Survey: To Reboot or Not to Reboot, That is the Question

[Lorendiac]

First: Here are two questions about what might happen right after Final Crisis; each may be answered with a simple "Yes" or "No" -- although if you want to type out lengthier answers, feel free! :)

Question 1. Do you think DC should do a reboot of most or all of the Post-Crisis continuity of its big-name superheroes? (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the JLA in general, the Titans, etc.?)

Question 2. Do you think DC probably will do a reboot of most or all of the Post-Crisis continuity of its big-name superheroes? (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the JLA in general, the Titans, etc.?)



Now that you've seen the questions, if you actually want to know why this is on my mind, I'll talk about them a little. (Or you can skip the rest of this post and just post your answers, if that's all you feel like doing!)

In the last few months, on various forums, I've seen fellow fans speculating about whether the upcoming Final Crisis will be "Really Final" in the sense that it will be the "Final Appearances" of the current versions of most or all of the mainstream heroes of the DCU -- Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and other big names, as well as their various friends and teammates and sidekicks and so forth, including all other past and present members of the JLA and the Titans . . . you get the idea.

One possible argument in favor of this idea rests upon the following fact: Grant Morrison reportedly said the following (in a panel discussion (http://www.newsarama.com/Comic-Con_07/DC/BigGuns.html) in San Diego a few months ago):

"It's like Lord of the Rings in the DC Universe,” he said.

The meaning of that is not terribly clear, even when you follow that link I offered and look at the context, but I'll offer one possible interpretation.

One key point about "The Lord of the Rings" is that it's a great big epic, with lots of characters, and battles between Good and Evil, and all that fun stuff . . . and then it has a real ending. Saruman dies . . . and doesn't come back. Sauron dies . . . and doesn't come back. Gollum dies . . . and doesn't come back. Gandalf and Frodo and various others "sail off into the West" . . . and don't come back. Things have permanently changed for all and sundry between the first and last pages of the narrative, even for those who are still alive and well when last seen. Tolkien never wrote -- never even considered, as far as I know -- any sequel trilogies in which the main characters, years later, would have to reorganize the Fellowship and sally forth on a quest to defeat Sauron (or his long-lost son, or whatever) all over again!

The way I look at it, the only way an epic set in the modern DCU could ever rival "The Lord of the Rings" in that sense of grand resolution would be if it was, in fact, the final appearance for the key characters in their current continuities, including any heroes (or villains) who got themselves killed dramatically in the course of events.

Otherwise "Final Crisis" will end up looking like just another dose of the same old, same old. Imagine this dialogue!

"Gosh, Batman, we managed to Save the Universe from Dire Peril, but in the process, Superman died again . . . and Lex Luthor died again . . . and Wonder Woman died again . . . and Darkseid died again . . . it sure is tragic and sensational, isn't it?"

"Yes, Robin, it is. For the time being. Now we just have to start up a betting pool on how many months will pass before Superman comes back from the dead, again, and Lex Luthor does the same thing, again, and Wonder Woman is resurrected, again, and Darkseid somehow reconstitutes himself and becomes ruler of Apokolips, again . . . "


P.S. Way back in March 2006, I solicited help from my fellow fans in drawing up a list of the times, beginning in the aftermath of "Crisis on Infinite Earths," when DC has basically Rebooted the continuity of a particular hero or entire team -- without bothering to Reboot their entire universe at any given time. I posted my results at DC's Reboots in the 20 years since COIE (http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=64714) if you want to go examine them. In it, I also offer more details on how I define a "Reboot" and what does or doesn't qualify for that label.

[Trey]

I'm no DC expert. But i'm guessing Final Crisis may end all the jumping-around- universes thing.

Q1 --------- they should not reboot, will alienate long-time fans
Q2---------- they will not do a reboot.

[Babylon23]

Q1. I don't think they need a reboot. Just clarify your history, sort out the messes and move on.

Q2. We won't see a reboot.

[Wind-Breaker]

1. No, I like the stories and general direction of DC created by the aftermath of IC.

2. Somewhat, not a full scale reboot, I think the GL and Batman books are safe from any drastic changes due to recent compelling stories (not to mention great sales). Everyone else could be fair game though...

[bethanycabe69]

Longtime reader since late 70's

Q1. I don't feel a reboot is necessary unless things get really messed up.

Q2. I'm afraid it may happen if DC decides readers may not be taking the "Final"
in Final Crisis at all seriously.

