PDA

View Full Version : COMICS FOR DUMMIES #14: THE AGED APOCALYPSE


Joel Phillips
Jan 11, 2005, 11:11 pm
<img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/logos/cfdlogo.jpg" align=left border=0 alt="Comics For Dummies logo">By Raul Grau, RJacknite@aol.com

The Aged Apocalypse

The year was 1995. The Macarena was playing at every senior prom across the country, Patrick Swayze made his return to the big screen dressed as a terribly ugly woman, and Marvel canceled their entire X-line of X-titles. Legion, the schizophrenic and often comatose son of Professor Xavier, decided to do some impromptu time traveling, and ended up accidentally killing his father. It turns out that when you kill your own daddy long before you are ever conceived, that creates certain problems, especially when your dad was all set to later found the team which represented a sizable chunk of the Marvel Universe. No Xavier meant no X-Men, and that opened the door for the Age of Apocalypse. Five months later, everything went right back to normal, with barely a mention of it from then on out... until this March, when Marvel revisits AOA, and we all know that revisits are always a good idea.

The premise for Age of Apocalypse was simple enough... well, as simple as superpowered, schizophrenic, time-traveling, walking paradoxes usually are. Legion had the bright idea that preemptively killing Magneto, the chief foe of his father's X-Men, would create a better world for all mutants (himself included). Unfortunately, Charles Xavier has always been the self-sacrificing type, and he saved the man who would be Magneto at the cost of his own life. Apocalypse, the Darwinian immortal mutant, noticed the power display of the temporal assassination and sped up his world conquering plan accordingly. Fast forward twenty years, and America is under the iron fist of Apocalypse, and not the oversized glove of Disney.

It turns out that even without the influence of Xavier, the X-Men would still find their way into being. Sure, Wolverine went by the name Weapon X, Gambit lead the X-Ternals, and Colossus (a giant metallic man) wore a mask, but these X-Men were pretty much the same as their mainstream counterparts, just with cooler costumes, improved powers (so, basically, Xavier was holding them back), and the freewheeling personalities that only seem to come with alternate universe stories. A plot device called the M'Kraan Crystal was slowly wiping out reality, the surviving humans were plotting the nuclear annihilation of Apocalypse's empire (pretty much, all of North America), and Bishop (bald for the first time) was screaming about how history was not quite right. The X-folks tried to deal with all of these various annoyances, quite a few of them died along the way, and they finally succeeded in unraveling their own timeline, just as the nukes were falling over New York. End of AOA.

The Age did have a few (very few) lasting effects. Holocaust, Sugar Man, and Dark Beast, arguably the three least interesting characters in their entire universe, managed to stow away to the regular X-books. Another new face, Nate Grey, the X-Man, kept his series going long after the other Agers faded, but later lost the battle with cancellation. However, the Age of Apocalypse itself was over, having began (Legion screws up badly), middled (the X-Men do stuff, almost all of which is rendered moot), and ended (lots and lots of nukes). This self-contained tale had been told, which is why the return seems so perplexing. Of course, this is not the first time an alternate timeline has been strip-mined for future material... though just look at how those turned out.

Let us start with Kingdom Come, still remembered fondly as one of the best miniseries of the 90s, not just for the fully painted interior art by Alex Ross, but also for its (mostly) innovative storyline (Squadron Supreme who?) and expansive cast (but mostly for the fully painted interior art by Alex Ross). In this mildly dystopian future, the up and coming generation of heroes were all of the grim n' gritty sort, engaging in pointless street battles that left property damaged and civilians killed... of course, the older set of heroes does the same exact thing, but they at least feel a little bad about it. Superman had ended his Neverending Battle years earlier, but cuts his retirement short in order to bring together all of the heroes who agreed with him, and imprison all of the ones who do not. Batman, on the other hand, did not care much for that plan, and put together his own private superpowered army to take out Superman's private superpowered army.

In the end, a handy atomic explosion narrowed the list of superpowered beings significantly, and the survivors decided to no longer place themselves above the likes of normal men, giving up their masks to take on a more personal kind of world saving. The epilogue added to the collected editions of KC provided a fine coda, with the codename abandoned Clark and Diana asking the beleaguered Bruce to be the godfather of their expected child. There were plans for a Waid/Ross sequel of sorts, set in the modern DC universe, with the heroes attempting to prevent the forthcoming carnage, but the story of Kindgom Come had been fully told with a clear beginning, middle, and end. There was no need to revisit this future... so of course DC did.

