MARVEL UNIVERSE, 1961-2015 - An Obituary

[TresDias]

You miss the point.

I got your point. See where I said "Fhis is being structured like a reboot, even if there aren't currently any changes to history taking place."

You missed mine, though:
"... and it will serve the function of a reboot for the company. If you would like to posit a different, more fitting term that has comparable lexical value (i.e. one that no one feels duty bound to step up and debate about while still successfully communicating without elaboration the intended idea when saying "reboot"), be my guest."

It's not a reboot. It's simply a way to merge the Ultimate and 616 universes. There is no actual reboot element here.

Other than the new, merged universe you referenced literally one sentence ago, you mean? =P

A new setting and new people are typical elements of a reboot.

Just people really trying to stretch the definition paper thin as an excuse to moan.

Who's moaning? This is the most excited I've been about anything Marvel has been doing since the Onslaught event in 1996 when I was 9/10 years old.

There's no splitting hairs. You're just wrong by calling it a reboot, as it doesn't fit the definition.

I would simply call it an event that's what it is, it is being structured like an event, like AvX, Civil War, etc. No need to complicate it by trying to poorly stretch the cry of reboot inappropriately. Calling it a reboot to people just causes confusion , misunderstanding and panic.

You are splitting hairs, yes, and you're actually the one promoting any potential confusion, if indeed either of us is.

The setting is being overhauled. The denizens making up the world are being overhauled. The publishing line is being overhauled. This, by any normative standard of communication, is a reboot.

You think pitching Marvel to a new reader by saying "Right now they're doing a reboot" is more confusing than this?:

"Right now they're having the countless disparate universes and continuities that used to comprise the Marvel Multiverse -- well, the few dozen that didn't get destroyed in this recent storyline where all the universes were literally crashing into one another -- merge into a single All-New, All-Different Marvel Universe with a new Earth that isn't really Earth. It's actually called Battleworld, which I know is kind of a hokey name, but you have to remember that this Battleworld is being named after the original Battleworld that was featured in the original 'Secret Wars' mini-series from 1985, in which this being from beyond the regular universe gave himself the similarly straightforward and unimaginative name 'The Beyonder,' then created Battleworld from pieces of different planets and such as a place for heroes and villains -- not all of them from Earth -- to duke it out. Anyway, he did that again, but this time with all those remaining different universes, many of which have been featured in their own books over the years, such as the Ultimates line of Universe-1610 or the 2099 line of Universe-928 -- though none of those others ever rose to the prominence of the regular Marvel Universe, which is Universe-616. That's the main one you would have had to worry about if you had been following comics up 'til now. So, pretty much everything that happened in those universes over the past 75 years that Marvel has been publishing these comics still counts, it's still part of the characters' pasts even if a lot of it probably won't ever be brought up again -- but don't worry, you don't need to know about that!"

If you say so.

If it was a reboot, then why are there new series starting now and in the next couple of months? Ones that don't come out of secret wars. Like, Ant-Man last month.

Because "reboot" doesn't have as limited a meaning as you keep stressing it does.

[jackolover]

The upshot of the period of Dark Reign, From Civil War to Siege was that the super heroes did return to their previous positions, but that they were now tainted, in that nobody saw them in quite the same positive light as they used to be. What had happened with the suspicion period of the citizens of the MU is that it dropped a pall over the world. The result of this pall is that super heroes have not responded to their re-emergence into the light as might have been expected and were becoming ineffectual as regards to protecting the Marvel Universe anymore. I mean really failing to cover all the threats around the Universe and multiverse, to such a degree that as a result the integrity of the Universe has been breached and things are physically falling apart. Now super heroes are acting against each other and there is no excuse as it was in the time of the crackdowns because it is peacetime. People are becoming the worst part of their characters. People are destroying planets full of populations and justifying doing that. The moral compass of the MU has completely been upset that nobody can see who the super heroes are anymore and nobody is willing to rectify the problem and just letting it run its course. The course it’s running too is utter obliteration.

So, why did it get there? Was it because of Civil War, the trigger moment that sent everything into the Dark Reign? Or was it the reading publics expectation that something change in Marvel to add tension to the stories? I think it is a combination of both. I take the blame here for suggesting to Marvel to make a change or I would stop reading comics. And when the change did come I was invigorated by the new direction the stories were taking, without realizing what it was doing to the MU. It was only after the Dark Reign that the realization began to creep in that this was maybe a big mistake for the readers to dictate to the company that it should change. The longer that the situation was allowed to continue the more and more we realized what a destructive thing it was to have set this train in motion.