[JamesJesse]

I think a total reboot is necessary, but not without providing closure to the existing Universe.

Perhaps it's best they start a parallel, seperate DCU line to get people into the new take. While slowly ending all the old DCU series. Not unlike Ultimate Marvel.

BUT this should be done over the course of a few years. With careful planning.

[Batman was taken]

I don't know... I don't see it happening. I mean, you not only have to look at the comics, where it may or may not be justified, but what about all the other media obligations these characters have? They've got a ton of movies, DVD's, TV shows etc, that they have to consider when making (drastic) changes like that...

I don't think they will do a hard reboot. They may take this opportunity to clarify the status quo though.

[ShaggyB]

Nah they wont totally reboot it. They just need to tell you what has happened in each characters life. Ie after Final Crisis in each title you spend one issue just recapping life for the characters within

[Shellhead]

1. Yes, they should re-boot. Except that I think that they should leave the current setting in existence, but pick another Earth as the primary focus for most of their comics. Allow an occasional crossover with the old setting.

2. No, they probably won't do it. It is a risky move, and DC is part of a publicly-traded corporation, so they probably won't take the chance of a huge dip in sales.

[matt_hatyber]

1. NO.

2. well probally to the comics that are having bad sales. They will just sya though that there is a earth with that hero just starting off. So they just make the comic like superman earth 42

[TotalWorldDomination]

1. Yes. Dispite my like of the direction of some comics over the past few years (Action Comics, Checkmate, Green Lantern, ect), DC has put the word FINAL before the word CRISIS. IF they don't reboot, or at least allow the setting to be forever changed in a crisis sized way, it's a cop-out of colossal proportions.

2. No Clue.

[EZMOHR]

Been reading DC for only about 5 years now....and love it.

1. Yes- Fans will come no matter what. It woud be bold and inventive to do a reboot.

2. No- They will puss out in the end and listen to a very vocal group of fans who will piss and moan about a reboot.

[NotSuper]

1. Yes, they should re-boot. Except that I think that they should leave the current setting in existence, but pick another Earth as the primary focus for most of their comics. Allow an occasional crossover with the old setting.
Bingo. That's the way they should do it. New Earth can be used the same way the old Earth-2 was: with characters there aging, dying, retiring, having kids, ect. Meanwhile, the new Earth-1 would feature all new versions of the DC heroes and villains. It's the best of both worlds (pun intended).

[Bored at 3:00AM]

The just gave the whole DCU a soft reboot and reintroduced the multiverse. Starting over again from scratch doesn't strike me as a wise move at this point.

My guess is that the thus far unintroduced Earth-1 from this new multiverse will be where DC starts things fresh with a Ultimates-type line of books while the rest of the books continue on the old continuity with its countless reboots, revisions and patches.

[BoosterBronze]

I hope DC doesn't reboot. It would probbly make me cancel most of my titles.

But, if they did one or two books in a rebooted (ultimate style I guess) universe, I would probbaly read those.

[NotSuper]

Speaking of New Earth, it's kind of interesting that all the top heroes have kids now: Chris Kent, Damian Wayne, and Jai and Iris West.

[Lorendiac]

Q1. I don't think they need a reboot. Just clarify your history, sort out the messes and move on.

One possible counterargument is that for the last few decades, DC allegedly has been trying to "just clarify their history, sort out the messes, and move on" . . . and look how that's turned out! :eek:

[Lorendiac]

I think a total reboot is necessary, but not without providing closure to the existing Universe.

Perhaps it's best they start a parallel, seperate DCU line to get people into the new take. While slowly ending all the old DCU series. Not unlike Ultimate Marvel.

BUT this should be done over the course of a few years. With careful planning.

Several people, on various forums, have made this same point about how DC could imitate Marvel by creating its equivalent of an "Ultimate" universe . . . with "rebooted" superhero character concepts . . . without completely throwing away the cluttered-up continuity of the modern versions of Superman, Batman, etc. Makes me wish I had included that as a separate question in this survey . . . looking back on it, I was basically just reacting to the way I had seen a few people here, and a few people there, on various forums, talking about the possibility of a "Total Reboot" after "Final Crisis" -- and I didn't really stop to think that DC could, in fact, follow Marvel's example by having their cake and eating it too, with "Modern Superman" and "Rebooted Superman" being featured simultaneously in different monthly titles, the same way "Modern Spider-Man" and "Ultimate Spider-Man" are!