Just over two years later, The Kingdom arrived, a skip week event which seemed to do everything it possibly could to erase Kingdom Come as well as another much-heralded miniseries. Ross wisely distanced himself from the project, where all of the heroes were back in their spandex, including quite a few who really should have been far too dead to do much fighting. Now, granted, we never did see the irradiated corpses of Power Woman, Flash IV, and Zatara, but KC was pretty apparent with the whole 'who lived?' thing, and then there was Hawkman, whose irradiated corpse we did actually see, so that one should be a little harder to get around.

Of course, perhaps I am being too harsh... perhaps this timeline did indeed need even more costumed heroes added to it, like Offspring, the pliable son of Plastic Man, and perhaps having a trio of heroes flying around the world to announce the birth of his son does nothing to lessen Superman's proclamation that the heroes not set themselves above society, but The Kingdom did the one thing that no DC series should be able to do and get away with... it made a mockery out of Crisis. Crisis on Infinite Earths set up the rules for the modern DC universe (those rules, by the way, were less timelines, less Flash's, and more aging), but The Kingdom decided that all of those erased universes and Elseworlds can feel free to interact with the present whenever they felt like, though the magic of Hypertime. Some people (for example, me) regarded Hypertime as a new excuse for lazy writers to ignore continuity, but, at the very least, it made the unnecessary return to the Kingdom Comeverse all the more disappointing.

Ten years before KC, DC had released another grim, mutant-filled look at the future, where another long-retired titan remembered his neverending war on crime, but this time The Dark Knight Returns. Here, Batman had hung up his pointy-eared cowl a decade earlier, but an escalating crime rate (and a maniacal Reagan in the White House) brings back the Bat. He finds a new, biologically female Robin in form of eager young Carrie Keane Kelley, whose parents were woefully unaware of where their daughter was, and the pair set about curtailing the 'rampaging mutant' population of Gotham City. Superman, hero turned government lackey, ends up in a life or death struggle with the loose cannon of a caped crusader, a battle which Batman both wins and dies from. Of course, his death, like all events in the DC Universe, was comprehensively planned out by Batman, and the tale ends with Bruce, Carrie, and their happy-go-lucky mutant army plotting their future.

DKR may have been a bit open-ended with its ending, but readers received enough closure to feel satisfied, and were allowed to let their imaginations run wild, dreaming of what the Bat-army would do next... of course, imagination is overrated, so, fifteen years later, The Dark Knight Strikes Again. Only three years had passed in DKR time, but Carrie had been promoted from Robin to Catgirl, the new President was digital, and nude women delivered the news (ok, maybe that future is not all bad). The Bat-forces were finally ready to make their move, beginning with the collection of other former heroes to aid in their society-toppling plans, and therein lies the Crisis (figuratively speaking).

Now, there was nothing intrinsically wrong with DK2 (though I doubt a single person exists who prefers it to the original), but it did create problems where none were before. DKR gave the impression that Superman had given himself over to governmental servitude in order to protect the other surviving (and hiding) heroes, but here we see other folks operating publicly in full spandex (or, in Wonder Woman's case, full metal brassiere). DKR could have been the actual factual future of the Batman (not that DC would ever let him age dramatically, but still), and perhaps having Hal Jordan as Green Lantern and Barry Allen as Flash was fun for Frank Miller, but for the readers it creates an Identity Crisis (figuratively speaking). I will not even get into the deaging of Green Arrow or the dystopian Plastic Man... some things are just better not being ranted about.

DC is certainly not the only publisher to routinely fast foward their characters, and Age of Apocalypse was not the first dystopia visited upon the X-books either. That distinction goes to Days of the Future Past, a tense confused world where robotic Sentinels had killed all non-mutant superheroes as well as all the less popular mutants, leaving only the most popular mutants to fill government-sponsored prison camps. This future resulted from the assassination of bigoted Senator Robert Kelly by the Brotherhood of Magneto-less but still Evil Mutants, so Kate Pryde (the grown-up, name changed version of Kitty), projected back in time by currently nonexistent Cyclops/Jean-spawn Rachel Summers, assisted the X-Men in foiling the plot, thereby erasing that terrible possible future. In just two issues, the story was over... or so it seemed.

Four years later, Rachel Summers wandered her way into the modern era, proving to be pretty spry for someone who no longer existed. It seemed that the Days of the Future Past timeline was still a possibility, just as long as any number of factors still occurred, including (but not limited to) the death of Senator Kelly at a later date and any sort of progress in the Sentinel project. As the X-verse grew, the visits to dystopia town became more frequent, as every added character, be they a new New Mutant or Excaliburite, was shown in their DotFP form. 1990 even brought Days of the Future Present, which went on for four whole annuals about how much of a nut an adult Franklin Richards could be, and introduced Ahab, who was like a mutant-hunting Melville character. Can Days of the Future Pluperfect be far behind?

