• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Arrowverse's Crisis on Infinite Earths to be 5-Part Crossover

Well here's an interesting interview with Marv Wolfman to publicise a book he's been working on. But there are a couple of questions about COIE including the CW adaptation, hence why I posted it here. Furthermore, to those who've been saying that Marv Wolfman considers abolishing the multiverse a mistake I'd pay particular attention to the question that specifically refers to that very issue (spoiler, he doesn't).
https://www.supermanhomepage.com/ex...an-about-man-and-superman-the-deluxe-edition/
Q: Speaking of “Crisis on Infinite Earths”, the comic book saga, knowing what you know now, would you push for the removal of the Multiverse again?

A: Yes I would. The idea behind Crisis was to bring new readers into the DC fold. We not only succeeded in doing just that, but George and I created a special event that is still being discussed, analyzed, copied and adapted 34 years later.
 
Removal of the multiverse was not why that story is still talked about. It was the epicness of the story and the reset. Losing the multiverse was a mistake -- one of many of the aftermath. Brilliant story though.
 
The '90s Flash was named Barry Patrick Allen.

Ah, okay. Still, if Henry Allen and Jay Garrick could be the same genetic individual with different names due to different life circumstances (something also implied to be true of John Diggle/John Stewart), then there's no reason Barry-90 couldn't be another doppelganger whose parents just chose his name differently. Given that Earth-1 has multiple doppelgangers of Earth-90 residents -- Tina McGee, Anthony Bellows, Julio Mendez, Trickster, Prank -- it logically follows that Henry and Jay are meant to be Barry-90's doppelgangers. After all, two of the three lookalikes ended up as the Flash of their worlds (and battling a version of the Trickster); on Earth-1 it just came a generation later.


Furthermore, to those who've been saying that Marv Wolfman considers abolishing the multiverse a mistake I'd pay particular attention to the question that specifically refers to that very issue (spoiler, he doesn't).

I never said that. I said that I consider abolishing the multiverse a mistake, and clearly the editors at DC eventually did too, since they restored it some years later. I also said, separately, that I'd heard a quote from Wolfman saying that the only good thing about the Crisis story itself was the paycheck -- which, whether my memory of the quote is accurate or not, was not about the decision to eliminate the multiverse but about the quality of the actual writing of the story. You're confusing two different topics: One, wheher CoIE is good as a work of fiction in and of itself; and two, the way that subsequent works of fiction in the decades to come were affected by it or undid its effects.

The decision of DC's editors that eliminating the multiverse was a mistake was, naturally, a decision that was arrived at gradually over many years, since it took that long to restore it fully. So it's not about Wolfman, since he wasn't the one making those decisions years or decades down the road. But the advantage of doing an adaptation later on is that you don't have to repeat the mistakes of the past. You can learn from the whole process your predecessors went through and just skip right to the end rather than recapitulating the whole thing from the start. And the end of the process, the final outcome of the experiment, was the choice to restore the multiverse to the comics, because DC's creators decided the franchise was better off with a multiverse than without one.
 
Well here's an interesting interview with Marv Wolfman to publicise a book he's been working on. But there are a couple of questions about COIE including the CW adaptation, hence why I posted it here. Furthermore, to those who've been saying that Marv Wolfman considers abolishing the multiverse a mistake I'd pay particular attention to the question that specifically refers to that very issue (spoiler, he doesn't).


Q: Speaking of “Crisis on Infinite Earths”, the comic book saga, knowing what you know now, would you push for the removal of the Multiverse again?

