I'm not EJA, but...yep, sure. Bring in new characters to take over for the previous generation as they age and fade away.
Marvel Comic's sliding timeline & its problems
- Thread starter EJA
- Start date
Not anymore, but in it's day in spawned radio shows and feature length motion pictures.
Hey, I'll be forty this year and just ordered the Mythos hardcover from Amazon based on my own response to EJA.Well, you can't!!!!
In all seriousness, Bruce-Wayne-as-Batman is more a concept than a character. The same holds true for many other mythological entities, of course.
Speaking for myself, I think that there's a successful precedent for this in Judge Dredd. I'm not too well-up on the character's recent activities, but I do recall that Mega-City One time was broadly synchronised with real time. Marvel's Ultimate Universe is both a precedent and a wasted opportunity, I think. What Marvel could do is have two or three "universes" on the go at once,with a new one every fifteen years or so and progressing in real-time; or keep going as is with the main continuity and have one alternate universe where characters age and get killed (permanently).
Never heard of it.
^ That happens a lot on this board.
So you'd prefer we were reading about the fourth or fifth Batman or Superman, the grandson of Peter Parker and a Fantastic Four headed by a middle aged Franklin Richards?
Sorry, but thats not who Batman, Superman, Spider-Man and the FF are nor what they should be. Their civilan IDs are as important to the concept as the costumed ones. It what made them famous in the first place. Remember they dont have to age, they aren't flesh and blood. We dont watch then 24/7. A singel adventure can span 12 issues but last less that a day for the character. So at what rate would they age anyway?
And the next year the age of heroes would start in 1979. Whats the point? So you can sleep soundly knowing that Dum Dum Dugan isnt a kick ass 100 year old?
Davros said:
Which works fine for that strip which was about a family and was something the creator of the strip intended.
No, I'd rather be reading about new characters. I didn't say they had to be children of the previous characters, or new incarnations of Batman or Spider-Man.
But what I want wouldn't be financially viable, so meh, whatever.
It's what they do with the JSA... but, no, DC isn't going to give up on Bruce Wayne as Batman, or Clark Kent as Superman.
And Disney didn't buy Marvel for Peter Parker III, but Peter Parker.
And new and old characters can't co-exist? What purpose does "killing off" the old character serve?
Sure they can co-exist--for a while. You don't think Bruce Wayne is going to be around to mentor Terry McGuinness forever, do you? Would an Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters under the care of an older Scott Summers in his 50s or 60s (I don't know about how old he was supposed to be when X-Men began) really be such a bad thing?
I just think it would be more interesting to me, personally, if these characters were allowed to age and progress as people normally, instead of staying around the same general age while time continues to move around them. I'm not saying my way would be better than how it is currently.
I just think it would be more interesting to me, personally, if these characters were allowed to age and progress as people normally, instead of staying around the same general age while time continues to move around them. I'm not saying my way would be better than how it is currently.
DC is more into the Legacy characters than Marvel is.
They would make for interesting one offs and "future history" type stories. (and have).
But most of those one-offs and "future history" type stories rarely end up actually "counting" in the official storyline. It's like when one of the Trek shows would do a crazy alternate timeline episode where everything changes, only to hit the reset button at the end and render it all meaningless. I don't see why it would be any less interesting than keeping the same characters for all time. There's no suspense anymore with them, because nine times out of ten, if one of them dies, chances are they'll be back sooner or later.
Batman Beyond does and actually has three different realities now Iron Man has just introduced a future history that introduced Tony and theorized Pepper's granddaughter named Ginny Stark that will be playing a part of Fraction's ongoing story.
That sounds interesting (though, again, I'm not arguing for all the presumptive new characters being children of the original characters, as that would get pretty lame), but having it all happen in an alternate--and therefore meaningless--reality cheapens the whole idea.
That just means you've read or watched a lot ( or too many
) of these stories. For some readers its their "first time". The aging jaded fanboy should not be a "key demographic."
I'm not aging! I don't start to get old until I hit 30. 
[/denial]
But yeah, like I said, I know that what I'd like to see happen wouldn't be financially viable, since Marvel/DC/etc. want to continue to attract new fans as time goes on (though I don't see why those new fans couldn't be attracted to new characters).
[/denial]But yeah, like I said, I know that what I'd like to see happen wouldn't be financially viable, since Marvel/DC/etc. want to continue to attract new fans as time goes on (though I don't see why those new fans couldn't be attracted to new characters).
Everyone is a new character, until they're old
But if the character was old when they were first introduced, were they still new?Everyone is a new character, until they're old
*head explodes*
Similar threads
