How Did "Armageddon 2001" "Break" Giffen & DeMatteis' "Justice League"?

[Lorendiac]

See, this is kinda the perception problem. JLI wasn't really a comedy title. It was funny, to be sure, but it was also a magnificiently plotted superhero book. The character interactions were funny, often hilarious, but the overall book came from a serious superhero base. (Yes, I was laughing as I wrote that. The genre does not permit a true serious base. You can have serious themes, but all superhero books are inherently ridiculous. Which is a good thing!)

My complaints about the Giffen/DeMatteis JLI boil down to two major points:

1. It shouldn't say "Justice League" in big letters on the cover if it doesn't feature Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman as members of the regular cast. (All three of them are necessary -- just having Batman as a regular, for instance, doesn't give a team a passing grade where its "authentic Justice League-ness" is concerned.)

2. I think it was too light-hearted in general tone, with some issues being almost pure comedy, for anything called "Justice League" -- regardless of whether or not Supes/Bats/WW were involved! (I recognize that not every single issue had a funny plot building up to a big punchline.)

In other words, I think my major problem with the superhero team depicted in the Giffen/DeMatteis run was that it shouldn't have been called "the Justice League!"

If they had just called it something else -- such as "the revamped Global Guardians," or "the Protectors," or "Heroes International," or something that didn't have all the baggage attached to it that the name "Justice League" had -- then I would have said that everything was fine and dandy! They could have kept right on doing the same plots with the same characters, as long as the scripts were not repeatedly using the phrase "Justice League!"

[Zero Hunter]

My complaints about the Giffen/DeMatteis JLI boil down to two major points:

1. It shouldn't say "Justice League" in big letters on the cover if it doesn't feature Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman as members of the regular cast. (All three of them are necessary -- just having Batman as a regular, for instance, doesn't give a team a passing grade where its "authentic Justice League-ness" is concerned.)

2. I think it was too light-hearted in general tone, with some issues being almost pure comedy, for anything called "Justice League" -- regardless of whether or not Supes/Bats/WW were involved! (I recognize that not every single issue had a funny plot building up to a big punchline.)

In other words, I think my major problem with the superhero team depicted in the Giffen/DeMatteis run was that it shouldn't have been called "the Justice League!"

If they had just called it something else -- such as "the revamped Global Guardians," or "the Protectors," or "Heroes International," or something that didn't have all the baggage attached to it that the name "Justice League" had -- then I would have said that everything was fine and dandy! They could have kept right on doing the same plots with the same characters, as long as the scripts were not repeatedly using the phrase "Justice League!"

I could not disagree with you more. To me the League works better when it is not just the Big 7 all the time. That gets so boring because nothing can really be done with the characters in a team book because their solo series have the final say. With the JLI Giffen was actually able to write characters, and not just do big dumb action issues over and over. It gives any writer so much more freedom to tell good stories when they don't have to worry about what is going on with 3/4 of their cast in other books. I actually prefer it when the trinity is now all on the team at the same time and only get together when it is a big storyline.

[ultradav]

Well, immediately before JLI was the Detroit League, which was the lower tier heroes (J'Onn, Aquaman, Elongated Man, Zatanna) and completely new characters (Steel, Vibe, Gypsy, Vixen), so in that context JLI was a step up in spotlighted characters. I feel like it wasn't until Morrison revamped that people expected JLA to be the top-tier heroes all the time. It started out that way in the 60s, but had meandered away from that. To the point immediately above this, it's true, how many times did the Morrison and post-Morrison era have to incorporate changes from the characters books? Like, CONSTANTLY.

As for JLI, I always thought the basic premise was, "What if superheroes were just like us, and being a superhero was a job like any other?"

I didn't see others mention also the Apokolips arc was pretty awesome. Oberon coming across Darkseid reading Mein Kampf -- golden!

[Lee Stone]

I could not disagree with you more. To me the League works better when it is not just the Big 7 all the time. That gets so boring because nothing can really be done with the characters in a team book because their solo series have the final say. With the JLI Giffen was actually able to write characters, and not just do big dumb action issues over and over. It gives any writer so much more freedom to tell good stories when they don't have to worry about what is going on with 3/4 of their cast in other books. I actually prefer it when the trinity is now all on the team at the same time and only get together when it is a big storyline.

True. There's only so much you can do without characters exclusive to the JL title.
if all the characters had their own titles you could have no character growth, no subplots and the sense of urgency falls flat because everyone knows they can't die or be really injured outside of their solo book.

