How would you feel if DC decided to move forward with the main universe?

[Castiel]

Something that often bothered me is how many lengths DC and other comics go to keep their heroes in their prime this is painfully evident especially with Batman and his robins. I feel like they shouldn't be afraid of just moving forward with their characters and aging them like in Generations and the like. I mean I love the heroes but the Big Three really feel less like pillars and more like shackles no character is allowed to surpass them or stand as their equal and it makes the story stale. Seriously most stories are just repeats of **** done before like Crisis. I mean that title has been done to death.

Something I'd like to see would be a massive uprising by all the villains and for it to be a coordinated attack with the big heroes getting taken out not by their arch foes but by lesser known villains working together. I think this would be good to see I mean imagine Superman going up against two or three D List villains that haven't been around since the golden age expecting it to be easy and then they work together and are completely revamped and managed to successfully beat Superman mean while all the other major heroes are either getting killed or forced on the run.

I like this idea because it'd be different from what is normally seen and I honestly think it'd be a nice change up and surprise fans that are used to the typical good guys winning. Also like I said it'd be a good way to move the lives of other characters forward have side kicks step up maybe have characters like Starfire and Raven stop being teens and grow up finally so they can evolve. I think it'd be cool if Raven became consumed by evil and became Trigon's top enforcer or became a powerful villain in her own right.

I mean a massive event that forever changes the lives of all the heroes would be epic to see but it'd have to be done right. Also I like the idea of a classic villain being behind something like that and explains to the popular villains by saying they were a joke and taking a dig at them saying something like "Why would I rely on a bunch of losers who have failed more times than anybody else to help take on the heroes?" I mean a dig like that would be true to because Lex and the others have in many ways failed to stop the heroes more than anyone so I can see how someone would not want them or any of the of other big villains to be part of a plan that involves taking down all the heroes.

All in all I think it'd be awesome to see the DC universe have to recover from something like the Justice League being defeated completely and forced underground for a long period of time like having remaining heroes spend years barely able to fight the villains and win which I think would add to whatever victories the remaining heroes get. It would also really stress the importance of a secret identity and the heroes being down and having difficulties just keeping in contact would make team ups more rare and more special I think.

This is what really gave me the idea and I think it'd be interesting something like this happened to the Justice League (all the different teams as well)

[Rod G]

It’d be an improvement over the backpedaling DC did in 2016.

[manwhohaseverything]

I would be ok with superman getting his complacent ass whooped. Have funny face be the one to do it.

[sifighter]

Honestly I’d welcome it, when I read a character I want them to grow and become something more. I want them to earn a history and have connections to the wider universe. I actually do want to see the day where after years of history Bruce retires and Damian does become Batman or Jon become Superman. I think it’s a detrimental problem when characters who have been around a long time have yet to age or grow out of their initial roles or even back track in horrible ways. Characters like Tim Drake who started out young and the grew and became Red Robin on his own...and then reboots and now he’s Robin again. Or worse Roy Harper who had a great showing when he became Red Arrow and joined the Justice League but now that’s all gone.

All I’m saying is if in 20 to 30 years Damian Wayne is still 13 or Tim Drake is still a teenage ward of Batman or etc, then I think we have a problem. I recognize reboots and alternate worlds have allowed for some of these things, but we got to let some kind of new generation grow.

[Noodle]

I just want good stories. I don't care if that comes from moving the timeline forward, or aging certain characters. I just want good stories.

Heck, the stuff I've been enjoying the most from DC lately are alternate universe stories (stuff like Injustice or the YA novels) that allow for new and unique takes on different characters because it allows them to take chances and try something different. As long as it's good, I'll read it.

[Güicho]

Something that often bothered me is how many lengths DC and other comics go to keep their heroes in their prime

I think we have a problem.

