Brubaker's Revival of Bucky

[Jim Thompson]

Its not even that hard to stay in continuity, just do not drastically change a character and try not to contradict an earlier story.

How do you feel about reveals, which very often are, by their very nature, playing with a character's back-story and continuity?


Moved from here--Acro.

[charlesthehammer]

How do you feel about reveals, which very often are, by their very nature, playing with a character's back-story and continuity?

They usually are not that good, but if it is done with a character that was either planned from the beginning to be this character, or was a non factor character with little to no backstory its fine. If it fits or a good reason is given as to why it conflicts(usually lack of info, but even that is walking a fine line) it is fine. So I would say its a judgment call.

[Jim Thompson]

They usually are not that good, but if it is done with a character that was either planned from the beginning to be this character, or was a non factor character with little to no backstory its fine. If it fits or a good reason is given as to why it conflicts(usually lack of info, but even that is walking a fine line) it is fine. So I would say its a judgment call.

Just to sort of give this some context for me, how'd you'd see Brubaker bringing Bucky Barnes back from the dead, a move that truly played with established continuity.

[charlesthehammer]

Just to sort of give this some context for me, how'd you'd see Brubaker bringing Bucky Barnes back from the dead, a move that truly played with established continuity.

It was not all that well done, as I believe Cap actual saw him die, and at times interacted with the ghost of Bucky. Though it has been a while since I have dealt with Cap, as I really have lost interest in most of Marvels characters. Of course that is another Pet Peeve of mine, resurrections.

[strathcona]

It was not all that well done, as I believe Cap actual saw him die, and at times interacted with the ghost of Bucky. Though it has been a while since I have dealt with Cap, as I really have lost interest in most of Marvels characters. Of course that is another Pet Peeve of mine, resurrections.

Cap didn't see Bucky die. Cap leapt off the bomb and as he was falling he saw it explode, then he immediately fell into the water where he entered suspended animation.

As for Cap encountering Bucky after his death. Most Legion of the Unliving appearances have since been revealed to have been Space Phantoms, constructs of whomever was pulling the strings or other imposters... I can't think of any other time Bucky may have appeared after his death, but even still, ghosts or afterlife appearances are hard.

I think Brubaker's return of Bucky was a great example of how to do a retcon right.

[Nomads1]

Just to sort of give this some context for me, how'd you'd see Brubaker bringing Bucky Barnes back from the dead, a move that truly played with established continuity.

Honestly, that, for me, was an exemple of a great use of previous continuity. He used past stories to build on a new one, without explicitly ignoring or contradicting anything of greater importance, tweaking it, at most. And I was someone that, if asked before, would have been against bringing back Bucky. Still mantain that I prefer dead to mean dead though. That may be the exception that proves the rule, as so mant others were not as well done, or didn't result in as many interesting stories. The way I see it, I prefer stories with consistent caracterization that respect the internal logic of the MU while building upon continuity. Regardless of how good a story may be, and it's always debatable how good they really are or aren't, I don't think it's worth breaking those rules. IMHO, that's what the Ultimate U or What Ifs? are for. The way I see it, continuity (or as Keith Giffen best put it, consistency) is what builds the long term bonds between reader and the fictional serial universe. If you are going to contradict and ignore it at every turn, some times in exchange for something as stuipid as a simple gag, what's the point? I didn't get into the ground floor of the MU. In fact, I started over a decade and a half later, however, that didn't stop me from enjoying stories that refered heavily to others in the past, nor did it prevent me from actually feeling encouraged to go hunt down and track those older stories, some that took me literally decades to get, and I didn't have the resources that we have nowadays (trade Market and the internet). In fact, those things served to even enhance my enjoyment of the medium.
Just my 2 cents.

Peace

[Jim Thompson]

I think Brubaker's return of Bucky was a great example of how to do a retcon right.

I wasn't bothered with the way Brubaker brought Bucky back; indeed, I thought it was pretty clever and artfully done.

[David Walton]

I wasn't bothered with the way Brubaker brought Bucky back; indeed, I thought it was pretty clever and artfully done.

In a lot of ways, he was just building on the several times Stan Lee teased the concept.

[Jim Thompson]

In a lot of ways, he was just building on the several times Stan Lee teased the concept.

Yeah, I've thought that a couple of times, too.