[FanboyStranger]

My complaints about the Giffen/DeMatteis JLI boil down to two major points:

1. It shouldn't say "Justice League" in big letters on the cover if it doesn't feature Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman as members of the regular cast. (All three of them are necessary -- just having Batman as a regular, for instance, doesn't give a team a passing grade where its "authentic Justice League-ness" is concerned.)

2. I think it was too light-hearted in general tone, with some issues being almost pure comedy, for anything called "Justice League" -- regardless of whether or not Supes/Bats/WW were involved! (I recognize that not every single issue had a funny plot building up to a big punchline.)

In other words, I think my major problem with the superhero team depicted in the Giffen/DeMatteis run was that it shouldn't have been called "the Justice League!"

If they had just called it something else -- such as "the revamped Global Guardians," or "the Protectors," or "Heroes International," or something that didn't have all the baggage attached to it that the name "Justice League" had -- then I would have said that everything was fine and dandy! They could have kept right on doing the same plots with the same characters, as long as the scripts were not repeatedly using the phrase "Justice League!"

I was going to write a post disagreeing with you, but then I had enough self-awareness to realize that this is exactly how I've felt about The Avengers since Disassembled. (Well, not your light-hearted point, but the overall idea that the book is not true to the spirit of its original incarnation.)

[ultradav]

They were also the Justice League because they were the preeminent team on earth at the time. They were officially recognized by the United Nations as the defenders of earth, and had embassies in most major countries.

[Lorendiac]

I could not disagree with you more. To me the League works better when it is not just the Big 7 all the time. That gets so boring because nothing can really be done with the characters in a team book because their solo series have the final say.

It's funny -- you quoted my post before typing out the above, and yet your words seem to be vigorously disagreeing with someone else instead of squarely contradicting the things I actually said!

I never said: "I always want DC to give me the Big Seven as the main co-stars of any Justice League book!"

I never even mentioned "the Big Seven" as a concept. I only said that as far as I'm concerned, if Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are not members of a team, then it isn't really the Justice League. Since I didn't mention Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, or The Martian Manhunter, that meant I was deliberately not insisting that they had to be present in any self-respecting "Justice League" series.

Likewise, I never said: "All of the regular members of the League should be high-profile heroes who are simultaneously headlining solo titles."

And I never said it would bother me in any way to have several of the members of a Justice League team roster be heroes whose only regular monthly appearances are taking place within the pages of that team title, and whose character development (if they get any) will necessarily be taking place within that same title. I didn't say there was anything fundamentally wrong with the storytelling style that Giffen/DeMatteis used in their JLI run, either. (I only said that it shouldn't have had the words "Justice League" on the cover, but other than that, I thought they were doing fine! )

I actually prefer it when the trinity is now all on the team at the same time and only get together when it is a big storyline.

I don't usually bother to nitpick over other people's typographical errors on these forums -- not as long as the intended meaning is still clear. But in this case, I think you made a mistake which pretty much reverses the apparent meaning of that sentence, and thus might confuse some of your readers. I think you meant to say "not all on the team at the same time" instead of "now all on the team at the same time."

[Lorendiac]

They were also the Justice League because they were the preeminent team on earth at the time. They were officially recognized by the United Nations as the defenders of earth, and had embassies in most major countries.

I don't see what one has to do with the other. Why should "we are sponsored by the United Nations" automatically mean a superhero team gets to call itself "the Justice League"?

[Lee Stone]

It's funny -- you quoted my post before typing out the above, and yet your words seem to be vigorously disagreeing with someone else instead of squarely contradicting the things I actually said!

I never said: "I always want DC to give me the Big Seven as the main co-stars of any Justice League book!"

I never even mentioned "the Big Seven" as a concept. I only said that as far as I'm concerned, if Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are not members of a team, then it isn't really the Justice League. Since I didn't mention Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, or The Martian Manhunter, that meant I was deliberately not insisting that they had to be present in any self-respecting "Justice League" series.

Likewise, I never said: "All of the regular members of the League should be high-profile heroes who are simultaneously headlining solo titles."

And I never said it would bother me in any way to have several of the members of a Justice League team roster be heroes whose only regular monthly appearances are taking place within the pages of that team title, and whose character development (if they get any) will necessarily be taking place within that same title. I didn't say there was anything fundamentally wrong with the storytelling style that Giffen/DeMatteis used in their JLI run, either. (I only said that it shouldn't have had the words "Justice League" on the cover, but other than that, I thought they were doing fine! )



I don't usually bother to nitpick over other people's typographical errors on these forums -- not as long as the intended meaning is still clear. But in this case, I think you made a mistake which pretty much reverses the apparent meaning of that sentence, and thus might confuse some of your readers. I think you meant to say "not all on the team at the same time" instead of "now all on the team at the same time."

