How important is continuity to Superman comics?

[The Frog Bros]

I totally think out of continuity or not there should be a ban on any more origin stories for Superman for at least a decade if not more. I want more Up in the Skys, more stories set where he’s actually being Superman, and less stories that are all about just starting out or about trying to fix his continuity.

Yes, please.

I’d just rather get Superman & Lois: Ignition over another take on Year One Superman. Gimmie Year Two Superman though where he’s already established but not fully embraced as the greatest hero ever though, and I’d be fine with that (which I’m hoping is something Waid will deliver with his upcoming project).

Preaching to the choir with this honestly. I'm not sure I'm that certain Waid will be able to deliver something as solid as Birthright again, but I live in hope. I also just think there is a serious benefit to a modernized take on his entire early career. Like give me a long form of Superman & Lois' flashback episode. I think this is more true of Superman than most other characters because there are a lot of tropes built into the character that need a modern touch to flesh out. Like Yang did with Smashes the Klan. I think there's benefit to that. And yes its been done. But often times its been done really poorly or has at least aged really poorly.

I'd take a Year Two type follow up to either Birthright (as rumored) or something inspired by Man and Superman over another origin for sure.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I defy anyone to make a sensible timeline of all the events and make it make sense. It's not happening.

Challenge accepted

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...e-(Update-2020!)

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I totally think out of continuity or not there should be a ban on any more origin stories for Superman for at least a decade if not more. I want more Up in the Skys, more stories set where he’s actually being Superman, and less stories that are all about just starting out or about trying to fix his continuity.

I see absolutely no reason to ban creators from exploring one of the most fertile periods in Superman's life. To use my previous example, you would seriously tell Kurt Busiek that he couldn't do Secret Identity simply because Mark Waid had done Birthright a year earlier? I'm sorry, but that's nonsense.

That said, a creator better have a damned good story to tell before DC approves another story diving into Superman's formative years though...

[Stanlos]

That still leaves Birthright through Man of Tomorrow. That's 11 origins in less than 20 years. Byrne's MOS is anchor to show how obsessed and hurting for ideas DC is.



Times Superman has fought and killed Doomsday to my recollection.

1. Infinite Crisis - 2005
2. Superman Doomsday - 2007 movie
3. New Krypton - 2008
4. Reign of Doomsday - 2011
5. Morrison's Superdoom - 2012
6. Superman/Wonder Woman - 2013
7. Doomed - 2014
8. Batman v Superman - 2016
9. Death of Superman - 2018 DCAU

I'm not aware of other instances, but I'm sure they exist. 9 times fighting a one-dimensional plot device (because Doomsday is not a character), over the past 16 years is not a good look. I'm not counting the Paradooms from 2020's Apokolips War. Also, from what I've seen online, Doomsday makes appearances in Scott Snyder's Metal and Death Metal. The point being, just like with the day one origins, we are super-saturated in stories about Doomsday. Enough is enough.




Did anyone ask for 4 variants of WW's origins in one year? Looking at the calendar, we got the DCEU WW movie the following year in 2017. Which had it's own origin. The issue is a lot of these authors only have one story to tell. If it was an ambiguous story set in the middle or early part of a character's career, that be a different story. But no. It's always day one. If this was Spider-Man, how many times would people put up with Uncle Ben being murderered to teach Peter a lesson about "great power and great responsibility"?

The bee in my bonnet is from the author's being demonstrably lazy. Tell a different story. Instead of remixing a pre-existing one. Overlapping and competing with the guy or gal who just told the same story the year prior.

I don't understand why DiDio Azz or Johns decided to toss in this generic Zeus origin that got that origin musical chairs started for WW. None of them hold a candle to the classic and haven't served to improve her design.

[Doctor Know]

I don't understand why DiDio Azz or Johns decided to toss in this generic Zeus origin that got that origin musical chairs started for WW. None of them hold a candle to the classic and haven't served to improve her design.

I surmise it fit the narrative for the adventures with the gods story Azz was doing for his 36 issue run. The daughter of Zeus angle was Cassandra Sandsmark's pre-Flashpoint explanation for her powers. In the New 52, Cassandra became the granddaughter of Zeus. So she still had powers similar to Diana.

Just a recycled idea TPTB at DC grafted on to another character. The same big brains who thought putting SuperMAN in a jeans and t-shift (ya know, Superboy Connor's pre-Flashpoint look) was going to be a jumping on point for the 2015 "DCYou" rebrand of the New 52.