[tony ingram]

Personally, i want them to revert too pre-Crisis continuity and bring back Earth 1 and Earth 2, ditching the more recent baggage. But they won't.

[Lorendiac]

Personally, i want them to revert too pre-Crisis continuity and bring back Earth 1 and Earth 2, ditching the more recent baggage. But they won't.

Believe me, I could live with that. But like you, I take it for granted that it ain't happening any time soon.

[Xevious]

I think they shouldn't reboot. they should just disconnect everything. Batman should be in his batman books, superman in his superman books, so forth. Even in that batman/detective, superman/action, green lanter/glc, etc. shouldn't crossover much if ever. That's how I think it should be. Each book should feel like it's own universe. If a character from another book is going to appear make sure that you don't have to know that other charater's entire story or pick up their book for the story in this book to work. That would kick so much butt.

[tony ingram]

I think they shouldn't reboot. they should just disconnect everything. Batman should be in his batman books, superman in his superman books, so forth. Even in that batman/detective, superman/action, green lanter/glc, etc. shouldn't crossover much if ever. That's how I think it should be. Each book should feel like it's own universe. If a character from another book is going to appear make sure that you don't have to know that other charater's entire story or pick up their book for the story in this book to work. That would kick so much butt.

Blasphemy! Burn the heretic! Without company wide continuity (or the illusion of it) what would we have to endlessly debate and complain about?:)

[earl]

I think the reset that the original Crisis on Infinite Earths did DC quite a bit of good and a bunch of good comics came out of the restart. Some of the restarts were really nailed like what Frank Miller did with Batman in Year One, Byrne's Superman (although much I guess was changed down the line), Perez on Wonder Woman and Mike Grell on Green Arrow.

From what I can tell, I'm not sure that is really what they need to do now. Considering DC had success setting up the Vertigo label, it seems like the Ultimate Universe that Marvel did would have been more of a DC idea. I think with the success of some of the side line Elseworld titles and the better stuff that was done with the Ultimate Universe stuff that Marvel did, there is room to maybe retell some of the DC Universe stories from scratch. The thing is that I think some of the 80s restarts like Miller's Batman:Year One would be pretty much impossible to do better.

My problem with both the DC and Marvel Universe is that there is just too much of everything at this point to try and tie it into some grand cohesive continuity.

"Each book should feel like it's own universe."

This is something I really hate about many current Marvel comics, as they seem to have their story lines so intertwined it is a complete mess. I liked it better the way they did it in the past where you could follow a certain solo title and for the most part ignore their team books, if you so wished.

[Sijo]

1. Should they reboot? Only minor things, clear up lingering doubts about whether this or that is in continuity (which is *still* happening post IC.)

2.Will they? No. At least not in another big reset. They just did that (twice if you count the alterations to the Multiverse in 52). They will just have another "epic" story and then retire the "Crisis" catchword from all future crossovers' titles. That's all. (Then they will invent another one.)

I can never understand why DC has so many problems with its continuity when Marvel handles theirs so easily. Just start an Ultimate DC for Superboy Prime and his like to rampage and keep the original with a retro feel for the rest. Have the cake AND eat it.

[buttler]

Another reboot to mainstream continuity would be a terrible idea. That trick never works.

That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a return to an infinite multiverse, because this 52 business was played out almost before it began. They're already having problems keeing it straight. (See Scott Shaw!'s question about Earth C and Earth C- elsewhere in the forums, for example.)

[Lorendiac]

It's been two weeks since I started this Survey, on several sites at once. I figure it's time to compile the data from all of them and bring you up to speed on the results, such as they are.

Note: I didn't post this as a clickable poll, because I felt it was important to post both questions at once in the same thread -- what you think DC should do, and what you think they probably will do. Some of the forums I frequent don't allow automated "Polls" in a thread at all. The others only allow one question on the Poll, so I didn't try to create a Poll on any of those, since it was important to me to have both questions back-to-back. (Days later, it finally occurred to me I could have set up the possible replies as "YES and YES," "YES and NO," "NO and YES," and "NO and NO," so that you'd have just four options to choose from, and you'd be clicking on the line that contained the two-answer combo you agreed with, but I simply didn't think of that two weeks ago, when I started this! Live and learn!)

