DC Comics: Rebirth

[kirk55555]

Some of the better Superman comics stories in recent memory have been Tom King's and Robert Venditti's stories in the 100-page giants, which operate independently of whatever foolishness may be going on in DC continuity at the moment. Yeah, they've had superficial connections to the larger DC universe, but only in the broadest and most general sense -- e.g., brief appearances by folks like Batman and Wonder Woman, but not tied to any specific continuity or storyline. They've been "baseline" versions of the characters and their world, and all the better for it.

You really shouldn't have to have a Ph.D. in DC-ology -- all 80+ years and eleventy-million forgettable characters and storylines of it -- to enjoy a fucking Superman comic.

People claiming a need to read a lot of comics to get into them are always full of it. I got into comics hardcore around 2004ish, and without a lot of money so it's not like I was stocking up on old issues, and never got confused. Especially in 2020, Google is pretty much everyone's fingertips, but I didn't even have home internet access when I first was getting the comics. In the Big 2's comics, unless you jump in in the middle of an event or reading some esoteric shit from writers like King, Morrison or Hickman, you are generally brought up to speed pretty easily.

Whether it's Marvel style summary Pages, or just dialogue in the issue, you pretty much have to try to be confused. This was just the same with Comics that are older than I am, the perception that it's hard to get into a comic with a high issue count has always been pure bulshit, propaganda from people who don't like continuity or the big two publishers.

continuity and character development over years what makes Comics from the big two publishers great. If you don't want it, go read whatever it is getting spewing out by image this month. I'm sure they've got 12 Superman clones, seven zombie comics, and an infinite amount of random bulshit available with no continuity whatsoever.

The problems can also be solved by limiting the continuity between books, since then one writer won't be able to hijack other writer's series.
I have a feeling the characters will all still exist in all of the books, so we will still be able to get team ups between the different characters, but what happens in one book won't affect another. So if they do another storyline like Death Metal, or the recent Ric Grayson story, the characters' solo books will be able to continue unaffected, while the changes will only effect the book where the change was made.
It looks like Marvel is kind of going this route with a lot of the crossovers being done with one offs or miniseries for the characters who aren't a core part of the series, rather than hijacking the solo books.

That's a horrible solution. Destroy an entire universe just because Scott Snyder and Tom King won't stop being assholes? All they have to do is tell them no once in awhile, and the problem is fixed. If the current editor-in-chief and the people running DC are unwilling to do that, then either fire the writers or fire them. You are literally suggesting they throw the baby out with the bathwater, and for absolutely no reason. The problem is editors and writers who can't behave, and your solution is to just say fuck all the fans, fuck the characters, let's go back to 1942 we're Comics were comics and no one interacted. Spoiler alert, Comics before continuity were fucking shit most of the time, and that's how it be if they got rid of the universe now.

also, I don't know why also, I don't know why you're bringing up Marvel, because they have a fairly tight continuity. Sure, you have to deal with people like Hickman or Jason Aaron fucking shit up, but they have a lot less power than king or Snyder do over at dc to just ruin books.

 

[The Realist]

Few are fond of "THIS Changes everything!!" multi-title/year events that did exactly what you said (cash grab), but some continuity is important, so you have to expect characters' worlds to mix. This is not the loose Golden Age/early Silver Age, where events or characters meeting was more coincidental (or to boost sales in some cases) than being part of a solid world/reality.

Isolated superhero stories are fine as one shots; DC has succeeded in spectacular fashion with that in the 90s and early 2000s with the magnificent Kingdom Come, the Dini/Ross tabloids (JLA: Secret Origins, JLA: Liberty and Justice, Wonder Woman: Spirit and Truth, Batman: War on Crime, etc.) and other one shots, but that only works because it operates in its own world, whether as an Elsewords type of story, flashback or whatever---but titles set in the main DC universe must be connected to some degree. That's not an "intrusion," but maintaining an established universe/format.

I seem to recall you weren't too thrilled when the Arrowverse portion of the DC universe "intruded" on Black Lightning.

