Is it time for a Full reboot?

[graffiX]

I'd agree to an extent. But comic fans love their continuity, and that is especially true of Marvel fans. People say that would keeps the Marvel Universe strong is the lack of a reboot.

I agree. The minute Marvel reboots is the minute I stop buying Marvel comics.

[DeadXMan]

Perhaps. That's one of those things where I think it is probably as tough as one makes it.

Be pretty hard pressed to do that one; the advances in technology and the socio/political changes to the world would make that hard to execute, I think.

hmmm given Vald recent duchbagery, i really don't think that will be an issue soon.

[Heroid]

Those both worked really well...but there seemed to be a pressing need at the time. I don't feel that way about Marvel, where the continuity is more of a benefit than a burden.

I guess all the various retellings of classic Marvel origins have soured me on the idea, because none of them carry the same weight as the Lee/Kirby/Ditko originals. These days, every retelling seems to be focused on mapping out all the character relationships and story arcs years in advance. Pete was bitten at OsCorp! Ock works there! Etc, etc.

Whereas I find Lee's take so inspired, and part of the charm is that he had no idea where he was taking these characters. He wasn't writing AF 15 with ASM 33 or 50 in mind.

Nowadays it feels like every creator is so focused on where their stories are headed that they can't live in the moment. I don't know that it's a bad thing--it is a sign that creators take their craft much more seriously. But I can't help but feel that we lost something when comics moved that direction.

It's probably nostalgia!

I don't think it's nostalgia. I think that getting all the writers together at a "summit" to make sure they are all telling the same overall story is bad and bad for the writers, characters, and readers. Continuity used to be keeping the "feel" the same from title to title. Each book was self-contained. Every character had his/her own story. These days the focus is on crossing over and interconnecting in order to sell "events".

And let's consider "continuity". I think Marvel could use a hard reboot because of all the stupid stuff they have done the past decade. Other people are afraid of losing their "continuity". But really -- try reading a Marvel Comic from the 60's and one from today and try to sell me that they are all part of one continuity. Pft! No way! There is no way that those characters even existed in the same universe as today's mish-mash of "heroes". The concept of a "616" (hate that name for the regular Marvel Universe) cohesive history is a joke. It's not there no matter how hard you try to force it.

Marvel has "soft" rebooted several times over the decades and it has worked fine. The only reason it needs a hard reboot now is because of the insistence on keeping a meticulous (and ridiculous) "continuity" that never existed before. If they could just kinda forget or soft-retcon things like "Civil War" and "One More Day" and just move on, things would be much better. But the fanboys would cry.

[Ben Smith]

The folks in charge of the James Bond and Star Trek franchises might disagree with you.

that's not the same thing at all. those rebooted because they had to. do you really think if Shatner and Nimoy were perpetually 25 years old they wouldn't keep the same cast of Star Trek forever? (assuming the actors are willing as well). Do you think if Sean Connery didn't age (and wanted to play Bond indefinitely) he wouldn't still be Bond to this day?

[John Ossie]

Right now I'd say no as I want to see where they go with this NOW! thing. But if the same question was asked in 2018 my answer might be different.

At this point, I think the entire MU might benefit from a reboot.

It might do it might not do depending on the execution of it.

there is no decision possible that everyone supports.

Agreed.

There will be no REBOOT while Stan Lee is still alive.

Wouldn't surprise me if that was true actually.

[Jim Thompson]

that's not the same thing at all. those rebooted because they had to. do you really think if Shatner and Nimoy were perpetually 25 years old they wouldn't keep the same cast of Star Trek forever? (assuming the actors are willing as well). Do you think if Sean Connery didn't age (and wanted to play Bond indefinitely) he wouldn't still be Bond to this day?

Yeah, I think you're way off base with all those assumptions.

[Ben Smith]

Yeah, I think you're way off base with all those assumptions.

you can think that, but you'd be wrong.

[David Walton]

Marvel has "soft" rebooted several times over the decades and it has worked fine. The only reason it needs a hard reboot now is because of the insistence on keeping a meticulous (and ridiculous) "continuity" that never existed before. If they could just kinda forget or soft-retcon things like "Civil War" and "One More Day" and just move on, things would be much better. But the fanboys would cry.

You can 'soft' reboot by passing over certain story elements. You don't say they never happened, you just don't bring them up.