At any rate: I figure I got a lot less answers than I would have if people were able to just "click" their votes instead of being required to type out "Yes" or "No" -- but I still got some answers.

Here's how it breaks down:

Question 1 -- should DC reboot?
70 votes have been cast on that one.
"Yes" got 21 votes, or 30%.
"No" got 49 votes, or 70%.

Question 2 -- will DC probably reboot?
51 votes have been cast.
"Yes" got 12 votes, or 24%.
"No" got 39 votes, or 76%.

There are some surprising things here when I look at all the data on an Excel spreadsheet. As you could probably tell, many of the people who voted on the first question did not bother to express a clear opinion on the second question! (One voter did it the other way around, by the way -- answered the second question, but didn't commit himself on the first one!)

And among those who did vote on both questions -- several of the people who answered the first question by saying that Yes, a company-wide reboot would be a good idea, immediately turned around and answered the second question by saying regretfully that No, DC won't have the guts to actually do it!

At the same time, there were a bunch of people who answered the first question by saying No, DC really shouldn't do that, and then sadly answered the second question by saying Yes, they probably will do it anyway!

So although a solid majority thinks it would be a bad idea, and another solid majority thinks it won't happen -- it's not the same majority on both questions! A lot of us fear that what we want from Final Crisis is totally different from what we will actually get when it's all over!

My Conclusion: Our faith in DC's ability to actually do "the right thing" with its "Final Crisis" is apparently rather weak. (Granted, this is a very small sample group, but it was the best I could do at the time.)

[brett tolino]

Q - Does the DCU need a reboot.

A - No.

The main purpose for reboots was because comics were for kids. They grew up with them as children then grew out of them as teens and adults. To make them appealing to the incoming kids, it was decided to redo many characters so the next generation could start reading about these heroes from the beginning.

Golden Age Superman - Considered your 'grandfather's' Superman, the one he grew up with.

Silver Age Superman - Considered your 'father's' Superman, the one your dad grew up with.

Bronze Age Superman - Considered almost 'this generation's' Superman.

Many current readers began reading at this time, watched the Byrne Superman reboot, Perez WW, Miller Batman although the speculator's boom of the 90's brought in many new readers. Some left but other's remained.

Technically, it's about that time again. These reboots occur in 15 - 20 year cycles, after each character has built up enough stinky barnicles in their histories to turn even the creators off.

To wash it away, give the character a clean slate for the next generation, the company reboots the character and history. That's why so many people feel like they've been reading the same stories over and over again.

They are.

Some readers have been around long enough to have read a few versions, which mainly are the same stories told in a new slant relevant for an audience of that time period.

There's no need for a reboot because there is no incoming generation to clean everything up for. The audience of today are mainly 35-40 year olds who have been reading comics since they were kids because they never grew out of them. Comics became a recognized form of art and they didn't need to give them up. They remain because they love the medium.



Q - Do I believe DC will reboot the characters?

A - Yes.

Dan Didio arrived on the scene believing the DCU was a mess and he wanted to clean it up. It was all part of a long plan. He already began doing it with Blue Beetle, Firestorm, Aquaman, Atom and others.

They all failed miserably.

It was not done organically, for the next generation. It was done to force diversity on an audience who liked the characters as they were. The current audience never grew out of the heroes they grew up with and they still wanted to read about the characters they loved.

DC and Didio are out of touch with the needs of the current marketplace.

They ignore their audience. They're paving the way by recycling characters for an incoming generation that doesn't exist. In the process, they're alienating the current readers when they watch these new guys come in and destroy the heroes they love for a new face behind the mask.

But Dan Didio is on a mission, he doesn't really care what the audience thinks because he'll be gone right after Final Crisis... when the DCU begins anew.

Then he can leave under the illusion that his tenure was a success. He did what he set out to accomplishl. It doesn't matter what readers thought or how sales were. He set out to clean up the DCU and have it start all over again and that's exactly what will happen after Final Crisis.

Final Crisis will be Dan Didio's big send off to himself, so he can ride off into the sunset with his head held high.

He achieved his goal, to clean up the DCU. Thing is, he made more of mess in the process and its his mess that will now be cleaned.

[Paul Newell]

DC and Didio are out of touch with the needs of the current marketplace.

They ignore their audience. They're paving the way by recycling characters for an incoming generation that doesn't exist. In the process, they're alienating the current readers when they watch these new guys come in and destroy the heroes they love for a new face behind the mask.

