Do you Believe That They Plan Another Reboot After Doomsday Clock Wraps Up?

[Maxi]

I just wanted to remind you all that DC has never done a full reboot, and that may be their biggest problem because they keep creating an ever bigger mess. COIE was never a full reboot, only Superman and Wonder Woman were fully rebooted, most characters kept at least 90% of their histories intact and the DCU continued from the point it was before Crisis. A lot of Silver/Bronze Age stories were referenced in the Post-Crisis universe. The Green Arrow/Green Lantern team-ups were canon, Barry's entire history also was (otherwise Wally wouldn't have taken the Flash mantle), Dick Grayson was still Nightwing, something that had happened recently on the pages of New Teen Titans, when Batman remembered how he met Ra's, he remembered the original Bronze Age stories, and so on.

Infinite Crisis was as much of a retcon/retooling as the original Crisis was. Flashpoint was the exact opposite of COIE. While COIE kept mostly everything intact but two characters, Flashpoint rebooted almost everything and kept two characters almost intact. But they never threw their entire continuity and started completely from scratch. And now they're bringing back more previous history and seemingly creating yet another timeline that's not quite the Pre-Flashpoint universe.

[North]

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: Similar to how most writers have a farewell story arc in mind for when a book they're writing gets canceled, I'm sure DC has a soft reboot in mind for when Rebirth starts to lose its relevancy & the higher ups pull the plug on it. However, I don't think they plan on throwing in the towel after Doomsday Clock. Rebirth has only been around for a year now. The longest running titles are still only in their mid-twenties for issue number. Everything feels like it's still being established.

[Ascended]

But the pre-Flashpoint continuity got bogged down by a lot of bad story directions over various periods of time. The New52 was a chance to dump a lot of the dead weight and have a cleaned up, streamlined back stories free from many of the past mistakes other writers / editors had made.

Indeed, but rebooting wasn't the only option available to them. A few tweaks and adjustments, maybe a retcon for the most problematic elements, and they could have achieved the kind of clean slate appeal they were after. Throw in a big, highly hyped Event to market things, and you're good to go.

The thing with rebooting is that it doesn't really clear up anything. It throws the baby out with the bath water as often as not, and can't really create a clean slate because there are concepts and characters that fans won't let go of. That's why the New52 had a five year gap, so characters like Tim Drake and Kyle Rayner could exist, and characters like Dick Grayson wouldn't be de-aged back into kid sidekicks. But as we saw with the 52, these characters might still be around but their circumstances are totally different, so the organic development and evolution that made them popular falls flat when set against the backdrop of the rebooted universe.

Not to mention, fans remember. Every story we've read informs our ideas and vision of these characters. DC can say that this story didn't happen, or this story happened differently, but fans remember the real tale and that story helped define how we perceive the character/s involved. Telling us that the same characters are no longer informed by that story doesn't change how we see them, so the entire thing is largely counter-intuitive.

While there are pro's and con's to both approaches, I tend to favor Marvel's method of handling their history. Everything is on a sliding time scale and the stuff that doesn't work isn't erased from a fictional history, it's just never mentioned again. Remember when Punisher was a demon hunting zombie? No one else does either, but Marvel didn't go out of their way to pretend it never happened, they just never referenced it again.

I feel like reboots sort of point a big, giant finger at all the things that're wrong with the universe, rather than highlighting the things that are good.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Hyperbole and revisionist history. They didn't have to outright replace him. It was merely opportunity. A previous idea brought an older version back and they went back to that well to use it again for a future story (and what it ultimately resulted in is more of a lesson on how not to change things up; they wasted a year of storytelling with this method). They would have just applied any changes they wanted to the lone Superman like everything else otherwise. And indeed should have.

It was also capitalizing on opportunity that came from mandated shake ups based on other failures (mainly the DCYou, which was mostly a debacle, and mostly responsible for the New 52 era's downfall as a whole). New 52 Superman in of itself though never outright failed as a concept. It was retired when it was still in a very viable state. They just chose to go back to a more classic set up. Out of desire, not necessity. Is it currently working? Yes. But its specious to take that success to tag what came before as failure.

