Absolute Final Crisis

[T Hedge Coke]

Of course, it doesn't really mesh with how they were portrayed in Countdown to Final Crisis, but i prefer to ignore that trainwreck of a series anyway.

There's a built-in explanation for this in the Monitors themselves being mutable by story/belief. Monitor role/culture us entirely dependent on what they believe it is.

They didn't necessarily have, chronologically, the huge long empires and history wee see in Superman Beyond, they just have to have the story of it, the idea. They're addicted to believing ideas are true; hence Mandraak coming back/being again because they can't comprehend Mandraak's inherent fictionality. Monitor, in Crisis on Infinite Earths, kept doing stuff like this; the new Doctor Light, or Harbinger and Pariah, arguably (as bolstered by Final Crisis) even Antimonitor are just ideas that are real. Monitor's Crisis on Infinite Earths plans were pretty much a) pick some characters, b) make them do stuff, and c) when one turns out not to be as useful as previously thought, put them away and focus on those that are working. I doubt that was intentionally a metaphor for writing, but it is a pretty good mimic of what writers on titles like these do.

[Robotman4]

it's funny how differently Final Crisis is viewed now compared to the fan response after the last issue was released. i dont recall a comic pissing off readers the way FC did. i think people were mostly upset with DC for putting out a weekly comic that was supposed to COUNTDOWN to this event and ended up having nothing to do with it. not to mention the fact that Death of the New Gods was also released right around the same time.
after rereading FC years later and having had time to forget Countdown, i realized just how brilliant it was. i think DC needed to stress how important Superman Beyond is to the story. i was one of the readers angry and DC and Final Crisis, but now it is truely one of my favorite stories. i was actually thinking of picking up the Absolute edition.

[direction9]

The point is less that he's literally changed and more that his 'story' has been subsumed when we get to Final Crisis proper.

that just doesn't seem like a point worth mentioning to me. the dark monitor, infected by story, literally lashing out against them all now, beginning with superman (the ultimate story), returns for last revenge where he runs into the only thing that can truly get rid of him: his son (his better self really, who he created), in a sort of gnostic unholy trinity arrangement.
every way i can think of to describe mandrakk is fluid from his first attack to his last. his story isn't quite subsumed until he runs into his son, seeing himself in the mirror really, and being judged (by the only thing that can actually judge him) for the murder of the woman he loved and for losing his universal mind and preying on creation.

[Rio_de_Janeiro]

seven soldiers' mister miracle bits.

[T Hedge Coke]

seven soldiers' mister miracle bits.

Why?

What's in there that's necessary to Final Crisis and not already in FC? And wouldn't, as a prelude, step on reveals in FC?

Ever since Sequart's Planetary book I've been wondering if there's something in modern comics fandom that massively dislikes surprises/reveals. One of the pieces in that book is a proposed restructuring of the order to publish Planetary in, based apparently on getting reveals out of the way as fast as possible. And, so, too, things that people seem to deem necessary or desirable to an FC collection, like Seven Soldiers or the Mr Miracle part of that series, are just included presumably because they would "clear up" things that Final Crisis took its time dealing with, like the New Gods inhabiting mortal bodies. Or Death of the New Gods showing the war and deaths and stuff.

Isn't the fact it's a mystery more interesting? Isn't learning these things from Turpin's perspective more emotional? Creepier? Scarier? Bigger than just seeing Orion and Kalibak punch each other again or Shilo Norman find out he's le special chosen One? "Who knew air whistling through blood and gristle could be such a turn on?" as he brains the Hatter, his black out moment where he's back on track of kids we just saw him find, the rough, sweaty anxiety and inappropriate horniness and brutality? That tells us more about Darkseid in this story than either DotNG or 7S could, yeah?

[Rio_de_Janeiro]

Why?

What's in there that's necessary to Final Crisis and not already in FC? And wouldn't, as a prelude, step on reveals in FC?

The reasons why I think it should be included are:

a. it made a very interesting prelude to what Final Crisis would be, and it was the first meta-sign of the time collapse due to Darkseid's fall through the multiverse (after all, it was part of Final Crisis, but published within Seven Soldiers)

b. It includes the explanation and shows the new new gods, which was an interesting view, and, again, part of Final Crisis.

c. It had the story of the death(s) of mylo and the black hole, which add up to Final Crisis narrative.

d. It IS part of the Final Crisis, and if you are going to call something the "absolute" final crisis, you should include it.

e. It added to my reading of the Final Crisis. It might not have been your cup of tea, or such, but it is enjoyable to other readers.

so there. these are my reasons why i'd publish mister miracle WITH the final crisis.

cheers.

[Desaad]

that just doesn't seem like a point worth mentioning to me.