But Dan Didio is on a mission, he doesn't really care what the audience thinks because he'll be gone right after Final Crisis... when the DCU begins anew.

Then he can leave under the illusion that his tenure was a success. He did what he set out to accomplishl. It doesn't matter what readers thought or how sales were.
Which would make a lot of sense if, you know, overall sales weren't continuing to go up and DC hadn't just topped Marvel for two months in a row.

[Shellhead]

I can never understand why DC has so many problems with its continuity when Marvel handles theirs so easily.

You mean like Hudlin's Black Panther? Or the infernal dissolution of the Parker marriage? The wacky hijinx with Scarlet Witch and chaos magic? Weak Marvel editors have let a lot of crap through in recent years.

There are two things that Marvel has done right compared to DC, with respect to retcons. First, Marvel has never tried to merge all their alternate realities into one, a messy business that can only lead to continuity problems. Second, Marvel has a really smart way of dealing with time travellers trying to muck with history... they can't. Any attempt to change the past in the Marvel Universe is supposed to only cause a divergent reality to split off from the unaffected original. There have been some exceptions, because not every Marvel writer or editor has been aware of this rule. But the overall impact has been that Marvel has avoided a lot of continuity problems that DC got into.

Marvel has one more advantage over DC: youth. DC has been around for over 20 years longer than Marvel, so they have had to take more extraordinary measures to preserve the youth of their most iconic characters. Marvel is now past the age that DC was at when the Crisis on Infinite Earths took place. Rather than make a big event out of it, we now see Marvel's first really high-profile and awkward retcon, with Mephisto retconning away the marriage of Mary Jane and Peter Parker.

[brett tolino]

Which would make a lot of sense if, you know, overall sales weren't continuing to go up and DC hadn't just topped Marvel for two months in a row.


DC beating Marvel is an illusion of prosperity.

The only reason DC did beat Marvel is because quite a few Marvel titles missed their ship dates for the past two months.

Spider Man which usually ships 3 different titles a month only shipped one and a few other big Marvel titles missed their ship dates for the month. Had those titles shown up, DC as usual, would not have beat Marvel.

DC beating Marvel was like them going to a race and Marvel's big guns weren't there because they called in sick.

So DC won by default, because there was little for them to compete against. Kind of like Contestant D, who runs an average of 65 mph and usually competes against Contestant S & Contestant WWH who runs an average of 80 mph and 90 mph. Contestant D winning the race doesn't mean Contestant D ran any faster, it just means Contestant M & Contestant U didn't show up.

[brett tolino]

I can never understand why DC has so many problems with its continuity when Marvel handles theirs so easily.

It's because DC's creators walk through the door with the belief that their history and continuity are problem oriented. They then create stories with the underlying notion that everything is confusing and needs to be fixed. If stories are created that way, readers read that into the stories and carry that belief with them.

Technically, DC's Universe is no different than Marvel's.

DC has Earth 1, 2, 3, whatever but they believe it is confusing and write from that view point. Marvel has their regular universe, ultimate universe, kids universe, their various alternate future timelines and whatnot. They don't write from that view point so readers don't believe it's confusing.

[brett tolino]

Which would make a lot of sense if, you know, overall sales weren't continuing to go up and DC hadn't just topped Marvel for two months in a row.


Also Paul, overall sales are up because DC is littering the market with tons of Countdown tie in titles.

Even if they all don't sell, and sell poorly at that, If only 5 of those countdown titles sell at 30k then that's an aggregiate circ figure for the month of 150k books sold... which makes up for the downward spiral of sales on their regular monthly books (with the exception of a select few such as JSA and Green Lantern). So the bottom line is up for comics sold because they're putting out more material. But the downward spiral of the regular monthlies still exists. So putting out dozens of useless crossovers is fine for short term results but t's a temporary fix to a greater problem in the big picture.

[Shellhead]

DC beating Marvel is an illusion of prosperity.

The only reason DC did beat Marvel is because quite a few Marvel titles missed their ship dates for the past two months.

Spider Man which usually ships 3 different titles a month only shipped one and a few other big Marvel titles missed their ship dates for the month. Had those titles shown up, DC as usual, would not have beat Marvel.

DC beating Marvel was like them going to a race and Marvel's big guns weren't there because they called in sick.

