Can DC do something like the current History of the Marvel Universe?

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I have not, and I told you I haven't read or have interest in any GL stuff. I'm just arguing on what little outsider knowledge I have and what evidence you've given me - and so far the only thing you've offered me is "Well, this character died in some other story, which lets him be a Black Lantern here, so isn't continuity super important to this story?" Which honestly, isn't an argument I'm feeling.

I literally just gave you two specific examples. You're just choosing to ignore them...

Not really - still seems like a lot of the important info is not "how they died" but simply that they died. But you know what, I'm not interested in the GL mythos or their events so I'm giving you this one just to move on...

Terra died betraying the team. So, obviously that plays into the impact of her return. Jean Loring literally tortured her ex-husband with images of a murder she committed in a previous story.

Establishing continuity is not the same as being reliant on continuity. And how many really great, amazing stories came out of following and relying on the continuity TKJ established? Sure we got BoP, but many would argue that Barbara didn't need to be crippled for that, and many Bab's fans wish she never had been crippled and that TKJ hadn't been in continuity.

It still points to the importance of continuity. And as you pointed out, Babs's entire time as Oracle and the BoP were dependent on that story. It also meant that the mantle of Batgirl was open, which is what allowed Cassandra Cain and Stephanie Brown to be Batgirl. And a lot of fans would actually tell you that Barbara Gordon still playing a pivotal role in the DCU despite her being confined to a wheelchair made her into a positive role model.

Which I said. It's the only bit of continuity that matters. And arguably it only matters to not upset Dick Grayson fans.

Again, that's a HUGE aspect of the story. Like, even the very concept of the story wouldn't work out if it were Dick in the role.

Under the Red Hood relies on that continuity, but the movie established the events of Death in the Family in like 3 minutes and made it so people who haven't a clue about continuity could follow it.

Again, still a recap of continuity. If they hadn't bothered with that recap, nobody would have known what was going on.

Mentioned it gets referenced when talking about Long Halloween. But Year One doesn't have any previous continuity it relies on, obviously. And New52 tried to retcon it, but it came back, and Superman and Wonder Woman's origin stories have both changed a few times since (Superman - Byrne's Man of Steel, Birthright, Secret Origin, Morrison's Action Comics, back to Secret Origin; Wonder Woman - from clay birth to Zeus is her daddy). So the continuity of Year One isn't anywhere near as important as its popularity. Year One is in continuity not because continuity is important, but because popularity is important - otherwise Superman's origin and Wonder Woman's origin wouldn't have changed.
Which is your favorite Superman or Wonder Woman origin?

Again, it establishes the importance of continuity that moments from Year One are still so prominently referenced and important to the Batman mythology. That's what we're talking about.

Again, setting up continuity is not the same as relying on continuity. Now Reign of the Supermen obviously relied on continuity.
And since the 90s, after Reign and Parralax was all over, how much has that story really mattered? How many new stories rely on the fact Superman died once? Not referenced it, not made an offhand comment or joke about it, but where Superman having been dead for a while was a real and important plot point for that story working?

- Superman's role in Blackest Night where he himself is turned into a Black Lantern because he died previously
- Every single time that Superman fights Doomsday or Hank Henshaw Cyborg Superman since they made their debuts in that story
- Every single story that features Conner Kent or Steel since they also made their debuts in that story

Also, the "Parallax stuff" lasted for like over a decade. But you're actually asking why one of the most important and publicized stories in the character's history is important to the character's continuity? Its sort of like asking how Spider-Man's life is impacted by the death of Gwen Stacy.

You know the drill - set up continuity =//= relying on continuity.

Again, still establishes how continuity is important.

Haven't read them all yet, will take me years to, but from how this argument has gone so far I'm going to go on a limb here and guess only half of those maybe actually rely on continuity, and others don't rely on it at all and merely is in continuity and doesn't break it. But don't tell me because I want to avoid spoilers (What? I've been reading DC comics only a handful of years and money is limited, going through all the classics is a process).

Actually, the majority of them rely a lot on continuity. You should read them if you want a firmer grasp on DC.

[Zero Hunter]

No one at the top at DC cares about continuity at all these days so there is no way they could do something like a new History of the DCU. Didio and Lee and most of the editors working under them have adopted the Marvel mindset of the early 2000's of just letting writers do whatever they want with pretty much zero oversight even if it hurts the characters in the long run.