[RobinGA]

The problem with continuity isn't doing another origin story. It becomes what happens
after that fact. What comes next? How do the pieces all fit together. Writers, editors
are always going to move in new directions. It won't ever be a rigid process,
but whatever is new needs to be able to link up with what has gone before.

[Vordan]

I see absolutely no reason to ban creators from exploring one of the most fertile periods in Superman's life. To use my previous example, you would seriously tell Kurt Busiek that he couldn't do Secret Identity simply because Mark Waid had done Birthright a year earlier? I'm sorry, but that's nonsense.

That said, a creator better have a damned good story to tell before DC approves another story diving into Superman's formative years though...

Saying Secret Identity is an origin story feels like a stretch to the max. That’s like saying Red Son is an origin story because it includes that version of Superman’s debut and the ending explains how he came to be. When I say “origin story”, I mean stories that spend a good chunk of time setting up Clark’s transformation into Superman. That’s not the focus of Secret Identity, he gets powers and becomes Superman in the first issue, and the next three cover his entire life. Stuff like that is fine for me.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Saying Secret Identity is an origin story feels like a stretch to the max. That’s like saying Red Son is an origin story because it includes that version of Superman’s debut and the ending explains how he came to be. When I say “origin story”, I mean stories that spend a good chunk of time setting up Clark’s transformation into Superman. That’s not the focus of Secret Identity, he gets powers and becomes Superman in the first issue, and the next three cover his entire life. Stuff like that is fine for me.

Yeah, if the entire premise of your story is simply another "and this is how Clark Kent became Superman!" story, then editors should ask the creators to dig deeper, but I think Clark's early years are simply too good a period to explore to ban simply because Dan Didio had a fetish for origins and reboots.

I think Superman Smashes The Klan is another good example of how to revist the origin without being a straight-up origin story.

[manofsteel1979]

Challenge accepted

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...e-(Update-2020!)

That was brilliant. I love how the Chris Reeve Superman films, Lois and Clark, Smallville, Batman 89 and The Dark Knight Trilogy and the like are all slotted in via interesting ways. This just may become my head canon of how the DCU works.

[manofsteel1979]

Yeah, if the entire premise of your story is simply another "and this is how Clark Kent became Superman!" story, then editors should ask the creators to dig deeper, but I think Clark's early years are simply too good a period to explore to ban simply because Dan Didio had a fetish for origins and reboots.

I think Superman Smashes The Klan is another good example of how to revist the origin without being a straight-up origin story.

I have no issue of going back to that period and doing year one Superman stories. The problem is when DC makes a big deal every time they do one of these, say it is the new canon origin, attempt to skew continuity to fit that version, and then abandoning it two to three years later and saying "no...this is THE origin of Superman now!" and repeating the process again. Just tell the story and don't try to use it as a reboot of the ongoing books UNLESS you plan to stick with it 5 to 10 years minimum.

For example, I love Birthright . It remains my favorite take on the Origin. However it should have remained a stand alone as it was intended and not just willy nilly tossed into the ongoing continuity and break it like DiDio did in 2003. That was when all of this mess began in earnest.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

That was brilliant. I love how the Chris Reeve Superman films, Lois and Clark, Smallville, Batman 89 and The Dark Knight Trilogy and the like are all slotted in via interesting ways. This just may become my head canon of how the DCU works.

Thank yew.

It started as a way of presenting DC history to my students in a way that incorporated as much stuff as possible...and then it kept growing and growing into its present form.

If you have any suggestions, please let me know. I'm forever tweaking and tinkering with it.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

For example, I love Birthright . It remains my favorite take on the Origin. However it should have remained a stand alone as it was intended and not just willy nilly tossed into the ongoing continuity and break it like DiDio did in 2003. That was when all of this mess began in earnest.

Wasn't Birthright always intended to be in-continuity? If it was going to be its own thing, separate from ongoing continuity, Waid wouldn't have kept the Kents alive or had Luthor remain a corporate businessman, as he prefers dead Kents and mad scientist Luthor who's the world's most wanted criminal.

[manofsteel1979]

Wasn't Birthright always intended to be in-continuity? If it was going to be its own thing, separate from ongoing continuity, Waid wouldn't have kept the Kents alive or had Luthor remain a corporate businessman, as he prefers dead Kents and mad scientist Luthor who's the world's most wanted criminal.

As I understand it he initally wrote it as sort of an "ultimate Superman" type book as a possible pilot for an ultimate style DC line , and he was asked to keep the Kents alive and Lex he had a compromise as an evil businessman/astrobiologist who knew Clark as a teen. Both more Inspired by Smallville more than specific post Crisis. Then DiDio decided it was going to be the new origin for some reason.