Was it a mistake to precipitate the end of time that seems to be coming in May 2015, or was this an inevitability that was always going to be on the horizon no matter whether it happened in 2005 or 2015? I think if nothing was done to change at Marvel in 2005, that this would have precipitated an ending of the MU anyway for lack of interest in what the MU was doing over and over again ad nauseum. That it took 10 years to eventually degrade again to a state that the heroes were unrecognizable rather than boring didn’t really matter. What I hope is that Marvel can return its heroes to a state that they can be viable.

[andersfurby]

I got your point. See where I said "Fhis is being structured like a reboot, even if there aren't currently any changes to history taking place."

You missed mine, though:
"... and it will serve the function of a reboot for the company. If you would like to posit a different, more fitting term that has comparable lexical value (i.e. one that no one feels duty bound to step up and debate about while still successfully communicating without elaboration the intended idea when saying "reboot"), be my guest."

I didn't miss your point. I gave you the fitting term, which is it's an event. It is being structured as an event, not a reboot. A game changing event. Like AvX, like Civil War. Those were not reboots, despite people on here banging on at the time that they would be. This is no different.

Other than the new, merged universe you referenced literally one sentence ago, you mean? =P

A new setting and new people are typical elements of a reboot.

By your definition, Iron Man and Daredevil moving to San Francisco are reboots.... As that's basically what the result of Secret Wars is going to be....

You are splitting hairs, yes, and you're actually the one promoting any potential confusion, if indeed either of us is.

Actually, you're promoting confusion by claiming it's a reboot and histories are going to be changed, etc, when that is not what they said.

Because "reboot" doesn't have as limited a meaning as you keep stressing it does.

All words have limited meaning, but lots of people just misuse them for things. Reboot is being misused more and more lately, people like you are propogating this fact. Take Doctor Who, people are calling the current run as a reboot, but it's not.

[TresDias]

I didn't miss your point. I gave you the fitting term, which is it's an event. It is being structured as an event, not a reboot. A game changing event. Like AvX, like Civil War. Those were not reboots, despite people on here banging on at the time that they would be. This is no different.

Yes, because "event" offers a clear delineation between something like "AvX" and something like this.

By your definition, Iron Man and Daredevil moving to San Francisco are reboots.... As that's basically what the result of Secret Wars is going to be....

I'm starting to feel like you're deliberately finding something in each of my posts to misrepresent.

I didn't say that was my definition of "reboot." You said no elements of a reboot are involved here. I showed you where you were wrong.

And now you not only misrepresent what I said, but come back at me with these examples of "the same thing" that are actually still within the same setting, and, thererore, not at all exemplary of the same thing. San Francisco is still part of the same universe/setting as always. It's also not a line-wide overhaul.

Thanks for the intellectual dishonesty. I don't feel like my time is being wasted at all.

Actually, you're promoting confusion by claiming it's a reboot and histories are going to be changed, etc, when that is not what they said.

Dude. I already said they're not changing any histories right now. Seriously, drop the intellectual dishonesty.

You're insulting me (and yourself) with it, but you aren't zinging anybody.

All words have limited meaning, but lots of people just misuse them for things. Reboot is being misused more and more lately, people like you are propogating this fact. Take Doctor Who, people are calling the current run as a reboot, but it's not.

You forget that words are created to serve people, not the other way around. Being anal about stuff like this is a waste of a few precious minutes of your life.

The meaning of words change all the time. Look at any idiom ever. Or the fact that we're discussing the word "reboot" -- which we're not using in the contexf of computer science, from which it comes. What's important is whether an intended message is successfully communicated and received.

Again, words are tools to serve the needs of people, not the other way around -- words have no needs.

[jackolover]

We were supposed to have expected that stories of our heroes were still going to be written to fit inside the continuity of the Marvel Universe. More nuiances that still had yet to be written about. I was trying to anwer the question, "Have I read all the super hero stories that could be written?". (I fully expected those to be stories written in the MU that I had been reading since the 1960's). If the answer to that question was yes, then someone had to find another way to write the super hero story. It seems to me that Marvel has been asking this question of themselves as well. "How DO we write fresh super hero stories NOW?".

One way was the Watchmen story, because that placed the super hero in a predicament where they were being scrutinized all the time until they were hounded out of circulation. But where do you go after the Watchmen? It seems the best way to write super hero stories is to make a clean start. Marvel can't just dispose of super heroes, thinking their story has come full circle, because in a world like the 616, everybody needs super heroes. But what is that world going to look like that is so different from the 616? Has the 616 changed so much that it requires a clean start as something different than was there in 1961?