[Sacred Knight]

As far as this regime goes, continuity is really little more than a security blanket for readers, more of an illusion than anything else anymore. What I mean is that a long history exists, but its so incredibly nonsensical, that it can barely be referenced causing confusion in its own right. Its irrevocably broken to the point of uselessness, and they've proven incapable of trying to incorporate any type of fix or streamlining that succeeds in the purpose, rather instead just succeeds in making it even more incoherent. When fans were given the "story over continuity" tagline with DCYou for instance, it didn't go over well. But the reality is story over continuity is exactly the way things work now and the way things worked even before the reboot. Its just not called attention to.

[astro@work]

Personally, I think the approach that writers shouldn't be constrained by continuity in the interest of telling a good story is a cop out.
Why is it an either/or? That's just editorial being lazy IMO. It's a both. Great story AND lines up with what we know about the character. Both.

The story> continuity trope only works if an entirely new group of readers pops in for each arc or run and then is replaced by a completely new slew of readers for the next arc. I don't want to read about a completely new Superman every time I start a new Superman arc. We don't need to dwell on the old continuity, but at the same time I don't want something that contradicts past continuity without at least a perfunctory explanation. Give us the perfunctory explanation and THEN move on.

I want great story that ALSO lines up with past continuity or acknowledges why it doesn't, the way Marvel typically does. That's too hard? Boo hoo hoo.
If you have to completely change a character just to tell your next story, maybe you're telling a story with the wrong character.

All that said, I'm fine with periodic line-wide reboots to clean up continuity or give things a fresh start. While I didn't love some of the nu52, it did unshackle characters from past continuity. NOTHING was back in continuity until was referenced/retold. I just wish DC had stuck to this model without arbitrarily dragging things back in that COULDN'T fit with what was established. That's where things went kablooey. (Example: Establishing Cyborg WASN'T a Teen Titans member but then depicting him in cameos as a TT member).

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I can understand those who want a consistent continuity like Marvel has had, more or less, since it was created by Lee, Kirby & Ditko, but since DC hasn't ever really had a consistent continuity, I don't know how that would work.

Marvel's entire continuity is built largely upon the works of three main guys. DC's continuity is a crazy patchwork quilt stitched together from at least four different publishers created by dozens of different people, each with a wildly different approach. There's simply no way for all that to ever fit together nicely. Since then, the most consistent thing about DC's continuity has been its ever-changing nature.

I think Paul Levitz said it best when he was advising Brian Meltzer on how to approach DC continuity with his JLA run following the post Infinite Crisis reshuffling of history. He told him that the important elements and stories that have stood unchanged as the foundations of the characters for decades should remain sacrosanct, but the smaller stories and details are fair game to be tweaked and changed at will.

This, by the way, was the big mistake that the New 52 made. It removed so much of those foundational stories that the DCU felt hollow and nothing better was created to make up for their absence.

[Patrick Gerard]

I think they started (or tried at least) with Rebirth to cancel the hard reset they tried with n52. Considering all the buildup towards Doomsday Clock, its (at the half I read so far) lack of feeling to belong or add to the continuity as it developed, opposed to the spontaneous METAL; which was a defacto universe changing crisis regardless on how much some downplayed it as silly distraction; I'd say they have a severe lack of foresight/long breath. They (the current leadership "they" at least) get distracted to fast by something shiny. Poor Jonni DC :P

I feel for the folks at DC. It seems like every attempt to fix their history is somewhat contingent on in-the-works projects.

You certainly couldn’t pin down Rebirth’s continuity until Superman Reborn and Doomsday Clock had played out and now they need Bendis’ Legion and Snyder’s JSA too before they can solidify things.

If the current batch of stuff doesn’t work, I really only see one viable route for stability.

Take things back to the last point where things made complete (relative) sense:

1985.

And go in with a plan to swiftly re-establish everything worth keeping since then.

So you negate the Crisis (which I thought Convergence did but then nobody addressed).

And you go through very deliberately re-establishing Kyle, Harley, Jaime Reyes, Steel, Doomsday, Bane, the JLI, etc.

And that’s your big event: a big 52 week megaseries that takes the saga of 1986 through 2020 and condenses it down into a coherent saga that aligns with the first 50 years of publishing history (with the big concession being for a sliding timeline).

So when you pick up, Barry and Iris are living together 1000 years in the future, Wally is sick, Batman is dating Nocturna and has acrobat Jason Todd as his sidekick. The JSA lives on Earth-2. You can’t set a foundation adjusting to preference.

And you make every book over a year retell the last 35 years worth of stories on stable ground.