Anyway, you and kirk55555 are acting like this is a matter of principle, when really it's a matter of preference. Bottom line, I don't much care about most of the DC universe. I'm not there for the continuity, or for the cast of thousands. For me, it would be better if Superman had never become part of a larger universe, because all that surrounding noise is mostly a distraction from what I'm there for, which is Clark and Lois, Jimmy and Perry, Jonathan and Martha, Lex and Kara.

Obviously, your mileage varies, and that's fine too. There's no "right" way to be a fan of this stuff.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I seem to recall you weren't too thrilled when the Arrowverse portion of the DC universe "intruded" on Black Lightning.

Bad example. Unlike comics, which had characters that were all the property of a publisher and regularly guest-starred in each other's titles, publishers had every opportunity to create a shared universe all along, but failed to do so. This is the polar opposite with the creators of the Black Lightning TV series, who consciously set out to create a world with no connections to the shows Berlanti, et al., produced. That was clear from the start--the very reason in earlier seasons, other "superheroes" were referred to as fictional characters and seen as visible ads for blu-ray movies. Black Lightning was meant to be as close to the life and sociopolitical realities of the real world as possible (with superpowers, of course). Again, in comics, they were all under the same roof, and because of that, fans wanted the universe connected.

 

[The Realist]

^ Knew you’d conjure a loophole, big guy.

Not all “fans” wanted the comics universe connected; I just said that I didn’t. Conversely, many fans did want Black Lightning connected to the Arrowverse; I’ve seen folks asking about it online since BL premiered.

Again, it’s personal preference, not The Way Of All Things. I don’t care for the larger DCU cluttering up my Superman stories, and you don’t want the Arrowverse’s dirty fingerprints all over Black Lightning. In the end, neither of us got what we wanted. C’est la vie.

 

[JD]

You guys are acting like all of the characters are going to completely isolated, and I really doubt that's going to be the case. I'm thinking we just won't be seeing one book being forced to match up with so what's going on in another unrelated book.
For example, let's say we have a Superman book where there is a massive alien invasion that effects everybody on Earth, now that can happen there, and we don't have to come up with excuses for why it's not effecting the other books. Or Bruce Wayne is killed in a crossover appearance in a Superman book, now the Batman books can continue to use him even though he's dead in Superman.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Also, the new approach is specifically the Omniverse, meaning everything is connected, only set in different universes. It's not "Everything happened, nothing matters", but "Everything happened, everything matters". There might be stories set in the New 52 universe, stories stories set in the pre- and the post-Crisis universes, shit, they might even do stories set in the universes of movies and TV, like a Chris Reeve Superman, and, yes, they'll certainly create some new universes, too. And they all happen in the larger Omniverse.

 

[Ovation]

Also, the new approach is specifically the Omniverse, meaning everything is connected, only set in different universes. It's not "Everything happened, nothing matters", but "Everything happened, everything matters". There might be stories set in the New 52 universe, stories stories set in the pre- and the post-Crisis universes, shit, they might even do stories set in the universes of movies and TV, like a Chris Reeve Superman, and, yes, they'll certainly create some new universes, too. And they all happen in the larger Omniverse.

So a mirror with the TV and Film properties as seen in Crisis/Arrowverse and, potentially, Flashpoint story in Flash (Ezra Miller) movie.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Yes. Pretty much what we've been hearing about them planning for the DC movies is now what they'll do with the comics. Using continuity as a tool for the creators to use as they see fit, not as a burden they have to adhere to at all cost.

 

[theenglish]

You guys are acting like all of the characters are going to completely isolated, and I really doubt that's going to be the case. I'm thinking we just won't be seeing one book being forced to match up with so what's going on in another unrelated book.

That is my point as well. Even "in continuity" over the past ten years there were glaring errors that I have mentioned before. Aquaman in stasis during the Forever Evil storyline and the events in Green Lantern comics completely ignored during the Darkseid War. The biggest for me though is how the Batman comics destroyed the revamped Titans series.