I can see where you're coming from.
Much like how some people think that a Teen Titans without Dick, Donna and Wally isn't really a Teen Titans.
Or a Defenders without Dr. Strange, Namor and Silver Surfer isn't really a Defenders.

I think the book that struggled the most with balancing iconic members with unique members was Avengers.
Most think Avengers isn't Avengers without all three of Captain America, Iron Man and Thor.
Unfortunately, during the 80s, Marvel kept a six-member limit to the team. Which would only leave three spots for characters that could be developed.

I think the best you can do is treat the characters like Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman (or Captain America, Iron Man and Thor) is to rotate them as leaders with the other two being reserve members.
That would leave room for a nearly full cast of characters unique to the book plus the leader and the two reserves (which wouldn't count towards number of members.
For instance, Batman (leader) and six other heroes plus Superman and Wonder Woman as reserve members.
Essentially, this would give nine members with Superman and Wonder Woman only appearing when needed.

Btw... for what it's worth... to me the real JLA died with Identity Crisis.
I don't think we'll ever get that back.

[Lorendiac]

I can see where you're coming from.
Much like how some people think that a Teen Titans without Dick, Donna and Wally isn't really a Teen Titans.

I happen to be more flexible on that point! (In other words: "Who needs Wally?" )

But seriously -- I'm very, very fond of the classic Wolfman/Perez "New Teen Titans" run from the early 1980s, but that doesn't mean I automatically throw a fit if a current "Titans" or "Teen Titans" book only has a couple of the boys and girls who were prominently featured in that era. (I was willing to give the mid-90s "Dan Jurgens Titans" a fair chance to impress me, in other words. I didn't fall madly in love with the team, but that wasn't because I sneered at the new youngsters as soon as they debuted in "Teen Titans #1.")

Or a Defenders without Dr. Strange, Namor and Silver Surfer isn't really a Defenders.

Didn't Namor and Silver Surfer both drift away from the team fairly quickly after "co-founding" it? Similar to how The Incredible Hulk was a founding member of the Avengers in their first issue and then walked out on them in the second issue? I can't honestly say I have any template in my mind for "who absolutely needs to be on the team roster before I can call a group 'the Defenders' with a straight face."

I think the book that struggled the most with balancing iconic members with unique members was Avengers.
Most think Avengers isn't Avengers without all three of Captain America, Iron Man and Thor.

I am inclined to go along with that idea -- especially the "Captain America" part. (Who cares if he, unlike Hulk, wasn't literally a founding member in the Silver Age continuity? Wolverine wasn't a founding member of the X-Men, either, but he made up for lost time after he finally showed up!)

I think the best you can do is treat the characters like Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman (or Captain America, Iron Man and Thor) is to rotate them as leaders with the other two being reserve members.
That would leave room for a nearly full cast of characters unique to the book plus the leader and the two reserves (which wouldn't count towards number of members.
For instance, Batman (leader) and six other heroes plus Superman and Wonder Woman as reserve members.
Essentially, this would give nine members with Superman and Wonder Woman only appearing when needed.

Your comments cause me to look back and realize there's something I didn't address, the other day, when I was posting my little rant about what I expect to see in anything that dares to call itself "Justice League!"

I believe I have said in the past (maybe before the CBR forums got rebooted last year) that in practice I'm fine with the idea that "every member of the team does not need to get some time onstage in every issue of the team's ongoing series!"

It simply didn't occur to me, earlier, to spell that out. But I'm rather fond of much of Gerry Conway's old JLA run from the late 70s/early 80s. (Not the Detroit stuff, but the dozens of issues he wrote before that about the "Satellite Era" League of the Bronze Age.) By the time of his run, the original JLA must have had what, at least 15 or 16 members on its official roster? But that didn't mean every last one of them was going to appear onstage in any given issue. For instance, as a schoolboy, just starting to collect comics, I bought the annual JLA/JSA crossover in 1982 ("Crisis on Earth-Prime", which included the All-Star Squadron), and the way it was set up, just five of the JLAers were prominently featured in that story arc, while rubbing shoulders with five of the All-Stars from 1942 and with five of the JSAers from 1982.

I've never said: "Gosh, that would have been so much better if Gerry Conway and Roy Thomas had found ways to squeeze in every superhero who's ever been affiliated with any of the three teams!"