Get Jurgens on the Superbooks for 2 months to handle Death and Return and marriage. Get Jim Lee to handle art on a Hush retelling over 2 issues. Get Grant Morrison back for an 8 issue weekly JLA. Johns on an 8 issue weekly JSA. Figure out how to handle the Super-Sons.

As I see it, you’d have a 52 part weekly book telling the spine of the story and 6 or so 8 issue weeklies that rotate between properties in the spotlight. And the monthly books running alongside these as tie-ins.

And at the end of 12 months, you have a coherent history.

[Gero4568]

They did in 2010. It's called DC Universe: Legacies. It explains DC history up until Infinite Crisis. If DC was smart, they would release a trade amending the series for whatever retcons have occured, and then release a sequel series, profiling the Post-IC, New 52 and Rebirth eras and the more recent history.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

They did in 2010. It's called DC Universe: Legacies. It explains DC history up until Infinite Crisis. If DC was smart, they would release a trade amending the series for whatever retcons have occured, and then release a sequel series, profiling the Post-IC, New 52 and Rebirth eras and the more recent history.

My hope is that this is kind of thing we'll get following whatever the latest Crisis ends up being, but with a better framing device than Donna Troy watching a PowerPoint presentation like we got in Fifty-Two or the rather underwhelming best friends who take different paths story from Legacies.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I feel for the folks at DC. It seems like every attempt to fix their history is somewhat contingent on in-the-works projects.

You certainly couldn’t pin down Rebirth’s continuity until Superman Reborn and Doomsday Clock had played out and now they need Bendis’ Legion and Snyder’s JSA too before they can solidify things.

If the current batch of stuff doesn’t work, I really only see one viable route for stability.

Take things back to the last point where things made complete (relative) sense:

1985.

And go in with a plan to swiftly re-establish everything worth keeping since then.

So you negate the Crisis (which I thought Convergence did but then nobody addressed).

And you go through very deliberately re-establishing Kyle, Harley, Jaime Reyes, Steel, Doomsday, Bane, the JLI, etc.

And that’s your big event: a big 52 week megaseries that takes the saga of 1986 through 2020 and condenses it down into a coherent saga that aligns with the first 50 years of publishing history (with the big concession being for a sliding timeline).

So when you pick up, Barry and Iris are living together 1000 years in the future, Wally is sick, Batman is dating Nocturna and has acrobat Jason Todd as his sidekick. The JSA lives on Earth-2. You can’t set a foundation adjusting to preference.

And you make every book over a year retell the last 35 years worth of stories on stable ground.

Get Jurgens on the Superbooks for 2 months to handle Death and Return and marriage. Get Jim Lee to handle art on a Hush retelling over 2 issues. Get Grant Morrison back for an 8 issue weekly JLA. Johns on an 8 issue weekly JSA. Figure out how to handle the Super-Sons.

As I see it, you’d have a 52 part weekly book telling the spine of the story and 6 or so 8 issue weeklies that rotate between properties in the spotlight. And the monthly books running alongside these as tie-ins.

And at the end of 12 months, you have a coherent history.

That'd be cool, but it's a pretty tall order, because it's unlikely that a lot of big name guys like Morrison or Johns would be interested in coming back to simply relive their greatest hits, and things don't turn out well when lesser creators try to ape Morrison.

[Vakanai]

Sorry for late response, having internet trouble.

I literally just gave you two specific examples. You're just choosing to ignore them...

No, I didn't ignore them, I hadn't read that part of your response when I typed that. I'm responding as I'm reading.
Glad your giving some legitimate examples. But Darkest Night is still just one story. Most stories still don't seem to rely much on continuity. Heck, most don't even really seem that enriched by it so far.

It still points to the importance of continuity.

No, it points to the importance of popularity. If that story hadn't been popular, it wouldn't have stayed in continuity.

And as you pointed out, Babs's entire time as Oracle and the BoP were dependent on that story.

No, as many Barbara fans would probably state, she probably didn't need to be crippled to be written that well or have a team of her own.

It also meant that the mantle of Batgirl was open, which is what allowed Cassandra Cain and Stephanie Brown to be Batgirl. And a lot of fans would actually tell you that Barbara Gordon still playing a pivotal role in the DCU despite her being confined to a wheelchair made her into a positive role model.

You didn't need to cripple Babs to get Cass as Batgirl - Babs had quit being Batgirl well before she was shot.
And they took Barbara out of the wheelchair and made her walk again.

Again, that's a HUGE aspect of the story. Like, even the very concept of the story wouldn't work out if it were Dick in the role.