So DC won by default, because there was little for them to compete against. Kind of like Contestant D, who runs an average of 65 mph and usually competes against Contestant S & Contestant WWH who runs an average of 80 mph and 90 mph. Contestant D winning the race doesn't mean Contestant D ran any faster, it just means Contestant M & Contestant U didn't show up.

In any other business, the failure to deliver one of your most popular products for two months would be considered a complete disaster, and people in management would get fired for it. If Marvel keeps missing deadlines, they will deserve to lose sales to DC.

[Shellhead]

So putting out dozens of useless crossovers is fine for short term results but t's a temporary fix to a greater problem in the big picture.

And this is different from Marvel how? House of M, Civil War, and World War Hulk were all big, expensive crossover events that each ended poorly. Fans are buying this crap so far, but with comics at $3.00 an issue, there is going to be some backlash coming.

[Sijo]

You mean like Hudlin's Black Panther? Or the infernal dissolution of the Parker marriage? The wacky hijinx with Scarlet Witch and chaos magic? Weak Marvel editors have let a lot of crap through in recent years.
True, Marvel has started to become like DC in that regard, giving writers too much control. (Who thought that letting Bendis retcon the Beyonder was a good idea?) One More Day is Quesada being a big "I must have it my way!" baby. And Black Panther... I don't even know what happened there. Still, overall, Marvel has handled it's few continuity problems better than DC over the decades (sometimes by just ignoring them, as was the case with Byrne's Spider-Man retcon.)

It's because DC's creators walk through the door with the belief that their history and continuity are problem oriented. They then create stories with the underlying notion that everything is confusing and needs to be fixed. If stories are created that way, readers read that into the stories and carry that belief with them.

Technically, DC's Universe is no different than Marvel's.
I agree, on both counts.

In any other business, the failure to deliver one of your most popular products for two months would be considered a complete disaster, and people in management would get fired for it. If Marvel keeps missing deadlines, they will deserve to lose sales to DC.
That's what baffles me the most. I guess they either believe fans will wait forever, or consider comics as just placeholders for Graphic Novels and Movies, and no longer give a damn about us weekly readers. Mind you, DC isn't much better.

Final Crisis will be Dan Didio's big send off to himself, so he can ride off into the sunset with his head held high.
You know this how? Mind you I hope it's true, and that the next DC administration has less bloodthirst.

[Buried Alien]

I think the way, way early solicitations for THE BLACKEST NIGHT in 2009 at the end of the SINESTRO CORPS WAR hedges the bet against DC rebooting after FINAL CRISIS. BLACKEST NIGHT would need to happen in this current DCU, not a rebooted one.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[carabas]

And this is different from Marvel how? House of M, Civil War, and World War Hulk were all big, expensive crossover events that each ended poorly.It's not so much that they ended poorly as that they didn't end a tall, and instead had a 'To Be Continued In Our Next Big Event' tagged onto them.

At least most DC events have some sort of closure at the end, even if the ydo have sequels.

[the-wolf]

My thoughts...I'll answer #2 first: No, because they don't have the balls.

#1: My personal view is start over. I had comics as a kid but I didn’t really get into it until I was 14 starting with Batman Year 3. This was 1989 and I still had a heck of time catching up on all the important back stories and continuity. Look at the differences in continuity then until now.

How is any new reader supposed to pick up a DC (or Marvel) comic now and even have a clue. Batman as an example:

-4 Robins; 1 who’s now Nightwing, 2 dead, 1 back from the dead, 1 a female, 2 Batgirls, 1 in a wheelchair, 1 gone bad, now good?, 1 Batwoman who’s a lesbian, Batman with a son (originally held by editors for years to be out of continuity), Ra’s dead now alive, multiple Gotham protectors in Huntress, etc., Gotham burned, earthquaked, plaqued by virus, back broken and healed, numerous love-affairs in Silver St. Cloud, Shondra Kinsloving, Vicki Vale, etc.; how many peolpe have discovered the Cave, know Bruce is Batman, how many have filled in as Batman, Alfred gone and back, Commissioner Gordon old young, old, young, old, retired, back?: Joker dead, reformed, escaped how many times?

And this is a short list. You clould go through Superman, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, and Flash as well.

Nothing makes sense and everything is weighed down. It’s senseless to continue a habitual program of “bold new directions” followed by “back-to-basics” crapola.