A: Yes I would. The idea behind Crisis was to bring new readers into the DC fold. We not only succeeded in doing just that, but George and I created a special event that is still being discussed, analyzed, copied and adapted 34 years later

Wolfman is correct, or course. Crisis on Infinite Earths served that purpose in spectacular fashion, cleaning out a half century of overloaded worlds/titles/characters (including so many DC acquired from Quality, Fawcett, etc.) that ended up making no sense, or compromising the strong titles that had to--by the demands of a shared universe/continuity--acknowledge the silly or creative dead weight. There are near endless reasons Crisis on Infinite Earths is still hailed as one of the finest series/stories in the medium's history, which is all so easy to see with any revisit. The inspiration, brilliant, respectful use of characters great and small (some getting their most memorable arcs such as the Flash, Supergirl and Earth-2's Superman), and for once, this was a comic where the stakes actually felt like it mattered, instead of other comics (and some superhero adaptations) where its a race to just be big and loud for no reason, and never lives up to creator promises.

Wolfman and Perez took the art of comics to a higher plane with Crisis on Infinite Earths, and thankfully, the misguided whining and/or ranting about it by a few will never change its celebrated place in comic book history.
 
Not sure where this screen cap is from, a friend posted it in our Discord channel
attachment.png
 
As Christopher said, it can't be disputed that DC came to realize that the Crisis on Infinite Earths was a mistake, because the proof exists in Infinite Crisis episode, 52, and Final Crisis, and to a degree in Zero Hour and the concept of Hypertime as well.

Yes, CoIE is a significant chapter in comics history, but it's also a chapter in comics history that came to be regarded as a mistake by the company that birthed it.
 
As Christopher said, it can't be disputed that DC came to realize that the Crisis on Infinite Earths was a mistake, because the proof exists in Infinite Crisis episode, 52, and Final Crisis, and to a degree in Zero Hour and the concept of Hypertime as well.

Yes, CoIE is a significant chapter in comics history, but it's also a chapter in comics history that came to be regarded as a mistake by the company that birthed it.

Nonsense, as DC continued to reboot / reimagine long after COIE and well into this century. It happens whenever the weight of company's history becomes difficult to manage and/or creatively bankrupt. At DC, Wolfman and Perez understood that endless character rosters, simple-minded late Golden/early Silver Age stories hurt the structured progress DC was making toward the end of the Silver/dawn of the Bronze Age. It was necessary and worked. DC trying to undo that was an idiotic decision sending them right back to the creatively challenged position they were in as Marvel started to surpass them in that manner in the early 60s.

A certain someone can whine until doomsday about COIE, but it will never remove it from its historic, celebrated status.
 
Each of the events that I cited was an attempt to undo the Crisis on Infinite Earths and reintroduce the Multiverse; that is not an opinion, it is indisputable fact.

It is also an indisputable fact that there has only been one full-continuity reboot since CoIE: 2011's Flashpoint event and New 52 Initiative; Rebirth is not a reboot because it is an expansion of the New 52 continuity while also being an attempt to slightly undo it in the same way that Zero Hour, the introduction of the Hypertime concept, Infinite Crisis, 52, and Final Crisis were attempts to undo the Crisis on Infinite Earths.
 
Flashpoint being a so-called "expansion" is simply more altering what came before, just like the New 52, Spin it however you like, but the fact every reboot post COIE simply exists did not make it worthy. They are still bad, creatively hollow / unnecessary decisions, and if the incredibly hostile reaction to the New 52 taught DC anything (not really), its that it was one of the worst mistakes in the publisher's history.

Meanwhile, COIE is still considered a classic of the medium, no matter how much someone rants about it, or rubs a bottle, wishing the opposite to be true.
 
My thoughts on Crisis -- i was there when the comics first came out. AMazing piece of work...not just the writing, but George Perez was the perfect artist for this... making this feel so epic, and squeezing in all he could into 12 issues (plus supplemental scene in other comics, like we have seen in the show).

I agree that the story itself was magnificent and well done. While the idea at the time made sense... it's just the aftermath wasn't well done. For example, i hated John Byrne's take on Superman (the human solar battery concept...umm.. only to a small degree do i agree).

We needed the multiverse to exist afterward... but some consolidation and reset definitely was needed.