Why not? Most casuals who didn't read comics at the time probably assumed it was Dick who had died.

Again, still a recap of continuity. If they hadn't bothered with that recap, nobody would have known what was going on.

A two minute recap. That also left out or changed a lot of things that was in Death of the Family.

Again, it establishes the importance of continuity that moments from Year One are still so prominently referenced and important to the Batman mythology. That's what we're talking about.

If that were true Superman's and Wonder Woman's origins from then would still be as prominently referenced

- Superman's role in Blackest Night where he himself is turned into a Black Lantern because he died previously
- Every single time that Superman fights Doomsday or Hank Henshaw Cyborg Superman since they made their debuts in that story
- Every single story that features Conner Kent or Steel since they also made their debuts in that story

I'll give you the first point, the other two, meh. These characters have been introduced in cartoons and probably other continuities without the Death of story. Using a character that debuted in a story as some sort of super importance of continuity, when that story doesn't define them, is...weak in my opinion. There are stories that introduced iconic characters that aren't even in continuity anymore, or have been retold in different ways and changed.

Also, the "Parallax stuff" lasted for like over a decade. But you're actually asking why on of the most important and publicized stories in the character's history is important to the character's continuity? Its sort of like asking how Spider-Man's life is impacted by the death of Gwen Stacy.

Lasted a decade maybe, but doesn't feel as important to the characters now usually. I could be wrong, I don't read every issue like people here, I just collect a half dozen or so trades and graphic novels and one shots and the like a year after sorting through reviews usually. But so far, it feels like continuity is more for the people devoted to the weekly/monthly every issue crowd because it's their soap opera and they're invested in it, but when the cream rises and the rest settles to the bottom, the really big stories don't rely on continuity to be important, that you can get by just knowing your basic iconic regular knowledge of heroes like Superman or Batman.

Again, still establishes how continuity is important.

No, not really. This is more an example of relying on the fact Bane has been a pretty one note character for decades...

Actually, the majority of them rely a lot on continuity. You should read them if you want a firmer grasp on DC.

I kind of doubt that considering how far we disagree on how much stories we both actually have read relies on continuity, but I definitely plan to read most of them eventually when I get the chance (there's a lot to go through, and I'm limited on how much I can splurge on comics a year). Definitely looking forward to a lot of them, and I definitely love DC.

(Just an fyi, I don't know how long my internet issues will continue, so if you want to respond I'd suggest doing it soon and keeping it super short, or having patience for however many days till I can respond again...)

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

No, I didn't ignore them, I hadn't read that part of your response when I typed that. I'm responding as I'm reading.
Glad your giving some legitimate examples. But Darkest Night is still just one story. Most stories still don't seem to rely much on continuity. Heck, most don't even really seem that enriched by it so far.

Well, again, I gave more than one example. But those are just examples of many, many other stories. If you want to know why they rely on continuity, you should read them.

But even recently, look at the likes of Dark Knights: Metal. That story just wouldn't have even been possible without the events of Final Crisis, a story that was published a decade before Metal came out.

No, it points to the importance of popularity. If that story hadn't been popular, it wouldn't have stayed in continuity.

Doesn't it say something that the response to its popularity of the story was to bring it into continuity?? That shows that fans want the stories they read to matter and to have consequences. Killing Joke had consequences and it set up a status quo that lasted for over two decades.

No, as many Barbara fans would probably state, she probably didn't need to be crippled to be written that well or have a team of her own.

If she hadn't gone through Killing Joke, she'd have been out in the field and wouldn't have enlisted Dinah. It would have changed the whole dynamic of the Birds of Prey as a team.

You didn't need to cripple Babs to get Cass as Batgirl - Babs had quit being Batgirl well before she was shot.

You do know that DC benched her...to prepare her for Killing Joke, right?? Alan Moore had to clear the story with DC editorial, so DC set it up to have her retire just in time for that story. That also casts some serious doubt on the argument that Killing Joke was intended as a non-canon story.

So, no, without Killing Joke, the Batgirl mantle would not have been open.

And they took Barbara out of the wheelchair and made her walk again.

And many, many DC fans will tell you that that was likely a mistake because it trivialized a lot of the character growth Barbara had gone through.

Why not? Most casuals who didn't read comics at the time probably assumed it was Dick who had died.

Except we're not talking about casuals. We're talking about people who actually read the books. To act as if it could have been Dick is ridiculous. It dances around the fact that that whole story wouldn't have turned out the way it did if it wasn't for how fans felt about Jason. Literally. The fans were the ones who voted him dead.