If you want your product to live you need to seek new readers and this is the only way. Sales-wise, yeah some people would find it a perfect jumping-off point, but most people would be intrigued. After all, the Ultimate line isn't actually real. The "real" Marvel universe is still out there. Do the whole thing over and now you're playing for keeps. Now it means something. And if that happens, what comic fan wouldn't go out and buy the all-new Batman (rather than a meaningless alternate-line Batman)?

The biggest thing they need to do is PLAN! My personal view is that a comic universe should start from scratch every 20-25 years. This would do a number of things: you can re-imagine and make characters entirely relevant for a new era, you attract new readers, you can wrap up storylines without loads of conflicting continuity.

The big thing is not repeating storylines. In other words, “how long until Dick Grayson becomes Nightwing?” needs to be avoided. This is a problem in the Ultimate line. It’s a new universe and you can’t have re-writes. Nobody wants to read about Jason Todd getting killed by the Joker again.

I, for example, wouldn’t even want to see a Batgirl again.

One of the problems nowadays that I see is that certain stories that were purposely written out of continuity were done so well that they have adversely affected the day-to-day writing of too many titles. The Dark Knight Returns comes immediately to mind. Batman becomes a jackass happened because too many writers looked at this story as what “will happen.”

Kingdom Come has also had a very detrimental influence as it seems the future of the DCU is being purposely shepherded in this direction despite the fact that that was never the original intention. Who decided Elseworlds stories were now canon?

I was happy years ago when old characters were aged and replaced. Kyle Rayner as the new Green Lantern and Connor Hawke as the new Green Arrow for example. Then they undid it all and put the originals back. Now they’re doing it all again with Blue Beetle, the Question and others.

Who can follow this? Blow it up and start over. Focus on self-contained 3-5 issue story arcs and focus on just telling a good story. And sell it as one story in one big mag, priced by the page. It's a longer wait in-between stories, but at least you can read it in one shot and writers won't have to artificially compress or expand the story to make it fit into a set number of pages.
-
“Epic”-writing is a huge problem and I’m sick of it. I always look at something like 10 Nights of the Beast. Do you really think that would be 4 issues today? Oh no. It would be 10 issues. Get it? GET IT? 10 nights? 10 issues? 1 issue/night. GET IT!!!???? And consequently it would suck.

I hate decompressed story-telling. I quit New Avengers because 32 issues in and they still couldn't wrap up a storyline. That's over 2.5 years! DCU and Marvel have become soap operas. Leave for a few years and come back. Tons has happened and yet nothing has happened. The more things change the more they stay the same.

It's time for something new.

[brett tolino]

And this is different from Marvel how? House of M, Civil War, and World War Hulk were all big, expensive crossover events that each ended poorly. Fans are buying this crap so far, but with comics at $3.00 an issue, there is going to be some backlash coming.


It's not different. Thing is, Marvel's ongoing monthly titles have not been shedding regular readers en mass the way DC's has. So when Marvel does these big company wide crossovers, it adds to Marvel's bottom line where DC is doing these company wide crossovers and all the tie in titles are doing is plugging holes from the people who are not buying many of the regular montlies anymore.

Bait and switch.

And don't get me wrong, DC does publish some great monthly titles. I am a HUGE DC fan and I want to see DC do better. They deserve to do better because they have a better library of characters... they just aren't being utilized correctly to maximize their potential. Also some of DC's business decisions have been short term solutions that are creating greater long term problems.

Someone also asked how I knew Final Crisis would be Dan Didio's last hurrah. He'll be gone following Final Crisis or shortly thereafter. Dan Didio will leave of his own accord after Final Crisis so that he can leave on a high note.

Final Crisis is Grant Morrison. It will sell like mad and then, Didio can leave believing his tenure was successful. He accomplished his goal and left giving DC and readers a great, best selling book. No one can ever say he failed. Then it's off to new challenges.

Watch.

By the end of next year, there's going to be a tremendous amount of changes going on, all over.

[Iroquois]

With the mess they've managed to make lately. I wouldn't really mind a reboot. But if there is one, wouldn't it kind of... nullify everything from IC up to FC? Especially seeing how origins and continuity in that time period was as vague as they come?

I don't know, but this Final Crisis already seems like a desperate attempt to catch a boat that sailed with not so much success. Imagine how a reboot would seem, after all the hype for IC and its aftermath (52, OYL titles, etc.)

[dazzler_slave]

1. No
2. No

Required character limit