Noted. It was a coincidental choice of words, BTW.
What are your thoughts about seeing the prime universe again?
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
Noted. It was a coincidental choice of words, BTW.
I've been reading DC for 50 years.
It's done to make money for the IP holders and the licensees. Marvel properties are spread out over three or four studios. With some properties having multiple continuities. Marvel's been playing the multiple continuity game pretty hard in comics for a decade or more, so its not exactly a DC thing anymore.
As I said, 50 years of reading comics. I'm pretty committed.Currently DC's leading the market in sales. Sales will drop off as readers lose interest, same as they've done for the last 80 years.
I love the smell of hyperbole in the morning.
I'm not a Marvel fan except for maybe The Fantastic 4, but they typically sell at -least- 25% more books than DC, that is, when DC isn't rebooting their entire line and publishing #1 issues of everything.
Right know DC is winning. And its been a for a few months.
Because Marvel never restarts books at number 1. I think Captain Marvel is on her fourth of fifth number one in as many years.
Sucks to be an FF fan right now, as they don't have a book and half the team is MIA. . As weird as that may sound.
That we care about. Enough to spend our time watching them, and seeking out blogs on the internet, where we can freely post our opinions on the subject. What I find most curious though... is that you found my genuine opinion "fucking offensive", but see nothing wrong with your own offensive choice of words. I may have been a little over zealous with my imagery, but it was unintentional.
The power of the liberal propaganda machine astounds me. Foul language is acceptable, but heaven forbid you insult -- intentional or otherwise -- some "protected" group. Heaven help us all.
I haven't read FF in years, but it's the only Marvel book I ever liked. How could they not have their own book? They were always one of Marvel's hottest properties. Surprisingly, the success both companies are having in the movies aren't necessarily translating to more comics sales.
Why insult anyone? What's the point? To try to make yourself feel better about yourself?
People are different, and there's zero reason to insult someone over something they have no control.
Fuckity, fuck, fuck, FUCK!!!
Yes, because a "fuck" once in a while doesn't hurt anybody. Racism, sexism, homophobia or transphobia on the other hand do. If you don't like that, you're out of luck here. This is not something that is up for discussion on this site.
Do not continue to derail this thread with your rants about liberal agenda or PC culture. Stay on topic.
Easy rule: Do not insult people and do not troll and bait them with sexist, racist or LGBT-phobic content.
You didn't even get an official warning for your earlier post so get off that cross.
You made your point, now get back to the topic, too.
Marvel has the team on "hiatus" for some reason. Speculation is it's related to the movie rights being in 20 Century Fox's hands. Right now Johnny is hanging with the Inhumans and the Avengers and Ben is a Guardian of the Galaxy. Reed and Sue are "outside the Universe" or something.
Star Trek has had different universes since 1967. It was probably "Mirror, Mirror" that gave DC the idea.
I stand corrected.
The last year or so of Dark Shadows were set in an alternate universe to the main one. That would have been late 60's/really early 70's.
It was even introduced in a similar manner to the Nuverse - main characters from the 'Prime' 1970's, accidentally travels backwards and sideways to 'Parallel' 1800's.
It was even introduced in a similar manner to the Nuverse - main characters from the 'Prime' 1970's, accidentally travels backwards and sideways to 'Parallel' 1800's.
Last edited:
No, Voyager was caused by stifling from the producers, stupidity from the network, and using a staff of writers who had been writing Trek nonstop for over a decade. Even if we just look at that last part, one needs to remember that even the deepest wells run dry.
DS9 was running in parralel during much of Voyagers run, yet it was in my view better written and an overall better quality show. Even the least developed characters on that show were written better than most of the regular cast of voyager. So I don't think that the creativity wells were completely dry at that point. With Voyager, they were simply slaves to the formula, a formula that continued post voyager.
I am late to this discussIon but I for one am happy to be back in the sandbox of the original universe! I have enjoyed the kelvin movies to some degree but they have not felt like real trek to me. I'm hoping that discovery will be good.
I agree with this, DS9 was a very strong show. I caught it mostly in reruns after it was done and I was very impressed with the powerful stories that were told around the midpoint and later in the series. I particularly enjoyed having Worf join the cast. The Klingon storylines and many of the dominion war stories remain among my favorite.
Voyager was entertaining but I felt that it never quite captured the drama or adventure of TNG and DS9. I enjoyed VOY but I feel that it was the weakest of those three shows.
I love it. I love the fact that Star Trek is (supposed to be) one singular coherent fictional universe since the sixties. How many franchises can claim a property of theirs from the 60s is still canonical? Imagine if the new Batman movies had to be in line with Batman '66? Even Bond reboots itself regularly. Trek imagines a whole future. But it still fits together. Of course there comes a bunch of problems with it, like continuity errors, change of tone, badly aged effects and make up. But all in all it's remarkable how rarely you have to turn a blind eye for all Trek incarnations to fit together.
It's one of Trek's unique selling points. And it manifests Star Trek on a whole as not just the story of some particular characters (Kirk, Spock, Data), but as a setting, a world that many different characters and stories can take place in. And as such to be able to create a set of characters and stories for each generation of viewers, that are still interconnected and can further develop.
I think splitting up the continuity was the biggest sin of Trek09. Because apart from that it's a fine movie. But it came just slightly at the wrong time, a last remainder of the reboot-craze of the 2000s, to just drop the ball exactly at the point when shared universes became popular with the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A shared universe with the new movie characters would have been okay, (although they would have needed a lot of recalibration of worldbuilding after Into Darkness). But having a modern television show take place in the same, single, shared universe that is inhabited by a dorky 60s' pop-coloured space opera fills me with utter delight.
It's one of Trek's unique selling points. And it manifests Star Trek on a whole as not just the story of some particular characters (Kirk, Spock, Data), but as a setting, a world that many different characters and stories can take place in. And as such to be able to create a set of characters and stories for each generation of viewers, that are still interconnected and can further develop.
I think splitting up the continuity was the biggest sin of Trek09. Because apart from that it's a fine movie. But it came just slightly at the wrong time, a last remainder of the reboot-craze of the 2000s, to just drop the ball exactly at the point when shared universes became popular with the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A shared universe with the new movie characters would have been okay, (although they would have needed a lot of recalibration of worldbuilding after Into Darkness). But having a modern television show take place in the same, single, shared universe that is inhabited by a dorky 60s' pop-coloured space opera fills me with utter delight.
Bond has been rebooted only once, in the 2006 Casino Royale. Previously he was simply recast.
