that are mostly about fixing continuity. Hopefully, Death Metal will reset DCU history in such a way that nobody has to worry about fixing it again for at least 10 years.
But I know that's highly unlikely ;)[/QUOTE]
Writers abiding by continuity isn't as hard as it's chalked up to be. You just to have good editors to keep the writers from contradicting past stories. All of the information you need is in the palm of your hands on the internet.
A good writer can easily tell a great story in a universe with rigid continuity. Just focus on the present, and don't succumb to cheap, contradictory retcons like a lot of modern writers. It's not that hard.