Crisis also spawned the idea of company-wide epics that were intended to get people excited about the company, but also for fans to try out new titles. That is how I saw Secret Wars... a little like the Deep Space Nine perception that the show was a rip off of Babylon 5 (i love BOTH shows , by the way...even if the creation of one might have not been under the best circumstances).

To me, Crisis is kinda the live action equivelent of Secret Wars (and ENdgame being the live action Crisis). Not exactly, for sure (they set this up from literally Day 1 of the Flash TV show), but that's the vibe (pun intended) i get from it.

It's definitely got me excited, and seeing how they have respected DC live action history of the past, i expect to see and especially FEEL the same of that. ANd i am one of those who still think the DC TV shows CAN co-exist in one universe. TV's Flashpoint showed how easy it is to slough off changes to the past, and just go with the flow (where MOST of the past is the same, just a few changes that are soon forgotten by most...y'know, like the Crisis in the comics ;) )
 
I had a thought the other day about the whole The Flash must die thing, maybe they'll find a way for Earth-90 Barry Allen/The Flash to take the Earth-1 versions place? That way a Barry Allen/Flash will die, but we won't lose the Grant Gustin version.
 
I had a thought the other day about the whole The Flash must die thing, maybe they'll find a way for Earth-90 Barry Allen/The Flash to take the Earth-1 versions place? That way a Barry Allen/Flash will die, but we won't lose the Grant Gustin version.
Also doesn't mean he has to stay dead.
 
While the idea at the time made sense... it's just the aftermath wasn't well done. For example, i hated John Byrne's take on Superman (the human solar battery concept...umm.. only to a small degree do i agree).

I agree with this--and I think Byrne brought in some good ideas and some bad ones. I actually liked the idea that Superman was the disguise and Clark was who he is. I loved the idea of bringing the Kents into Clark's adult life. Most people don't lose both parents so young, and I think having his parents around humanized Clark because that relationship between a parent and son is very human.

I did not like the changes made to Krypton and that ridiculous birthing matrix idea. I get that they wanted to make it colder, but that takes away from the tragedy. I did not like Clark never being Superboy, because I felt that Superboy was a very cool concept, very relatable to kids, and just a fun part of the character that I personally enjoyed.

I didn't like weakening Superman either. Good writers will work within Superman's strengths and don't need to weaken him to help their story. There are beings that can harm him physically even if they can't beat him. He had the two vulnerabilities. And there are things Superman just can't do, like when he couldn't save Jonathan from his heart attack in the movie.

I had a thought the other day about the whole The Flash must die thing, maybe they'll find a way for Earth-90 Barry Allen/The Flash to take the Earth-1 versions place? That way a Barry Allen/Flash will die, but we won't lose the Grant Gustin version.

Thought of that too, but I'm not a fan of the idea. Flash90 should get a good crossover story with Barry. The show deserves its respect, and I think killing Flash90 would be a bad call because it would disrespect that show and ITS fans. Plus, it's a cop out.

Not sure where this screen cap is from, a friend posted it in our Discord channel
attachment.png

That is very interesting depending on context, though it reiterates a consistent complaint I have had about Tyler's version of the character. I'll wait to see to judge.
 
That occurred to me too.
He's a popular comic book character. They never stay dead.

I mean seriously; through magic, science, retcons or just shoddy writing all of these have died and come back to life: Batman, Superman, Supergirl, not one but TWO Robins, Captain America, Spider-Man, Bucky Barnes, Jean Grey...Oh yeah, and some guy called Barry Allen! ;)
 
Last edited:
Barry Allen should have stayed dead. The most interesting thing he ever did was die / save the universe. Wally was an amazing character that had 20 years to develop and then they took all of his best stories and abilities, and gave them all back to Barry, while crapping all over Wally. Gustin should have played a Wally that lost his Barry early in season 1, and needed team flash to help him grow and learn and take the mantle/fill the shoes.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top