LOL every week we get one of these I want to "fix" comics threads, by having Batman & Superman age, retire, die, so the new ones can take over.
Yet these characters have succeeded, put out more content, with a unique sliding time-scale the medium allows, and by KEEPING the main characters in their prime, adapted for modern audience, and have lasted longer doing that, than any other franchise characters.

And in all those threads I ask- Unless you want to name that franchise using "organic time line" and replacing the main character, with the new "graduate" , that has lasted longer and been more successful?

I'm still waiting for that reply, and I'll ask it here too.
Just name one. To back up your model is better for comics than what they are doing.


-----------
Also instead of the endless Crisis and "fixing" events, also done for modern readers.
DC used to have a whole wonderful ongoing universe where sidekicks, legacies and children could "graduate" take over and become center stage.
Without ruining the classic heroes in their prime for the next gen to enjoy them as you found and discovered them too.

So a new reader could get both; read about Batman in his prime adopted to modern audience (the way you discovered him).
And in another book could read about him married, and retired where his protege comes into his own and daughter continues his legacy, etc. .
They had both!





But this new gen is all about the "Crisis" events, and fixing what wasn't broken.
At some point DC decided the incoming fans or editors were to stupid to get the multiple continuity franchises concept? So they came up with Crisis to "fix" what was never broken.
Heck we could be reading about Batman and Catwomans grandchildren as the leads by now in their own ongoing Universe , if you didn't endlessly devour these crisis fixing events.

Now we got one group complaining when will they "fix" comics and have ______Hero retire and let derivative new _______Legacy-kid take over!
And another complaining, how many of these redundant derivative rehash characters are they going to churn out, don't they realize this garbage piles up. And leads to crisis events.

[Restingvoice]

Normally I'll easily answer yes, definitely, but considering DC's usual idea of the future is Batman Beyond where things are depressing (though it does get better) and Futures End (where things are dark)... I don't trust them. They can't even do One Year Later right. They have to make someone evil... someone dies... someone cut off from their family...

So I'll only say yes if they can do it respectfully for every character

All I’m saying is if in 20 to 30 years Damian Wayne is still 13 or Tim Drake is still a teenage ward of Batman or etc, then I think we have a problem. I recognize reboots and alternate worlds have allowed for some of these things, but we got to let some kind of new generation grow.

Hehe... judging by our track record, in 20-30 years we'll have a writer who wants Damian and Jon to be 10 years old so they can have a Super Sons, an editor or chief executive who wants Titans and DickBats to be the main lead, and a large number of readers frustrated that the Justice League generation are being disrespected after leading the story since the 60s, and Damian's generation of readers angry that they're not allowed to grow up because the people in charge want to keep things in the Morrison's Batman and Robin era

Oh and Tim's generation will have the same trouble as Titans now

[sifighter]

LOL every week we get one of these I want to "fix" comics threads, by having Batman & Superman age, retire, die, so the new ones can take over.
Yet these characters have succeeded, put out more content, with a sliding time-scale and by KEEPING the main characters in their prime, and lasted longer doing that, than any other franchise characters.

Unless you want to name that franchise using "organic time line" and replacing the main character, with the new "graduate" that has lasted longer and been more successful.

I'll wait.

JSA/Earth-2 and I’d argue the Flash and Titans.

JSA and earth 2 is where we really got see characters who appeared in the 40/50’s start to age and grow older in the 70’s and 80’s even having kids who would replace them. Powergirl replacing Superman when he retired, Huntress replacing Batman when he died, Fury as the new Wonder Woman of sorts, and so on.

Titans definitely got to age, they were introduced as kids and then now they are adults, who were probably depicted as older pre-flashpoint. Then we get characters like the Flash who died and then have Wally who started out at 21 grow and become the Flash, even to the point that he has kids.

I’m just saying holding back your characters so that Batman can always remain in some nebulous 20 to 30 something is a bit ridiculous at times and that we can have some form of progression. That’s not a knock against Batman, it’s a knock against a lack of progression. Isn’t it better in say a show like Young Justice when we can see characters like Aqualad grow until he actually becomes Aquaman himself.