A two minute recap. That also left out or changed a lot of things that was in Death of the Family.

Because the story wasn't A Death in the Family. It was an adaptation of another story that DEPENDED on A Death in the Family. If DC chose to actually adapt A Death in the Family, it would probably be a lot more accurate. But the animated movies don't have the luxury of having years of canon preceding any individual story. The books DO have that luxury, hence why they depend on that canon to tell the stories that they do.

If that were true Superman's and Wonder Woman's origins from then would still be as prominently referenced

That's not related to the point AT ALL. Also, Wonder Woman's origins were referenced in later Post-Crisis stories. The Perez run was very influential.

I'll give you the first point, the other two, meh. These characters have been introduced in cartoons and probably other continuities without the Death of story. Using a character that debuted in a story as some sort of super importance of continuity, when that story doesn't define them, is...weak in my opinion. There are stories that introduced iconic characters that aren't even in continuity anymore, or have been retold in different ways and changed.

Except the Death arc did define these characters. The whole point of these characters was to either kill Superman or to take his place after his death. Superboy's whole deal is that he was a clone created to take Superman's place. John Henry Irons wouldn't have taken up the Steel identity if not for Superman being gone. The Eradicator wouldn't have taken on the classic humanoid form without Superman being dead and it using his body as a template. And, finally, Hank Henshaw as Cyborg Superman would not make sense because literally the whole point of him taking up that identity was to fool people into thinking he was the real Superman returned from the dead. And given how Hank Henshaw and Eradicator have never been successfully adapted into animation or any other medium EXCEPT in the Death of Superman movies, I'd say that story is necessary for those characters to function.

But also, the point needs to be made here that cartoons, TV shows, films, and the books are all completely different mediums. The continuity of the comics matter to the comics and the comic book storylines depend on that continuity to tell future stories set in that universe. That is just a basic rule of fictional storytelling. Did Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix pick up with Cedric Diggory alive and well despite him being killed off at the end of Goblet of Fire? Do you tend to see 616 Gwen Stacey walking around perfectly unfazed in Spider-Man comics? Is Bucky Barnes still Captain America's sidekick? No. To all of those. That is why continuity matters.

Also, as an aside, the very presence of Eradicator in the Death arc depended on years of Superman continuity from before the Death arc.

Lasted a decade maybe, but doesn't feel as important to the characters now usually.

Actually, that's very wrong. Parallax played a HUUUUUGE part in Geoff Johns's Green Lantern run and was critical in stories like Sinestro Corps War, War of the Green Lanterns, etc. Again, you should really read those books.

I could be wrong, I don't read every issue like people here, I just collect a half dozen or so trades and graphic novels and one shots and the like a year after sorting through reviews usually. But so far, it feels like continuity is more for the people devoted to the weekly/monthly every issue crowd because it's their soap opera and they're invested in it, but when the cream rises and the rest settles to the bottom, the really big stories don't rely on continuity to be important, that you can get by just knowing your basic iconic regular knowledge of heroes like Superman or Batman.

You just hit on the central issue here. For people who are just casual fans and who don't really invest in these characters and their universe, continuity might not be all that important and they might just dip in for one story every so often. They just pick up a book and are willing to accept whatever status quo is there. But for people who actually do invest in these stories and the universe, continuity is important because people don't want to have the stories they read mean nothing in the long run. That's just how it is. And, since the whole point of DC and Marvel is to get people to invest in their stories and their universe, continuity is important because continuity is what builds up their lore.

After all, DC has to rely on regular readers to stay in business.

No, not really. This is more an example of relying on the fact Bane has been a pretty one note character for decades...

Still doesn't disprove my point.

[Vakanai]

Well, again, I gave more than one example. But those are just examples of many, many other stories. If you want to know why they rely on continuity, you should read them.

But even recently, look at the likes of Dark Knights: Metal. That story just wouldn't have even been possible without the events of Final Crisis, a story that was published a decade before Metal came out.



Doesn't it say something that the response to its popularity of the story was to bring it into continuity?? That shows that fans want the stories they read to matter and to have consequences. Killing Joke had consequences and it set up a status quo that lasted for over two decades.



If she hadn't gone through Killing Joke, she'd have been out in the field and wouldn't have enlisted Dinah. It would have changed the whole dynamic of the Birds of Prey as a team.



You do know that DC benched her...to prepare her for Killing Joke, right?? Alan Moore had to clear the story with DC editorial, so DC set it up to have her retire just in time for that story. That also casts some serious doubt on the argument that Killing Joke was intended as a non-canon story.