I've never seen a checklist showing which members of the JLA were featured in each issue of the original title, but I'm sure there were plenty of other times when, say, five or six of them got to do all of the heavy lifting, with a few other members maybe getting cameos somewhere along the way, and several members simply nowhere in sight that month! (Maybe Green Lantern was at the other end of his space sector that night, cleaning up a mess which had nothing to do with Planet Earth, and maybe Batman was hunting down a vicious serial killer in the dark streets of Gotham, and maybe Atom was delivering an important paper at a big scientific conference somewhere . . .)

In other words, my current feeling is that if something calls itself "The Justice League," it really should have Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman on the official membership roster, and they should be showing up regularly, but not necessarily constantly. I mean, suppose I read a three-issue JLA arc in which six heroes do most of the work to defeat the current villains, and Batman is one of the six, but Superman and Wonder Woman are conspicuously absent. I'm not instantly going to scream: "Blasphemy! This isn't really the Justice League at all!" But if a year or so goes by and Superman and Wonder Woman have never gotten to help out in any of that year's arcs, I'm going to be muttering: "Yep, it's degenerated into a 'Justice-League-in-name-only.'"

(On a similar note, that's approximately how the DCAU's "Justice League Unlimited" series worked. There were several dozen brave men, women, and robots all on the roster, but it often happened that an episode only spotlighted a handful of them working on one special case.)

Btw... for what it's worth... to me the real JLA died with Identity Crisis.
I don't think we'll ever get that back.

I thought Identity Crisis was lousy, but I've never thought of it "placing the tombstone on the real JLA's grave." I just think of it as a bad story that needs to be swept under the rug and forgotten.

(Heck, one of my complaints about "Identity Crisis" was that Kyle and Wally should not have been the least bit surprised at the "revelation" that some of the older-and-supposedly-wiser members of the League had sometimes been known to telepathically brainwash captured supervillains "for the greater good"! Same darn thing had happened at the end of the first story arc of Grant Morrison's run -- when they'd just captured 78 White Martians -- and Kyle and Wally were right there when J'onn explained what he was going to do to render those guys harmless. So what's all this crazy stuff in IC about "Gasp! I never dreamed you guys would ever stoop so low!"?)

[Lee Stone]

As for the JLI, Superman and Wonder Woman (although fighting alongside them in Legends) were left out of the team on launch because John Byrne and George Perez were busy reinventing them.

Superman appeared briefly in #10 and was mentioned in various articles as reserve member. Although, in the actual title, I don't recall it ever being mentioned.
Wonder Woman arrived in #24 as part of the new Europe team. And even though her joining was a big deal and promoted well, by the time the book started she was to be written out because of behind the scenes events.

So I don't think Giffen & Dematteis intended to leave them out. They just never could use them.
And it's safe to bet that no matter what Justice League was formed in 1987, it would not have had Superman and Wonder Woman.

Even if we had gotten a Morrison JLA in '87, it would have had to make do with just Batman.

It was just unfortunate for Giffen & Dematteis.
And they made lemonade.

[ultradav]

I don't see what one has to do with the other. Why should "we are sponsored by the United Nations" automatically mean a superhero team gets to call itself "the Justice League"?

Meaning, they were THE super-hero team on earth at that time, in terms of official status. In that sense, it was true to the Justice League "brand".

[colonyofcells]

Captain Atom was not really a critical part of the success of the main funny JL title which is probably why Captain Atom was sent off to the spin off JLE. The funny JL could easily survive without Captain Atom. The funny JL only needed Batman, Martian, Blue and Gold, Fire and Ice, Guy Gardner as the core. The lost of Batman and Booster was probably more of a problem :
http://www.comics.org/issue/49566/

[Lee Stone]

Captain Atom was not really a critical part of the success of the main funny JL title which is probably why Captain Atom was sent off to the spin off JLE. The funny JL could easily survive without Captain Atom. The funny JL only needed Batman, Martian, Blue and Gold, Fire and Ice, Guy Gardner as the core. The lost of Batman and Booster was probably more of a problem :
http://www.comics.org/issue/49566/

I don't think Batman was really necessary. He was used mostly as a representation of the "hero with no personality" or "the mask is all there is".
He was a good contrast for the others who acted like real people.

For me, the core has been Beetle, Booster, Fire & Ice. With Guy and J'onn being key supporting characters.

[dancj]

I cannot undersatnd how DC never collected this storyline. Breakdowns was great.

Really - I thought it was one of the low points of an otherwise great couple of runs.