 

[kirk55555]

You guys are acting like all of the characters are going to completely isolated, and I really doubt that's going to be the case. I'm thinking we just won't be seeing one book being forced to match up with so what's going on in another unrelated book.
For example, let's say we have a Superman book where there is a massive alien invasion that effects everybody on Earth, now that can happen there, and we don't have to come up with excuses for why it's not effecting the other books. Or Bruce Wayne is killed in a crossover appearance in a Superman book, now the Batman books can continue to use him even though he's dead in Superman.

That's horrible. If a character is dead in one book, he should be dead in every book, period. I'd be fine with specific events being kept to one character. For a recent example, scott Snyder shouldn't be allowed to ruin Supergirl and Hawkman because of a story completely unrelated to them happening in his Justice League book. He had them both get "infected", becoming evil edgelord bullshit and utterly ruining Supergirl's ongoing story (Hawkman was able to pivot decently to work with the bullshit, but Supergirl was absolutely destroyed). This is an example of when books should be separated, but both books should still ackknowledge the Justice League book if the events ever do have relevance to them, Snyder just shouldn't be able to derail those books on a whim.

But if a character, for example, died in Snyder's Justice League book, they should be dead in every book. I'd be fine if the books stopped pulling in a bunch of random unrelated books for events, but the actual story of the events should be canon to every book. If Dick grayson gets shot in the head, he's Rick Grayson in every book, period, but that should only be the decision of his writer, not some unrelated person that could be ruining the plans of the Nightwing book. Anything else is completely unacceptable. This isn't some random fucking Image book or Valiant comics, this is a real comic book universe and one that needs to exist.

That is my point as well. Even "in continuity" over the past ten years there were glaring errors that I have mentioned before. Aquaman in stasis during the Forever Evil storyline and the events in Green Lantern comics completely ignored during the Darkseid War. The biggest for me though is how the Batman comics destroyed the revamped Titans series.

You're just talking about bad writing. Continuity is not the problem in those cases, just terrible writing and writers who are allowed to ruin whatever they want. This gets fixed by the editors telling the writers no more often, and maybe hiring better writers. Destroying the DC Universe is not the solution.

 

[The Realist]

For a recent example, scott Snyder shouldn't be allowed to ruin Supergirl and Hawkman because of a story completely unrelated to them happening in his Justice League book. He had them both get "infected", becoming evil edgelord bullshit and utterly ruining Supergirl's ongoing story (Hawkman was able to pivot decently to work with the bullshit, but Supergirl was absolutely destroyed).

Here we can agree, and was exactly my point (part of it anyway) about how continuity across the DC "universe" can be intrusive and destructive. I bought Supergirl because I wanted to read about Supergirl, not more of DC's puerile Bat-obsessed bullshit.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

^ Knew you’d conjure a loophole, big guy.

Actually, the Black Lightning TV series creators did that.

I don’t care for the larger DCU cluttering up my Superman stories, and you don’t want the Arrowverse’s dirty fingerprints all over Black Lightning. In the end, neither of us got what we wanted. C’est la vie.

This is why I mentioned books like Kingdom Come, and the Dini/Ross tabloids--they are truly in their own universe and will never be subject to on-again, off-again main DC continuity, whatever creative winds they're following, etc. They were about as pure as you can get. I know DC (and Marvel) are not going to publish books like that often, but when they appear, its better than nothing for anyone not wanting a character or characters to be a part of a larger universe.

 

[JD]

That's horrible. If a character is dead in one book, he should be dead in every book, period. I'd be fine with specific events being kept to one character. For a recent example, scott Snyder shouldn't be allowed to ruin Supergirl and Hawkman because of a story completely unrelated to them happening in his Justice League book. He had them both get "infected", becoming evil edgelord bullshit and utterly ruining Supergirl's ongoing story (Hawkman was able to pivot decently to work with the bullshit, but Supergirl was absolutely destroyed). This is an example of when books should be separated, but both books should still ackknowledge the Justice League book if the events ever do have relevance to them, Snyder just shouldn't be able to derail those books on a whim.

But if a character, for example, died in Snyder's Justice League book, they should be dead in every book. I'd be fine if the books stopped pulling in a bunch of random unrelated books for events, but the actual story of the events should be canon to every book. If Dick grayson gets shot in the head, he's Rick Grayson in every book, period, but that should only be the decision of his writer, not some unrelated person that could be ruining the plans of the Nightwing book. Anything else is completely unacceptable. This isn't some random fucking Image book or Valiant comics, this is a real comic book universe and one that needs to exist.