Its not revisionist. New 52 Superman struggled creatively for a looooooong time. Between Doomed, George Perez's initial run, Lobdell's atrocious run, Truth, H'el on Earth, and every other awful story coming out of the New 52 Superman comics, it was obvious that something wasn't working and that something was the very concept of the N52 itself. The only time N52 Superman was bearable to read was when Pak was writing him, but that wasn't enough to make up for the utter awfulness that was otherwise associated with the character.

[MajorHoy]

Its not revisionist. New 52 Superman struggled creatively for a looooooong time. Between Doomed, George Perez's initial run, . . .

The "problem" with George Pérez's initial run wasn't George Pérez.
The "problem" was that DC was fawning too much over whatever Morrison was deciding to do in Action Comics, so instead of giving Pérez any heads up / guidance as to what they wanted him to present in his stories, they waited until after he turned in the work and then asked him to go back and make changes in what he already did.

(And personally, I liked the initial George Pérez issues because they didn't feel totally divorced from the pre-Flashpoint version I use to read and enjoy decades ago,)

[Kevin Street]

I just wanted to remind you all that DC has never done a full reboot, and that may be their biggest problem because they keep creating an ever bigger mess. COIE was never a full reboot, only Superman and Wonder Woman were fully rebooted, most characters kept at least 90% of their histories intact and the DCU continued from the point it was before Crisis. A lot of Silver/Bronze Age stories were referenced in the Post-Crisis universe. The Green Arrow/Green Lantern team-ups were canon, Barry's entire history also was (otherwise Wally wouldn't have taken the Flash mantle), Dick Grayson was still Nightwing, something that had happened recently on the pages of New Teen Titans, when Batman remembered how he met Ra's, he remembered the original Bronze Age stories, and so on.

Infinite Crisis was as much of a retcon/retooling as the original Crisis was. Flashpoint was the exact opposite of COIE. While COIE kept mostly everything intact but two characters, Flashpoint rebooted almost everything and kept two characters almost intact. But they never threw their entire continuity and started completely from scratch. And now they're bringing back more previous history and seemingly creating yet another timeline that's not quite the Pre-Flashpoint universe.

I think the New 52 was a full reboot, the first in DC comics history. But they've been changing that since Rebirth by bringing older things back. (And for the better, I think.)

Comics fans don't really want reboots. The New 52 was exciting at first (because it really was something new), but when it failed to cohere into a recognizable universe enthusiasm for it waned quickly. There's a balance that needs to be found between the comfort of familiar, truly loved characters and story elements and the impression that exciting things are going on. Hopefully DC will find that balance again going forward. It seems to be working with Rebirth.

[Jcady59]

I don't think they will, at most they will more than likely shift into another long form story that plays out in the background like Rebirth is now. I do however want as someone posted earlier a history of the DC universe one-shot to clear up the continuity. DC could also give each charter with an on going a history of, one-shot like they did at the beginning of Rebirth as well.

[Maxi]

I think the New 52 was a full reboot, the first in DC comics history. But they've been changing that since Rebirth by bringing older things back. (And for the better, I think.)

Comics fans don't really want reboots. The New 52 was exciting at first (because it really was something new), but when it failed to cohere into a recognizable universe enthusiasm for it waned quickly. There's a balance that needs to be found between the comfort of familiar, truly loved characters and story elements and the impression that exciting things are going on. Hopefully DC will find that balance again going forward. It seems to be working with Rebirth.

If it was really a full reboot starting from scratch, they wouldn't have kept all the Robins canon and Green Lantern wouldn't have continued from the point it was before Flashpoint. Same thing happened with Swamp Thing, a title that acknowledged Alec Holland's return to life that had recently happened in Brightest Day. They didn't want to throw away Batman's sidekicks and the work of Johns and that created an even bigger mess of things.

[Lee Stone]

I think the New 52 was a full reboot, the first in DC comics history. But they've been changing that since Rebirth by bringing older things back. (And for the better, I think.)

Comics fans don't really want reboots. The New 52 was exciting at first (because it really was something new), but when it failed to cohere into a recognizable universe enthusiasm for it waned quickly. There's a balance that needs to be found between the comfort of familiar, truly loved characters and story elements and the impression that exciting things are going on. Hopefully DC will find that balance again going forward. It seems to be working with Rebirth.