It's an EXTREMELY important point worth mentioning, to me. It's parts and parcel of the whole 'editorial subtext' of the Monitors.

the dark monitor, infected by story,

Story 'infected' the fiction-verse of the blank panel. Dark Monitor was puppeted by something more sinister.

every way i can think of to describe mandrakk is fluid from his first attack to his last. his story isn't quite subsumed until he runs into his son, seeing himself in the mirror really, and being judged (by the only thing that can actually judge him) for the murder of the woman he loved and for losing his universal mind and preying on creation.

No, it's subsumed as soon as he's in Final Crisis, his identity gone and we're left only with the force of what he is. His history, his story, was a big part of Superman 3D but not Final Crisis as all pretense of it was lost in the greater, interconnecting whole, and to editorial whim.

[Desaad]

Why?

What's in there that's necessary to Final Crisis and not already in FC? And wouldn't, as a prelude, step on reveals in FC?

Ever since Sequart's Planetary book I've been wondering if there's something in modern comics fandom that massively dislikes surprises/reveals. One of the pieces in that book is a proposed restructuring of the order to publish Planetary in, based apparently on getting reveals out of the way as fast as possible. And, so, too, things that people seem to deem necessary or desirable to an FC collection, like Seven Soldiers or the Mr Miracle part of that series, are just included presumably because they would "clear up" things that Final Crisis took its time dealing with, like the New Gods inhabiting mortal bodies. Or Death of the New Gods showing the war and deaths and stuff.

Isn't the fact it's a mystery more interesting? Isn't learning these things from Turpin's perspective more emotional? Creepier? Scarier? Bigger than just seeing Orion and Kalibak punch each other again or Shilo Norman find out he's le special chosen One? "Who knew air whistling through blood and gristle could be such a turn on?" as he brains the Hatter, his black out moment where he's back on track of kids we just saw him find, the rough, sweaty anxiety and inappropriate horniness and brutality? That tells us more about Darkseid in this story than either DotNG or 7S could, yeah?

I'm not convinced that Seven Soldiers Mister Miracle steps on any reveals in Final Crisis, though.

[T Hedge Coke]

I'm not convinced that Seven Soldiers Mister Miracle steps on any reveals in Final Crisis, though.

If you come in with just Final Crisis, you're learning how Darkseid operates through his corruption and possession of Turpin. I think the impact is lessened if you are immediately told beforehand,that Darkseid possesses people. I think for FC it's better to see it happen before it's spelled out.

As separate stories, it's fine to have the information out there, but as a prologue, it robs the earliest issues of their horror-surprise. Those first few two issues do play that and Orion's death as mysteries. It's probably not the sell, but the mystery aspect does have energy, I think, worth preserving.

[Desaad]

If you come in with just Final Crisis, you're learning how Darkseid operates through his corruption and possession of Turpin. I think the impact is lessened if you are immediately told beforehand,that Darkseid possesses people. I think for FC it's better to see it happen before it's spelled out.

Hmmm, perhaps I'll see on my next re-read. I thought it was fairly clear even from the first issue of Final Crisis what was going on with the possession, but of course I had read Seven Soldiers.

[direction9]

It's an EXTREMELY important point worth mentioning, to me. It's parts and parcel of the whole 'editorial subtext' of the Monitors.

Story 'infected' the fiction-verse of the blank panel. Dark Monitor was puppeted by something more sinister.

No, it's subsumed as soon as he's in Final Crisis, his identity gone and we're left only with the force of what he is. His history, his story, was a big part of Superman 3D but not Final Crisis as all pretense of it was lost in the greater, interconnecting whole, and to editorial whim.

his identity isn't gone anymore than it ever was though. you haven't made that idea convincing except for stating it a few times, where is it in the issues? his identity remains crucial as he runs into nix, his history, his story. i think you're making assumptions about editorial to make this argument. they're vampires already, you don't really need more evidence.

[Desaad]

his identity isn't gone anymore than it ever was though.

It certainly is, in that it doesn't play into Final Crisis but does in Superman 3D.

you haven't made that idea convincing except for stating it a few times, where is it in the issues?

Uh, that's fine? I don't particularly care if you agree. I've already TOLD you exactly where it is in the issues, or rather where it ISN'T.

i think you're making assumptions about editorial to make this argument.

I'm not making any assumptions about editorial. It's all embedded right there.

they're vampires already, you don't really need more evidence.

Right, and this plays right into that.

[direction9]

It certainly is, in that it doesn't play into Final Crisis but does in Superman 3D.
Uh, that's fine? I don't particularly care if you agree. I've already TOLD you exactly where it is in the issues, or rather where it ISN'T.
I'm not making any assumptions about editorial. It's all embedded right there.
Right, and this plays right into that.

nah. this book succeeds in fully making all the points you're expressing without the argument you've used. it's not in a position to add anything.

[Desaad]

nah. this book succeeds in fully making all the points you're expressing without the argument you've used. it's not in a position to add anything.

Well, it's certain a work that is open to interpretation. From what I've seen on this board you're quite incapable of, or unwilling to, change your mind so I'm quite content to leave it at that.

[WolfOfMibu1991]

Why is Final Crisis bashed by reviewers critically?