Not only does loosening up the continuity prevent things like what happened to Supergirl, but it also gives writers the chance do whatever they want without having to worry about how it could effect things outside their books.
Despite what it sounds like, I actually do like shared universes, but I can also see the appeal of going for a looser continuity. As fun as shared universes are, having to maintain that kind continuity between books can sometimes be a bit of a hinderance.

 

[kirk55555]

Continuities never hindrance, and when people think it is it's actually just bad writing and/or editor shenanigans. There is no justifiable reason to not have a shared Universe continuity for DC, and if they get rid of that they're dead. It's bad enough that they have the worst writers and the worst people in charge of any of the major companies quite possibly in either of their existences, and I'm including the people have bankrupted Marvel in the 90s in that statement, but literally destroying the universe would be unprecedented.

Like I said before, the second they fire Geoff Johns and Jim Lee they`ll have fixed 90% of their problems, as long as they replace them with people who will say no to idiots like Tom King and Scott Snyder. literally destroying the DC Universe will fix nothing, except destroying something that has existed since before any of them were born. No shared Universe means DC doesn't exist, period.

Here we can agree, and was exactly my point (part of it anyway) about how continuity across the DC "universe" can be intrusive and destructive. I bought Supergirl because I wanted to read about Supergirl, not more of DC's puerile Bat-obsessed bullshit.

she shouldn't have been infected, but she should still acknowledge things like the source wall getting wrecked if it becomes relevant to her book, same with things like Superman giving away his secret identity. There should be continuity, the people in charge just shouldn't let random writerss ruin books unrelated to anything they're doing, which has nothing to do with continuity and all to do with bad leadership and writing

 

[theenglish]

You're just talking about bad writing. Continuity is not the problem in those cases, just terrible writing and writers who are allowed to ruin whatever they want. This gets fixed by the editors telling the writers no more often, and maybe hiring better writers. Destroying the DC Universe is not the solution.

That is literally continuity. Continuity between books is the responsibility of the editor. I have no problem with events in one book happening in a different moment of time than books being published in the real world simultaneously. But when the effects of events in one book have effects on another that are so detrimental they lead to the cancellation of a title then that pisses me off.

In the case of the Titans--that was extreme. The entire point of the title was reuniting the original Teen Titans and it was well done. It could have survived the loss of one character such as Arsenal, but everyone knew that Dick Grayson's story in the Bat titles was temporary and could have easily been glossed over in Titans. The book might have survived.

Similarly the Aquaman fiasco during the Forever Evil story was unnecessary as it could have been easily fixed as well. The problem was that Arthur was written as being in two places at the same time contradicting events in both Justice League and his own book.

Darkseid War had Oa and the Guardians still existing when they had been gone for a while in the Green Lantern book--and there was no point in the GL timeline where the war could logically fit.

I am a fan of a shared universe and I don't really like what I am hearing about DC's plans so far but I am not going to judge this until we see what is actually going on. My guess is that big events will still happen and major changes will still be big changes, but the attempt to keep timelines intact across titles will be more relaxed. And there will be titles set in different parts of the multiverse.

Ideally, this would be going back to the Pre-COIE years where you could have the Captain Marvel family on one Earth, the JSA and All Star Squadron on another, the Freedom Fighters on another, etc.

This was what was promised (and then squandered) with Infinite Crisis and is at the heart of what has made the DC universe cool since the JSA first teamed up with the JLA.

If that is what the Omniverse is then, as a DC fan, I am going to be very happy.

 

[kirk55555]

That is literally continuity. Continuity between books is the responsibility of the editor. I have no problem with events in one book happening in a different moment of time than books being published in the real world simultaneously. But when the effects of events in one book have effects on another that are so detrimental they lead to the cancellation of a title then that pisses me off.

This I can agree with. But my solution is to not let writers massively change other books unless either 1) The writer of the other book(s) agrees and is in on it, or 2) they give the other writer(s) at least enough time to end their story as close to the way they want it as possible. Throwing away continuity entirely is not the correct solution.

