Originally Posted by
SiegePerilous02
Of the Trinity reboots, IMO the only one that has stood the test of time for the most part is Miller's Batman because it holds up the most on a craft level and implemented the fewest changes (and I don't even like it that much). Perez's Wonder Woman has great stuff mixed in with some so-so stuff and outright bad ideas, and Byrne's Superman is just godawful altogether with the exception of allowing Maggie Sawyer to be created. I know all of these were extremely popular at the time and still have devoted fans and are viewed as classics, but I think the stranglehold they have on the characters (especially Superman) are detrimental in the long run. It's not just because they are old comics from the 80s either. TDKR, Watchmen and the proto Vertigo stuff were coming out around the same time and hold up far better.
Changes and updates can work within the confines of established continuity, and it would have been better to do so in the long run if they had. The Multiverse was not confusing, that was just a scapegoat they used to pull the trigger and get attention/sales boost. The few good things that came out of those revamps could have happened in the Pre-COIE history. Superman was already heading in some of those directions anyway, it would have been cleaner and wouldn't have resulted in the convoluted situations with Supergirl and the Legion. Donna Troy was ruined forever.
I think it's fair to claim the New 52 as a whole was a bad idea. I think it was as well despite liking a few things from it. But I think it's also fair to say COIE was a bad idea. I have some favorite runs and stories from before that event that got altered or outright erased in the name of a sales boost, and it rankles. Like it's kind of annoying to read "Who is Donna Troy?", the greatest Donna issue ever published, and know it's gonna get erased a few issues later for something worse. It interrupts the flow of a story right in the middle of it. That's bad writing.