[icctrombone]

Honestly, that, for me, was an exemple of a great use of previous continuity. He used past stories to build on a new one, without explicitly ignoring or contradicting anything of greater importance, tweaking it, at most. And I was someone that, if asked before, would have been against bringing back Bucky. Still mantain that I prefer dead to mean dead though. That may be the exception that proves the rule, as so mant others were not as well done, or didn't result in as many interesting stories. The way I see it, I prefer stories with consistent caracterization that respect the internal logic of the MU while building upon continuity. Regardless of how good a story may be, and it's always debatable how good they really are or aren't, I don't think it's worth breaking those rules. IMHO, that's what the Ultimate U or What Ifs? are for. The way I see it, continuity (or as Keith Giffen best put it, consistency) is what builds the long term bonds between reader and the fictional serial universe. If you are going to contradict and ignore it at every turn, some times in exchange for something as stuipid as a simple gag, what's the point? I didn't get into the ground floor of the MU. In fact, I started over a decade and a half later, however, that didn't stop me from enjoying stories that refered heavily to others in the past, nor did it prevent me from actually feeling encouraged to go hunt down and track those older stories, some that took me literally decades to get, and I didn't have the resources that we have nowadays (trade Market and the internet). In fact, those things served to even enhance my enjoyment of the medium.
Just my 2 cents.

Peace

Roy Thomas wrote a great story that started in Avengers #56 and ended in Annual #2 where Cap finds out once and for all that Bucky Died. It's a 40+ year old story and I guess TPTB figured that it shouldn't get in the way of a current story. But Bucky dieing was always part of the Captain America Mythos.

[Reptisaurus!]

Roy Thomas wrote a great story that started in Avengers #56 and ended in Annual #2 where Cap finds out once and for all that Bucky Died. It's a 40+ year old story and I guess TPTB figured that it shouldn't get in the way of a current story. But Bucky dieing was always part of the Captain America Mythos.

... Not sure what you mean. The "Bucky is dead! DEAD!" retcon from Avengers # 4 wiped out damn near a decade of '40s and '50s Captain America stuff and had later creators scrambling to fill the gaps - Leading to the current confusing mess where there are, like, eight Captain Americas. This was, of course, before the Roy Thomas EIC philosophy of "Everything counts. Even the Golden Age stuff. Unless it contradicts the stuff I'm writing now. Then it doesn't count."

I'm not saying that Lee and Kirby should have cared, or that there was any way they could possibly have predicted that Roy Thomas style continuity niggling would be a thing that exists. Just that, from a modern continuity anal point of view, the original Bucky is dead retcon ignored a lot of people's work and caused some huge problems.

[strathcona]

Roy Thomas wrote a great story that started in Avengers #56 and ended in Annual #2 where Cap finds out once and for all that Bucky Died. It's a 40+ year old story and I guess TPTB figured that it shouldn't get in the way of a current story. But Bucky dieing was always part of the Captain America Mythos.

I know I have read those issues, but I don't recall the story. What exactly happened in it?

[Nomads1]

Roy Thomas wrote a great story that started in Avengers #56 and ended in Annual #2 where Cap finds out once and for all that Bucky Died. It's a 40+ year old story and I guess TPTB figured that it shouldn't get in the way of a current story. But Bucky dieing was always part of the Captain America Mythos.

I remember that story. It's from one of my favorite periods of the Avengers, the Thomas/Buscema years, however, other than Bucky died, I don't think the Brubaker story explicitly contradicted anything on it. I may have to pull out my essentials and the Winter Soldier TPBs, but I think Brubaker's retcon started to work after the airship exploded, thus, as far as Cap knows, everything that happened in the Thomas story did, in fact, happen. I may be remembering incorrectly, though.

Peace

[strathcona]

I remember that story. It's from one of my favorite periods of the Avengers, the Thomas/Buscema years, however, other than Bucky died, I don't think the Brubaker story explicitly contradicted anything on it. I may have to pull out my essentials and the Winter Soldier TPBs, but I think Brubaker's retcon started to work after the airship exploded, thus, as far as Cap knows, everything that happened in the Thomas story did, in fact, happen. I may be remembering incorrectly, though.

Peace

Is that the story where Cap goes back in time and is invisible and watches the events surrounding the drone explosion? If so, doesn't he leave right afterwards, so there is nothing that contradicts Bucky's survival there.

[Nomads1]

Is that the story where Cap goes back in time and is invisible and watches the events surrounding the drone explosion? If so, doesn't he leave right afterwards, so there is nothing that contradicts Bucky's survival there.

That's the one.

Peace