In the case of the Titans--that was extreme. The entire point of the title was reuniting the original Teen Titans and it was well done. It could have survived the loss of one character such as Arsenal, but everyone knew that Dick Grayson's story in the Bat titles was temporary and could have easily been glossed over in Titans. The book might have survived.

Similarly the Aquaman fiasco during the Forever Evil story was unnecessary as it could have been easily fixed as well. The problem was that Arthur was written as being in two places at the same time contradicting events in both Justice League and his own book.

Darkseid War had Oa and the Guardians still existing when they had been gone for a while in the Green Lantern book--and there was no point in the GL timeline where the war could logically fit.

I am a fan of a shared universe and I don't really like what I am hearing about DC's plans so far but I am not going to judge this until we see what is actually going on. My guess is that big events will still happen and major changes will still be big changes, but the attempt to keep timelines intact across titles will be more relaxed. And there will be titles set in different parts of the multiverse.

If that is the case, I'd be fine with it. Things return to the status quo so often in comics that if, say, Titans can just keep Nightwing around while Rick grayson is also around I'd be ok, assuming that Rick Grayson was a one or two-ish story arc thing. If Rick Grayson is sticking around for a year or two though, then I'd say that Titans would have to adjust to fit it, even if they were given some leeway timewise to do so. Even Marvel keeps some books out of sync on occasion, but usually they just say that one story takes place slightly before or after the other to explain the inconsistancy.

My issue is eliminating a shared universe altogether, I'm more then open to a bit more flexibility, although my personal favorite solution is just telling writers no more often.

Ideally, this would be going back to the Pre-COIE years where you could have the Captain Marvel family on one Earth, the JSA and All Star Squadron on another, the Freedom Fighters on another, etc.

This was what was promised (and then squandered) with Infinite Crisis and is at the heart of what has made the DC universe cool since the JSA first teamed up with the JLA.

If that is what the Omniverse is then, as a DC fan, I am going to be very happy.

I don't agree with this at all. Fuck having different Earths for everyone, that sucked and was the main reason that COIE was such a godsend to DC. The JSA should always be on the same Earth as the JLA, Captain Marvel, etc. Alternate universes should be used for things like elseworlds type universes, not artificially limiting themain DC characters for no reason. In other words, stories like Kingdom Come or Superman Red Son, and concepts like the Crime Syndicate, should get their own Earth, and honestly there should be an infinite number of these not just a randomly picked number like 52. But the big Dc characters shuld be on a Earth that has a superhero legacy. From the WW2 mysterymen to the era of the Justice League and beyond all being on one Earth is what makes DC's universe great (at least pre-New 52, but as a concept its still great).

 

[JD]

You can still have all of that even if the characters aren't all on the exact same Earth. Like I said before, I doubt that they're going to completely remove all of the connections between the characters, or the history of the superheroes, the different books probably just won't have as much as a direct impact on each other. I can almost guarantee you that they know better than to completely isolate all of the different characters and teams from each other.

 

[kirk55555]

You can still have all of that even if the characters aren't all on the exact same Earth. Like I said before, I doubt that they're going to completely remove all of the connections between the characters, or the history of the superheroes, the different books probably just won't have as much as a direct impact on each other. I can almost guarantee you that they know better than to completely isolate all of the different characters and teams from each other.

This is modern DC Comics. They didn't "know better" then to do the New 52, or to employ Frank Miller past the 1980s, or to not fire a woman harassing editor for literally years, and a thousand other decisions ranging from idiotic to ruinous in the last 10+ years.

To paraphrase Joker from the 89 Batman movie: DC Comics needs an enema. It needs a new Editor in Chief who comes from outside the company, and it needs to revamp its structure so that no writers are allowed to be little kings doing whatever they want. As it is, DC can be a great company with a real shared universe, All of its internal problems are related to the editors and some writers. It just takes someone at WB to care enough to clean house to fix DC Comics.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

DC has a new Editor-in-Chief

 

[JD]

Wow, you could not have timed that any better.