Yes, I think 2015 can be thought of as a whole lot more stable and cooperative from an economic POV. Nobody is talking about nuclear war anymore. Nobody is wasting money on pointless overseas wars to stop the spread of Capitalism or Communism anymore. There are the little annoyances of criminals and gangsters associated with Al Quaeda, and ISIS, but they are just petty annoyances as far as the big picture is concerned. If the world gets it's act together properly, they can almost universally become Capitalist societies, in a free market, all swimming with the flow of the river towards the same goal of prosperity and harmony.

Of cause, there are always little ripples along the way. The Hydras, the AIMs, the snakes in sheeps clothing will allways be annoyances along the way. So, how do you write super hero stories in an environment where there isn't anymore glogal threats to security, or any competition as to world dominance anymore? You virtually have to form smaller groups, and less participants, because we aren't talking large threats of any permanent basis in 2015. All those were gone by 1990. We have had a period of readjustment from the time of tension and threat, and we don't know what to do with it. How many years was it between the First World War and the Second? 20 years? We have had 25 years of calm to languish in and there was no French punishing of a Germany in all those years festering a deep resentment of the many years of restitution. Nothing is coming on the horizon as far as a big bad looming just ahead, so as far as the real world is concerned, all its resources have nothing better to do than to concentrate on consolidating infrastructure for welfare alone. No wonder Marvel has had a difficult time justifying why their super heroes are needed in a world like this.

War was always the last resort for kick starting progress, by forcing new Research and Development by directing their energies at a demonised enemy. Secret War seems to be that recognised method that can supply an enemy for the super heroes to justify their existence. Its very similar to the situation in 1961, without all the Cold War paranoia, in that Stan Lee and Jack Kirby did a similar thing to the first super heroes, by justifying their existence.

[TresDias]

If the world gets it's act together properly, they can almost universally become Capitalist societies, in a free market, all swimming with the flow of the river towards the same goal of prosperity and harmony.

Capitalism and harmony are antithetical to one another. Capitalism is built around competition and depriving someone else of something, not sharing.

As for the rest of the world "getting its act together," toward the end of the 1970s, Afghanistan had become a secular, modern nation with world-renowned universities where women could be students and dress in modern third-world attire, as well as vote and serve in politics.

Where it got derailed is that this more secular, liberal establishment was supported by the "enlightened" USSR, prompting the "even more enlightened" United States to fund and supply arms to the religious extremist opposition factions in an effort to destabilize the country and stick it to Russia, as both superpower nations wanted to be the influential presence in the oil-rich region.

In 1979, the USSR went in to openly aid the Afghan government against the extremists, sending some 100,000 troops. The U.S. waged a proxy war in retaliation, jointly providing with Saudi Arabia some $40 billion in money and weapons to the Mujahideen -- i.e. the Islamic extremists who believed themselves to be engaged in jihad. That's what "Mujahideen" means: It's the plural of "Mujahid," one engaged in jihad.

After ten freakin' years of this ****, with some 1.5 million casualties and the decimation of the country's infrastructure along the way, the Soviets gave up and withdrew in 1989. The Mujahideen declared victory and promptly set up the Islamic State of Afghanistan.

However, this piecemeal combination of the various pre-existing factions still wasn't religiously extreme enough for one faction, and with all the work to be done in setting up a new system over the course of the following five years, it was simple enough for this group to organize the weaponry they still had laying around from the 10-year war and make their move to assume power in 1994. Before 1996 was out, they had largely succeeded.

Do you know what that group who took power using weapons provided by the United States and Saudi Arabia -- and taking advantage of a situation they had created -- was called? It was the Taliban.

That's what your 'capitalist harmony" did. It put the freakin' Taliban in power in that country and sent those people back to the Dark Ages.

And don't even get me started on Iran, where, during the 1950s, the U.S. and Britain had installed the brutal (yet ironically secular extremist) tyrant Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as monarch, and then continued to support him throughout the 1960s and 70s because (big surprise) he opppsed Soviet expansion and favored western influence.

The Shah may not have been an Islamic extremist, but he was so staunchly anti-religion and so cruel about it that the religious people of the country simmered in anger for many years until they were ready to revolt. The economic effects of the 1973 oil crisis (guess which world superpower's interference in other countries triggered that) became the tipping point for revolution (and is also credited by historians with triggering a revival in Islamic fundamentalism), as the quality of life gap between the (mostly secular) rich and (mostly religious) poor increased greatly, even as taxes on the poor were raised despite the billions those in control of the oil were raking in.