[Gaius]

Always felt it a bit self-entitled by fans to think they get to be ones who decide when a character's story is over, which is almost always when they're reading it not say 10-20 years from before they got into the characters.

[Ra-El]

I have no interest in reading a Superman comic and having someone else in Clark's place. If DC ever actually replaces the main heroes, it would be the perfect jumping off point I'm needing to definitelly cutting ties with the mainstream superhero books.

But I don't think they will do it, because why throw Bruce Wayne, Clark Kent and Diana Prince away? It's like throwing money away.

[Digifiend]

That's what would've been good about 5G. It wasn't all going to be surprise next generation replacements. There was emblems for all five generations. I saw a graphic on this forum once, probably a year ago. G4's I think was based on Rebirth's design (representing the New 52 and Rebirth eras) and G2's was based on the old checkerboard header from the silver age. G1 was the golden age, of course, and G3 the 80s and 90s. G5 was also on there, representing the new stuff. It seems that the books would've actually told stories from different eras. So despite the plans for Luke Fox Batman, there'd still have been a Bruce Wayne title too (probably Detective Comics).

[Lee Stone]

But... why do comics need to progress?

Just stop making everything fit into one continuity.

Batman '66 and Batman Beyond did really well. And they weren't forced to fit into the main universe.

Matter of fact, DC's two biggest hits ever, Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, had absolutely no link to the main continuity at the time.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I think there's something to be said for having one main Earth that has young heroes in their prime, with modern origins that are regularly being refreshed, while there's another Earth where the prior incarnations of the DCU reside, are still featured in a handful of books and get annual crossovers with the main Earth.

This allows the DCU mainstays to stay young and marketable, while also rewarding longtime readers with genuine character progression.

The problem is that DC has been around so long now that you'd need multiple Earths to house all the previous versions of the DCU, as Doomsday Clock made explicit.

Had the New 52 relaunch simply been on a brand new Earth while the Pre-Flashpoint DCU continued to exist on its own Earth, DC could have avoided at least a decade of endless plate-spinning and creative backtracking.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

But... why do comics need to progress?

Just stop making everything fit into one continuity.

Batman '66 and Batman Beyond did really well. And they weren't forced to fit into the main universe.

Matter of fact, DC's two biggest hits ever, Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen, had absolutely no link to the main continuity at the time.

I agree. While I think there's definitely value in stories set in a shared inter-connected continuity, that doesn't need to be the main focus of the whole comics line, and shouldn't be. Simply tell great stories with these characters that stand alone and don't require any previous understanding of their decades long histories.

[sifighter]

I have no interest in reading a Superman comic and having someone else in Clark's place. If DC ever actually replaces the main heroes, it would be the perfect jumping off point I'm needing to definitelly cutting ties with the mainstream superhero books.

But I don't think they will do it, because why throw Bruce Wayne, Clark Kent and Diana Prince away? It's like throwing money away.

I’m not talking about throwing away characters, I’m just talking natural story progression in a shared and continuing world. If we are going to introduce the children of heroes, such as Damian, Jon, Aquaman’s daughter, Jai and Irey, eventually you would see them age which means that the original characters grow older. That’s not throwing away that’s just progression. Besides it’s not as if the heroes get old and just stop, look at Earth-2 or Batman returns or Kingdom come and tell me you wouldn’t expect that some of these heroes are still kicking at an old age.

I’m not saying throw away Batman, but would it really be so bad that as the decades go on he got older, that characters can follow a natural progression. And maybe it’s not the same level of progression as the real world, I mean come on it’s takes a year or two for some stories to come out, but just a tiny bit of progression.

Like Tim Drake appeared in 1989, it’s now 2020 and he’s still about the same age as when showed up. Would it be so bad if he was say 21 or some other random early 20’s age now?