| Author |
|
Brian O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 13 November 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 1964
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 3:31pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
Apparently, in the 'single, post-Crisis universe', the first 11 issues of the series 'never happened', and all that was left was the shadow demons overrunning the planet, along the lines of CRISIS # 12.So, an entire year of buildup, crossovers, and layer upon layer of overwrought drama...just so they could kill 'old Green Arrow without a beard', the Lieutenant Marvels, and both versions of Wonder Woman...wait, SHE didn't exist yet, either...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4184
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 3:49pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
I think the idea was to have a "last hurrah" for the Multiple Earths set-up before wiping it out.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 12186
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 4:13pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
I've learnt a lot about CRISIS in this topic. I knew the basics, but now, having read some facts, I am convinced that fandom were asking the questions that did not need to be answered. It's depressing.
I believe Bond was given a birthdate in one of the novels (1920 perhaps?). And yet I also believe there was a reference to Bond having bought a Bentley in 1929. So, nine-year-old Bond bought a Bentley, eh? Must have had generous parents - and passed his driving test early.
Truth is, and that's only one example, it doesn't matter. Bond's birthdate has been fluid. Lots of fictional aspects of a character are fluid. Superman's origins were fluid (i.e. orphanage taking him in, Jonathan and Martha being the first to find him). We just have to, as some advocate, stop mentioning it.
Returning to Bond, I'm sure Ian Fleming never expected his creation to take on a life of its own for many decades. Did he worry about it? Did the franchise (literary) need its own "Crisis" in order to deal with the 1920 birthdate/Bentley discrepancy? No.
My comparisons are flawed, but hopefully someone will understand my point.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2365
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 4:55pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
Something that has not been mentioned yet (here or in any other CRISIS discussion I'm aware of) is the fact that the idea of multiple Earths and an actual Multiverse is legitimately accepted (or discussed) scientific theory! Theoretical physicists say there could be an infinite number of parallel universes, one for every possible choice or change of action. (That seems a bit much to me, but people do entertain the thought.) DC's Earth 2 and other stories simply introduced kids (and older readers) to a scientific theory that was already out there and growing in acceptance and popularity.
To reduce an infinite number of universes to one (as in CRISIS) or 52 (as in DC's NEW 52) or Marvel's recent multiverse-destroying crossover storyline (I don't even know what to call it) is not scientific. It's a story, an imposed conceit--another layer of convoluted continuity forced on readers to remember.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike Norris
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4274
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 5:35pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
Not sure one should invoke science when discussing superheroes. And the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is a bit different than Vibrational Frequency Theory of Parallel Universes. The MWI only dates back to the late 50's, though I suppose it's possible Broome. Schwartz or Fox heard of it. As I kid I had no problem with the concept. I think it was older fans and fans turned pros who had the problem. Especially those who wanted DC to be more like Marvel.
Marvel should never have gotten in the "Multiverse business" in the first place. Their one universe was fine. Another victim of "Other Company Envy Syndrome".
Edited by Mike Norris on 27 August 2017 at 5:35pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Adam Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 July 2017
Posts: 1717
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 6:13pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
Nothing wrong with Marvel having a multiverse.
But having any of the alternate timelines seen in WHAT IF? seen anywhere outside of WHAT IF? -- that's a problem.
Characters from the future of alternate timelines (Rachel Summers, Nimrod) or possible "mainstream" future timelines (Cable, Bishop) becoming regular characters in the X-MEN titles -- big, big, huge gigantic problem, and one of several reasons I stopped reading those titles decades ago.
It wasn't so much that I couldn't follow everything -- I just didn't enjoy having to do the work to follow everything.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike Norris
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4274
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 6:31pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Adam Schulman wrote:
| Nothing wrong with Marvel having a multiverse.
But having any of the alternate timelines seen in WHAT IF? seen anywhere outside of WHAT IF? -- that's a problem |
|
|
The latter is a multiverse. No matter if it's alternate timelines or parallel universes, its a multiverse.