I could say plenty more about what went down and why, but suffice it to say this pressure cooker of inequality and discrimination erupted in 1979, resulting in the Shah's exile and an Islamic government whose judiciary is a wacky combination of Civil and Sharia Law. Once again, "capitalist harmony" destabilized a region, created conditions that led to the rise of religious extremism and turned millions of people against the West (particularly the United States).

As officially Islamic nations go, Iran isn't the most extreme, but it's still fucking insane.

[jackolover]

Capitalism and harmony are antithetical to one another. Capitalism is built around competition and depriving someone else of something, not sharing.

As for the rest of the world "getting its act together," toward the end of the 1970s, Afghanistan had become a secular, modern nation with world-renowned universities where women could be students and dress in modern third-world attire, as well as vote and serve in politics.

Where it got derailed is that this more secular, liberal establishment was supported by the "enlightened" USSR, prompting the "even more enlightened" United States to fund and supply arms to the religious extremist opposition factions in an effort to destabilize the country and stick it to Russia, as both superpower nations wanted to be the influential presence in the oil-rich region.

In 1979, the USSR went in to openly aid the Afghan government against the extremists, sending some 100,000 troops. The U.S. waged a proxy war in retaliation, jointly providing with Saudi Arabia some $40 billion in money and weapons to the Mujahideen -- i.e. the Islamic extremists who believed themselves to be engaged in jihad. That's what "Mujahideen" means: It's the plural of "Mujahid," one engaged in jihad.

After ten freakin' years of this ****, with some 1.5 million casualties and the decimation of the country's infrastructure along the way, the Soviets gave up and withdrew in 1989. The Mujahideen declared victory and promptly set up the Islamic State of Afghanistan.

However, this piecemeal combination of the various pre-existing factions still wasn't religiously extreme enough for one faction, and with all the work to be done in setting up a new system over the course of the following five years, it was simple enough for this group to organize the weaponry they still had laying around from the 10-year war and make their move to assume power in 1994. Before 1996 was out, they had largely succeeded.

Do you know what that group who took power using weapons provided by the United States and Saudi Arabia -- and taking advantage of a situation they had created -- was called? It was the Taliban.

That's what your 'capitalist harmony" did. It put the freakin' Taliban in power in that country and sent those people back to the Dark Ages.

And don't even get me started on Iran, where, during the 1950s, the U.S. and Britain had installed the brutal (yet ironically secular extremist) tyrant Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi as monarch, and then continued to support him throughout the 1960s and 70s because (big surprise) he opppsed Soviet expansion and favored western influence.

The Shah may not have been an Islamic extremist, but he was so staunchly anti-religion and so cruel about it that the religious people of the country simmered in anger for many years until they were ready to revolt. The economic effects of the 1973 oil crisis (guess which world superpower's interference in other countries triggered that) became the tipping point for revolution (and is also credited by historians with triggering a revival in Islamic fundamentalism), as the quality of life gap between the (mostly secular) rich and (mostly religious) poor increased greatly, even as taxes on the poor were raised despite the billions those in control of the oil were raking in.

I could say plenty more about what went down and why, but suffice it to say this pressure cooker of inequality and discrimination erupted in 1979, resulting in the Shah's exile and an Islamic government whose judiciary is a wacky combination of Civil and Sharia Law. Once again, "capitalist harmony" destabilized a region, created conditions that led to the rise of religious extremism and turned millions of people against the West (particularly the United States).

As officially Islamic nations go, Iran isn't the most extreme, but it's still fucking insane.

Although it wasn't really capitalist harmony that caused all that, was it? It was Cold War insanity.

[jackolover]

The Incursions began after Age Of Ultron, when Hickmans New Avenges showed the Illuminati mind wipe Captain America, but they coud have been going on in the backgound for a long time until they focussed on the 616, because it kept surviving. If Back Panther didn't intefere with Black Swan, would she have overseen the next Incursion while destroying Eath 616? If she would have, then Earth 616 would have been destroyed sometime after Avengers #1 and not have to endure AVX or Infinity. But it has been hinted that the Incursions happened a good while ago, so that seems to be before AoU. Could the Incursions have started around the time of Civil War, and would that represent the appearance of the Great Destroyer here in the 616, or does it still mean the Great Destroyer was from another reality? If it means the Great Destroyer was from elswhere, then the End Of Everything has nothing do with anything involved with the 616, and the idea that the CW was going to lead to the End Of Everything seems a little arbitrary.