There used to be an interview online with Waid conducted around that time shortly after that goes into more depth, but I can't find it.

Also if I remember correctly that instead of the fake Kryptonian invasion it was originally going to be a Brainiac/Luthor team up that Superman had to stop. I definitely remember Brainiac was mentioned in an issue of Wizard when they ran a preview of issue one. I wish I still had that issue.

[exile001]

Not to sound overly dramatic, but continuity is dead in DC. It's an outdated concept anyway, at least in the way we historically mean it as fans.

Marvel have had the correct idea for decades, say everything happened but just ignore the stuff that didn't work (even retcon without mentioning it) and move on. Specifics don't matter unless directly referenced.

Nobody picking up an Iron Man book today needs to know he fought a racist sterotype in a wrestling match in his first appearance or that 27 issues ago he was revealed to be a robot clone (or whatever that was). It doesn't matter. What does? Weapons dealer, gets injured, Iron man suit we're now 15 years on. Everything else that matters is told in that story, including (re)introducing threats, explaining their relationships and progressing. You don't need to have read another Iron Man comic to follow it.

The current IM run is just one example of Marvel doing a great job of moving forward and utilising the past where needed.

Batman and Green Lantern (Jordan onwards) largely use this approach and they don't have the Superman problem.

DC have this weird obsession of tidying and shifting its continuity to the point that those shifts become the events themselves. It's almost a parody (and in Death Metal's case, it straight up WAS a parody) and Superman is one of the worst affected (see also: Hawkman).

Why does DC have this problem with Superman? I honestly don't know. I guess trying to stay relevant in changing times, (for better and worse) the cultural impression left by Reeve's movies and the tremendous pressure to please so many fans who each have 'their' Superman, most of which tend to be 20+ years old.

To be honest, the New 52 and the baffling, rudderless mess editorial made of continuity broke my interest in it. That's a good thing. Previously, I'd try and slot every story together in a perfect narrative which is impossible after so many versions, creators and revisions. Now, I don't care.

On the original questions, when did Supergirl and Zod first appear, was Clark Superboy and were he and Lex friends. Why does it matter?

Supergirl exists, Zod exists, Superboy (Clark) isn't being used in any books and Lex is adult Clark's arch enemy. Why do you need to know anything more?

I'm not being dismissive, I used to be a continuity fan, but I find following DC much more enjoyable without sweating the details.

[Vakanai]

I list Byrne's run to help demonstrate how super-saturated the last 15 to 20 years has been with day one origin stories. I can make a similar list of how many times Superman fights and kills Doomsday. It's nearly every year.

The point of my post was to demonstrate that when in doubt, writers will just tell an origin story and then bounce from the character all together. When it comes to continuity, it can be confusing. Non-comic fans would want to start with an origin, but which one do they choose? How many of them actually got day twos?

To go off on a tangent for a moment, but in the same vein. WW had 4 different origins in 2016. Rucka's Rebirth, Morrison's Earth One, Thompson's True Amazon, De Liz's Legend of Wonder Woman. Of the 4, only 2 got follow ups. All 4 of which being released 5 years after Azzerello's run started.

It's absurd and obnoxious. It hurts continuity, because we are always set back to day one with Superman or there is a new spin on his origins. Every two years or whenever a new writer signs on to the book.
There is no not-too-distant future seasoned and experience Superman continuity. Who can point to old adventures, of how he became a legend.

There is a futuristic Superman, but he's an accessory of Batman Beyond's futuristic dystopia. Supes doesn't have his own.

There is no functioning version of the Legion of Superheroes. So, the IP that was created to bolster Superman's cast of characters and adventures is out of reach for him.

Hell, Supes doesn't even mainline events anymore. There are no standalone stories readers can just jump into that aren't day one origins or forgotten continuity revisions (Doomsday Clock). I think the last ones were Doomed and Unchained from the New 52. The continuity that was "erased" and that we are all supposed to hate.


At the end of TPB and Hardcovers, DC always recommends similar stories the readers may like. But their recommendations are all over the place. Things from the Rebirth, New 52, Azzarello's For Tomorrow, Secret Identity, All Star Superman etc. Are the things that never fail to get a mention from DC. All of the aforementioned titles have nothing to do with one another. And that's a problem. There's no long term sustainability. Like I said in another thread about the current history of the DCU (COIE to Infinite Frontier). I defy anyone to make a sensible timeline of all the events and make it make sense. It's not happening.

How is it confusing? They're very clear and up front when they release new origin stories not in continuity that they aren't continuity. If someone thinks Year One, American Alien, Man and Superman are in continuity then that's just weird.