You would've thought they knew better by now regarding rebooting.

Back in the Silver Age, reader turnover was much more frequent. It was said that five years was the length of time that mattered back then because every few years the audience changed. They didn't have the collectors and lifelong readers they have now. It was a steady stream of kids coming and going.
And then when they brought back the Flash as Barry Allen, Green Lantern as Hal Jordan, Atom as Ray Palmer, the JSA as the JLA... They couldn't imagine that they had any readers that still remembered the originals, which hadn't been in print for over five years. And they were sent letters from people that missed 'their' versions, leading to the Golden Age characters returning and being put on Earth-2.

If the Silver Age readers had such trouble letting go, even with their higher reader turnover rate... what hope would they have of doing something like that today, where most readers tend to be 'lifers'?

[Ascended]

I don't think they will, at most they will more than likely shift into another long form story that plays out in the background like Rebirth is now. I do however want as someone posted earlier a history of the DC universe one-shot to clear up the continuity. DC could also give each charter with an on going a history of, one-shot like they did at the beginning of Rebirth as well.

Remember after Zero Hour when they printed that timeline? It was incredibly basic: "35 years ago, Kal-El lands in Smallville." ""15 years ago, Superman debuts." real bare bones stuff, but it had the major moments, the major deaths and events and changes.

When Rebirth ends I want to see each each title contain one of those kinds of timelines, for the relevant characters within the franchise. Just one page with the broad strokes. At no extra charge. And I want these various timelines for the different books all combined on DC's website so fans can go there and compare without having to flip back and forth (real hard for the digital crowd).

I think the New 52 was a full reboot, the first in DC comics history. But they've been changing that since Rebirth by bringing older things back. (And for the better, I think.)

Comics fans don't really want reboots. The New 52 was exciting at first (because it really was something new), but when it failed to cohere into a recognizable universe enthusiasm for it waned quickly. There's a balance that needs to be found between the comfort of familiar, truly loved characters and story elements and the impression that exciting things are going on. Hopefully DC will find that balance again going forward. It seems to be working with Rebirth.

The answer to this has always been blindingly simple. You let the characters take the next natural step. You know a big part of why Superman has done so well in Rebirth? Its because this new family dynamic feels fresh and new, but it feels natural, it feels like what should happen next. That's all DC has ever had to do. Just let the characters take a baby step along life's journey once every ten years.

You move forward. You dont take steps back.

[Sacred Knight]

Its not revisionist. New 52 Superman struggled creatively for a looooooong time. Between Doomed, George Perez's initial run, Lobdell's atrocious run, Truth, H'el on Earth, and every other awful story coming out of the New 52 Superman comics, it was obvious that something wasn't working and that something was the very concept of the N52 itself. The only time N52 Superman was bearable to read was when Pak was writing him, but that wasn't enough to make up for the utter awfulness that was otherwise associated with the character.

It was very revisionist, as is this post, where you're twisting your personal opinion into the fabric of the truth of the matter. You hated those stories, which is more than fair. But it doesn't mean the character was struggling because you didn't like the stories. In point of fact, the character was going along fine through all the stuff you mentioned, with the exception of Truth.

To date, Rebirth is faring better. But again, this is not either/or. One thing performing better doesn't mean that what its being compared to was necessarily performing poor. You're just revising recent history to make it sound that way.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

It was very revisionist, as is this post, where you're twisting your personal opinion into the fabric of the truth of the matter. You hated those stories, which is more than fair. But it doesn't mean the character was struggling because you didn't like the stories. In point of fact, the character was going along fine through all the stuff you mentioned, with the exception of Truth.

To date, Rebirth is faring better. But again, this is not either/or. One thing performing better doesn't mean that what its being compared to was necessarily performing poor. You're just revising recent history to make it sound that way.