In any case, the Avengers degraded from the time they encountered two Incursions, and the Infinty gems exploded. Where the time gem went, and why it reappeared when Steve Rogers confronted Tony Stark in Original Sin, is still a mystery, but it was written by Jonathan Hickman, so who knows if this is significant?

I would say that we saw the last of the Avengers that we know the best, after Fear Itself, and AVX, but after AOU I think the Avengers were gone. Stark, Pym, and McCoy felt the shift when realities broke, in AOU #10, and something from then on made the heroes different. Stark betrayed Rogers, McCoy brought the O5 from 1965, and Pym decided to redevelop AI again, and risk another Ultron. You just have to wonder if these 3 men realized that their reality had only a short time left, and they didn't care what they did anymore.

[HaveAtThee]

Yes, I think 2015 can be thought of as a whole lot more stable and cooperative from an economic POV. Nobody is talking about nuclear war anymore. Nobody is wasting money on pointless overseas wars to stop the spread of Capitalism or Communism anymore. There are the little annoyances of criminals and gangsters associated with Al Quaeda, and ISIS, but they are just petty annoyances as far as the big picture is concerned. If the world gets it's act together properly, they can almost universally become Capitalist societies, in a free market, all swimming with the flow of the river towards the same goal of prosperity and harmony.

I dont know whether to laugh or cry at this sentiment. Its a bit off topic but I had to respond. Talk about viewing the world with blatant blinders on. The world is far from heading toward a harmonious march to pure capitalism. If anything people in the world are yearning for the exact opposite. Someone like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, no matter how philanthropic they can be portrayed, would be viewed with downright contempt if not at least major suspicion by regular people.

[John Ossie]

Its a lil early for these articles lmao

Quoted in agreement.

Might be wise if we just actually wait to see what happens instead of freaking out about something we've imagined and then blaming people for it. Just a thought.

Agreed.

I dont know whether to laugh or cry at this sentiment. Its a bit off topic but I had to respond. Talk about viewing the world with blatant blinders on. The world is far from heading toward a harmonious march to pure capitalism. If anything people in the world are yearning for the exact opposite. Someone like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, no matter how philanthropic they can be portrayed, would be viewed with downright contempt if not at least major suspicion by regular people.

Quoted in agreement.

[Majin_O.A.W.]

While the past stories may still be 'in continuity', there is a sense in which they will still be less relevant, though... if all of this is correct, and the future of the Marvel Universe is this mash up of people and places from different realities and histories, but without those histories being merged and reconciled in any way (even as badly as was done at DC in the aftermath of Crisis), you're right, it won't be a reboot.

What it will be is a confusing mess where the 616 continuity is just one of dozens of histories shared by a segment of the population, and if you want a version of a character who had X happen differently in his or her past, you can probably lay your hands on one, and you'll never know whether villain Y is actually the one that hero Z has a grudge against, or an entirely different guy... so while everything in 50+ years of Marvel may still have happened, so has a whole bunch of stuff that may make the 616 history unimportant. The overuse of the evil twin trope that this setting will make easy alone... yowch.

I agree. My thinking though is that this will lead to an eventual reboot. Is that kind of the consensus here? That Secret Wars isn't necessarily the reboot, but it is the precursor to a reboot occurring.

[jackolover]

I dont know whether to laugh or cry at this sentiment. Its a bit off topic but I had to respond. Talk about viewing the world with blatant blinders on. The world is far from heading toward a harmonious march to pure capitalism. If anything people in the world are yearning for the exact opposite. Someone like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, no matter how philanthropic they can be portrayed, would be viewed with downright contempt if not at least major suspicion by regular people.

What about the Arab springs?

[Mark]

It's gonna be a long road until SW is over and no reboot happens. Until then, just gotta listen to folks bristle and freak out.

Which might be what marvel wants.

[Mace Dolex]

The Marvel Universe has been dead to me since the 2000's, does this mean all those Ultimate Spider-Man and X-Men comics I sold off are now valuable since I hear both universes are being conjoined as one? oh phooey!!

[616MarvelYear is LeapYear]

The Marvel Universe has been dead to me since the 2000's, does this mean all those Ultimate Spider-Man and X-Men comics I sold off are now valuable since I hear both universes are being conjoined as one? oh phooey!!

This is why it is a marvelous move to retire the 616 marvel universe with some shred of dignity. Slott, BMB and KSD can finally spout out marvel comics that are no longer a part of the 616 marvel universe Thank Jack 'King' Kirby!!!!