So, no, without Killing Joke, the Batgirl mantle would not have been open.



And many, many DC fans will tell you that that was likely a mistake because it trivialized a lot of the character growth Barbara had gone through.



Except we're not talking about casuals. We're talking about people who actually read the books. To act as if it could have been Dick is ridiculous. It dances around the fact that that whole story wouldn't have turned out the way it did if it wasn't for how fans felt about Jason. Literally. The fans were the ones who voted him dead.



Because the story wasn't A Death in the Family. It was an adaptation of another story that DEPENDED on A Death in the Family. If DC chose to actually adapt A Death in the Family, it would probably be a lot more accurate. But the animated movies don't have the luxury of having years of canon preceding any individual story. The books DO have that luxury, hence why they depend on that canon to tell the stories that they do.



That's not related to the point AT ALL. Also, Wonder Woman's origins were referenced in later Post-Crisis stories. The Perez run was very influential.



Except the Death arc did define these characters. The whole point of these characters was to either kill Superman or to take his place after his death. Superboy's whole deal is that he was a clone created to take Superman's place. John Henry Irons wouldn't have taken up the Steel identity if not for Superman being gone. The Eradicator wouldn't have taken on the classic humanoid form without Superman being dead and it using his body as a template. And, finally, Hank Henshaw as Cyborg Superman would not make sense because literally the whole point of him taking up that identity was to fool people into thinking he was the real Superman returned from the dead. And given how Hank Henshaw and Eradicator have never been successfully adapted into animation or any other medium EXCEPT in the Death of Superman movies, I'd say that story is necessary for those characters to function.

But also, the point needs to be made here that cartoons, TV shows, films, and the books are all completely different mediums. The continuity of the comics matter to the comics and the comic book storylines depend on that continuity to tell future stories set in that universe. That is just a basic rule of fictional storytelling. Did Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix pick up with Cedric Diggory alive and well despite him being killed off at the end of Goblet of Fire? Do you tend to see 616 Gwen Stacey walking around perfectly unfazed in Spider-Man comics? Is Bucky Barnes still Captain America's sidekick? No. To all of those. That is why continuity matters.

Also, as an aside, the very presence of Eradicator in the Death arc depended on years of Superman continuity from before the Death arc.



Actually, that's very wrong. Parallax played a HUUUUUGE part in Geoff Johns's Green Lantern run and was critical in stories like Sinestro Corps War, War of the Green Lanterns, etc. Again, you should really read those books.



You just hit on the central issue here. For people who are just casual fans and who don't really invest in these characters and their universe, continuity might not be all that important and they might just dip in for one story every so often. They just pick up a book and are willing to accept whatever status quo is there. But for people who actually do invest in these stories and the universe, continuity is important because people don't want to have the stories they read mean nothing in the long run. That's just how it is. And, since the whole point of DC and Marvel is to get people to invest in their stories and their universe, continuity is important because continuity is what builds up their lore.

After all, DC has to rely on regular readers to stay in business.



Still doesn't disprove my point.

Yeah, I don't have enough time today to respond to a post of this size again, and I don't know how many days it'll take till I can, so I'm just going to say "I disagree with you" and move on. Neither of us is going to budge here, I think you know that, our arguments are both becoming rather circular, and I don't see either of us winning. So, yeah, agree to disagree and to each their own and so on and so forth I guess.

[Lee Stone]

I think they started (or tried at least) with Rebirth to cancel the hard reset they tried with n52. Considering all the buildup towards Doomsday Clock, its (at the half I read so far) lack of feeling to belong or add to the continuity as it developed, opposed to the spontaneous METAL; which was a defacto universe changing crisis regardless on how much some downplayed it as silly distraction; I'd say they have a severe lack of foresight/long breath. They (the current leadership "they" at least) get distracted to fast by something shiny. Poor Jonni DC :P

Heh, when I saw that image, I thought of Carol Danvers with Ms. Marvel (replace the two Wonder Girls with her early and last costumes), Binary (Darkstar), Warbird (Troia) and Captain Marvel (Donna Troy by the door).
I wonder if a non-Marvel reader would be confused about Carol's history and what order her different identities she's had were in.

I also imagine that if Marvel had rebooted their universe multiple times during Carol's career, like DC did with Donna, people would definitely be confused.

[Buried Alien]

This could take a while; they definitely should order pizza.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Lee Stone]

This could take a while; they definitely should order pizza.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Or a Snickers.