Its not just my personal opinion, though. It was the opinion of a LOT of people, from regular fans to professionals whose job it is to write about this stuff. Almost every major comic book news site pointed out several problems with New 52 Superman and the New 52 in general.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/...-we-didnt-like

There's nothing inherently wrong with presenting superheroes in a darker and more grounded light. Nor should Marvel have a monopoly on flawed heroes. But too often, this treatment went against the grain of DC's heroes. What happened to the noble, larger-than-life figures that used to defend the DCU? Even Superman has often come across as cold, distant, and unlikable in his New 52 appearances. It's only recently that writers like Greg Pak have managed to restore him to a sense of normalcy.

http://www.outrightgeekery.com/2016/...perman-sucked/

Jonathon and Martha Kent are both dead in the New 52 because of a 5th Dimensional Imp that may or may not have been Mr Mxyzptlk. He’s only friends with Lois by association with Jimmy Olsen. He doesn’t even work at the Daily Planet, he’s an independent blogger. As Superman, his best friend is Batman, and he’s boning Wonder Woman. Even if they broke up, how could Lois come behind that? Clark Kent was always his connection to humanity. Since all his previous connections are either dead or removed in the New 52, what purpose does Clark Kent serve? There’s even an issue where Batman has to CONVINCE Superman to keep up the disguise of Clark Kent, since he actually considered just giving it up and being Superman 24/7. Eventually Lois outed his Clark Kent identity to the entire world, which resulted in…little to nothing. Clark Kent is one of the most fascinating aspects of the Superman mythos, yet it was thrown out of the window so we could spend more time on Superman fighting space aliens and giant robots.

https://www.newsarama.com/18869-the-...reboot.html#s6

In this era of “grim and gritty,” you’d think you’d be able to look to the heroes for a little bit of hope, but that seems to have gone the way of the old universe, even two years into this reboot. There are a couple of exceptions (Flash has kept a notably lighter tone despite serious subjects), but the rule seems to be: abandon all hope, ye who read DC Comics.
It’s the little things – the young heroes are all as angry and dark as their adult counterparts, characters like Billy Batson/Shazam are instantly corrupted, and even Superman (more on him later) doesn’t seem to be a shining beacon anymore....Part of what made Superman a hero was his restraint. He could have the world doing his bidding, but instead, he serves humanity. This Superman doesn’t possess that quality, and one wonders why a being so powerful lacking that superhuman moral center doesn’t just snap. There have been a lot of great things about the New 52, but changing Superman’s personality wasn’t one of them.

There is a point when, if enough people have an opinion, it not just a regular opinion, but it becomes a general consensus.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

The "problem" with George Pérez's initial run wasn't George Pérez.
The "problem" was that DC was fawning too much over whatever Morrison was deciding to do in Action Comics, so instead of giving Pérez any heads up / guidance as to what they wanted him to present in his stories, they waited until after he turned in the work and then asked him to go back and make changes in what he already did.

(And personally, I liked the initial George Pérez issues because they didn't feel totally divorced from the pre-Flashpoint version I use to read and enjoy decades ago,)

I never said that Perez's run was bad because Perez was a bad writer. In fact, I know just how good a writer he was. But, yes, his Superman run in the N52 was bad and it was bad for the reasons you stated. Because Perez was subject to editorial interference and mismanagement. It was a prevalent theme during the entire N52 period.

[Sacred Knight]

Its not just my personal opinion, though. It was the opinion of a LOT of people, from regular fans to professionals whose job it is to write about this stuff. Almost every major comic book news site pointed out several problems with New 52 Superman and the New 52 in general.

Of course others shared your opinion. Others shared mine. Its irrelevant to the point though. The point was you said New 52 Superman had to be replaced and was the worst mistake DC ever made, and nothing backs that up. The character was doing pretty good from 2011-2014. I don't care what the news sites say, I care how the books performed, as that's the benchmark if one wants to make a blanket claim of success or failure, and until Truth they performed fine. Hell even in the early stages of Truth things were going okay. It was around the quarter mark, maybe the halfway mark if we're being generous, where the wheels completely fell off. And even then replacement was hardly a necessity. The Rebirth initiative as constructed for most all the characters would have worked just as easily with Superman. Again a different route was only taken because there was already another Superman walking around due to a previous story.

[Gardensnake]

Rebirth itself is a soft reboot. Reboots don't follow each other that closely and it wouldn't make any sense. It's going to likely conclude the ongoing incorporation of pre-Flashpoint story elements. Then again Johns says there is only Doomsday Clock and that there won't be any crossovers, so I don't know.

Marvel would like to disagree with you.

William