Slott is no fan of Parallel Lives, for instance, and you'll notice that he just doesn't mention MJ having known Peter's identity before they got together. But if another Spidey writer in 2050 loves the concept they could build five years worth of subplots out of it. The possibilities are still there.

Same thing has basically happened with OMD...it will be a long time before we see that addressed again, if ever.

[Jim Thompson]

You can 'soft' reboot by passing over certain story elements. You don't say they never happened, you just don't bring them up.

Yeah, but there have been other "soft" reboots that take a different approach. Iron Man's origin jumps to mind.

[Jim Thompson]

you can think that, but you'd be wrong.

That's what people who are wrong often think. But fear not; you may get a head on your shoulders one day.

[Mister Mets]

One problem with a hard reboot is that a lot of time will be spent reintroducing characters. Editorial decisions could make classic characters less interesting, depriving the series of what made them unique.

For example, I wasn't as interested in having the Ultimate Universe become the regular Marvel Universe when the Ultimate Juggernaut was just some mutant.

Though, I do think it would be interesting to reintroduce villains with the understanding that their first appearance will probably be their last, as is the case with most fictional bad guys. The complicated backstories between the heroes and most of their enemies help make comics even more inaccessible.

[Invisible Martian Archer]

Do you think that with all the recent mess such as with issue 700 and past events such as OMD, that it is time to do a full reboot of Spider-man. It can be similar to that of the Star Trek reboot films in which the past continuity is still part of the story and honoured but still allowes for a fresh start. Should it be done after Superior Spiderman finishes? Maybe involving mephisto? Do you agree or not?

I think that no matter how bad it is, it's not worth writing out of continuity the best run of any comic book EVER - Amazing Spider-Man #1-150.

Does the MU need a major realignment? YEP, and it ain't Marvel NOW! Reboot would be tossing away about 75 years of continuity. No way. Just fix the car and get it back on the right road.

[refrax5]

We have seen a lot of classic Marvel stories told and retold in stuff like Ultimate Comics, Season One, etc. I don't really want to see all of these classic stories and characters reintroduced, you know? It'd just feel tedious having to start all the way over. I feel like the classic Bond series (actually the new ones fit into this too, I guess) are a good way of doing it. Those movies went on for years and years without the character getting especially older and with recurring characters and villains, but no concrete continuity. Things didn't usually contradict, but almost never has there been a Bond film where you really needed to see the previous ones.

Geoff Johns said something interesting about this once, and I wish I could remember where. He said something that when you meet any character in any story, they have baggage and a history you aren't aware of, just like people you meet in real life. The trick is to make the character accessible enough that people want to get to know them more. When you think about it, a lot of the better Marvel cartoons (X-Men animated, Wolverine and the X-Men, Avengers, Spectacular Spider-Man) start off with the characters already existing. And those are pretty accessible.

Even Kaine, in the new Scarlet Spider series, has a pretty clear cut status quo and the series is very easy to just jump into and understand. And that character has some insanely complicated history. With a reboot, there's a whole host of problems, like throwing out classic stories and rewriting them and doing new origins for established characters, so I kinda feel like it's just best to streamline everything, rather than throw all of it out. A brand new continuity would eventually get just as messy, as Ultimate proved.

[DracoDracul]

The problem you get with reboots is either A) it leads to retreading the same ground as writers want to try their hand at retelling some classic story B) in order to avoid A they go a wildly different direction possibly alienating the audience and missing the spirit of the character or C) they assume that most of the major stories happened anyway thus making the reboot rather pointless. Where it really becomes problematic is when you get a mix of all three with different characters as it will leave continuity more screwed up than when you started (which is honestly an impressive feat for comic books). The worst possible outcome is that the only good stories that get told are those that could have been told anyway without the reboot.

[Hambone]

that's not the same thing at all. those rebooted because they had to. do you really think if Shatner and Nimoy were perpetually 25 years old they wouldn't keep the same cast of Star Trek forever? (assuming the actors are willing as well). Do you think if Sean Connery didn't age (and wanted to play Bond indefinitely) he wouldn't still be Bond to this day?

The Bond reboot covers only Casino Royale to the recent Skyfall films. All the other Bond films (Lazenby's, Moore's, Dalton's and Brosnan's films) are in the same continuity as the Connery movies.