Was there really a need for the Ultimate Marvel Universe? Or an ongoing in the Squadron Supreme Universe. Or especially universe with a darker version of the Squadron Supreme?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2365
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 6:32pm | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
As a kid, I felt the Multiverse was some sort of "Gentleman's Agreement" between Marvel and DC. (With the Squadron Supreme's world the bridge in-between!) Both realities could exist, just in parallel universes. This was after I read that the Quality heroes had their own Earth, and the Fawcett characters did too, etc.--it just made sense...and kept things clean. (Even my 11-year-old mind could see the confusion that would occur if you tried to retroactively fit all these continuities together!)
When Superman first met Spider-Man, I was initially expecting some sort of dimensional travelling, but I was fine with them being on the same Earth so their supporting casts could meet too--for this one story! (If one thought about it, this must be yet another parallel Earth where both Marvel and DC characters lived--a concept that could boggle the mind!) No need to explain why Superman was never around to help whenever Galactus came calling. (A problem Marvel needlessly gave itself when they retroactively created "Silver Age" heroes the Blue Marvel and the Sentry.)
The Multiverse idea was just a tiny bit complicated--but complicated in a way that was fun for an 11-year-old fan! Retroactively altering established history and continuity is fun for no one.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jim Lynch
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 617
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 8:21pm | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
I went to catholic school as a kid, and the only problem I had with Earth-2,3, S, X, was, did each of these earths have a Jesus? My total enjoyment of a comic book concept was dampened by theology.
I enjoyed the Crisis story, it would have been better as just a story.
And for my money, nobody drew Kal-L better than George Perez.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Christopher Frost
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 October 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 484
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 8:41pm | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
"Just to make sure I understand you ------ Various monthly titles in which multiple iterations of the characters appeared from time to time (but mostly didn't) was "daunting", but a single series in which every single one of those iterations appeared all at the same time, that was a "gift"?"
Correct. My exposure to the multiple iterations of various characters in comics I read as a kid didn't make a lot of sense to me at the time but that changed with Crisis. I'll credit Marv Wolfman and his writing for making it happen for me. I can't specify a particular issue or sequence of it that made it all "click" for me, but it was during the reading the Crisis that it all fell into place for me. With that series, Marv was able to make me understand the concept of the multiverse while at the same time cleaning it up and providing a fresh starting point to build from. I enjoyed the story and the art and still like to re-read it every few years. I'd consider that a gift.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Adam Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 July 2017
Posts: 1717
|
| Posted: 27 August 2017 at 11:22pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
The latter is a multiverse. No matter if it's alternate timelines or parallel universes, its a multiverse.
I didn't say it wasn't. But if the WHAT IF? stories aren't referenced in other titles, then they're just self-contained stories, like the "imaginary stories" in the 1960s Superman titles. No reason to give them numbers (Earth-432, or whatever).
Was there really a need for the Ultimate Marvel Universe? Or an ongoing in the Squadron Supreme Universe. Or especially universe with a darker version of the Squadron Supreme?
Is there a "need" for superhero comics at all? I think Marvel editors thought the Ultimate line might become a replacement for their traditional line -- of course, that idea was thrown out very quickly once it was clear that the new versions of characters were going to have very different personalities than the old ones (Ultimate Captain America is a jingoistic jerk, Ultimate Hulk eats people, etc.).
The Squadron Supreme wasn't a problem, IMO, and it wasn't like we saw them all that often. I didn't like what I read of "Supreme Power" but I don't like JMS's writing, period. But as a self-contained story I wouldn't have cared if it was published or not.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Trevor Smith
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 September 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3542
|
| Posted: 28 August 2017 at 4:52am | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
I was *far* from a critical reader at the time Crisis
came out - just a fan that knew what he liked. I
wasn't into dissecting or picking apart what I was
reading - "this is boring" or "I don't like this art"
were about the extent of my critiques.
All that said, at the time, I definitely had a sense
of being let down and finding that Crisis fell flat.
I don't know if it was maybe because of over-exposure,
and that there was no way Crisis could live up to the
hype and raised expectations, but every issue seemed
to leave me with a sense of "that's it?", with only
that gorgeous artwork keeping me on board for the
whole series.
Decades later, I see all the problems and
ramifications being discussed here, but at the time it
was something that I expected to be this massively
entertaining bang that ended up being just a pretty
whimper.
Edited by Trevor Smith on 28 August 2017 at 7:04am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