Of course, not every alternate timeline needs to remain isolated by design. Earth X contained the seeds of its own sequels (as well as a whole lot of other seeds, seemingly one per person). Guardians of the Galaxy, Legion of Super-Heroes, and the 2099 line all fall within the category of ongoing, if alternate, futures (and, coincidentally enough, are all far enough away in their respective futures to make appearances by modern day characters unlikely). So why is it that some timelines can be played in repeatedly, while others need to erect heavy fencing to protect their integrity?

Being mainstream comic book readers, we all know that these characters will outlive each of us, remaining young as long as their sliding timelines will allow. Barring divine or editorial intervention, they will never have a future, and simply spend their days in the eternal present of the spotless superhero. Therefore, there is a profound freedom in an alternate timeline, where characters can change, grow, and die (sometimes all in the same issue), and writers are allowed to break from the serial format, if just for a miniseries, to tell a story with an actual ending. This is not necessarily a better way to tell stories than the serial method (yes, it is), but it has different rules.

By the way, this type of self-contained storytelling is not just inherent to alternate timelines, as you might have noticed it in your Watchmens, your Sandmans, and your Bones. It shows up whenever a creator is allowed to tell their story, in full, and then to put their characters away, hopefully in a place where no one else (not even themselves) can ever reach them again. Honestly, as neat as you might think it could be, do you really want to see a sequel to Watchmen? Or how about The Punisher Kills the Marvel Universe... Again, The Other Last Avengers Story, or The X-Men: Even More Ended?

I am not saying that the return to the Age of Apocalypse will necessarily be bad (though it probably will be), but it will invariably cheapen the original work. AOA has already been revisited, but through stories set in its own past. Neil Gaiman occasionally returns to Sandman, constructing some new, brilliant, but untold tale from the earlier years of Morpheus (immortals, by nature, have lots of untold tales), and that does nothing to lessen the established end to the story. It is only when creators try to expand upon the already finished that both the new and the classic work suffer.

People, have we learned nothing from The Kingdom?

<center><hr width=75%></center>

Raul Grau has a peculiar affinity for stories set in alternate timelines. This disorder probably stems from an early childhood incident, where he wondered aloud about what Mister Rodgers would be like as an unrelenting cyborg killer with comfortable shoes.

<center><hr width=75%></center>

The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the writer, and are not reflective of ComiX-Fan or its other staff in general.

Jon Hancock
Jan 11, 2005, 11:30 pm
Real good stuff Raul. I swerved Kingdom big time and am thankful I've never even seen a back issue of it.

Ken Boehm
Jan 11, 2005, 11:53 pm
I never read the Kingdom, and therefore never really understood hypertime. Any chance someone could go into it in a bit more detail?

And Raul, Reagan was a smooth pimp in DKR :) . If I had Superman on my side, I'd sure as hell fight those damn commies. I'm suprised you didn't mention how stupid Barry looked running around in shorts in DK2, though (that was the point where I just knew it would not be a fun read).

And I'm not holding my breath for the AoA sequel; in fact, there has never really been a sequel in the comics (at least the big 2) sense that was equal to or better than the original. That's a shame, really.

Jon Hancock
Jan 11, 2005, 11:58 pm
I remember how excited me and my brother were to get DK2. After issue one the excitement had dulled slightly and after #2 it just became a bit of a chore to read.

raul grau
Jan 12, 2005, 01:44 am
Thanks Jon, and I think I made my feelings on the Kingdom abundantly clear.

I never read the Kingdom, and therefore never really understood hypertime. Any chance someone could go into it in a bit more detail?

Hypertime was basically the idea that all DC stories, from the imaginary tales of the 60s to Elseworlds to Tangent, are real (or as real as comic books get), and still exist, despite Crisis. Kingdom #2 also stated that occasionally these other timelines would interact with the main one, so a character might recall someone they had never actually met or have their personal history changed and not notice... say good-bye to continuity. Thankfully, after a brief storyline in Superboy, Hypertime was never really mentioned again.

And, yes, the black costume with attached short shorts looked ridiculous on Barry. That is another point that almost goes without saying. :)

- Raul

Jon Hancock
Jan 12, 2005, 02:14 am
Coincidentally I saw the Homer skips church episode of the Simpsons today and now all I can think of is Barry Allen in a pair of black leather briefs, wiggling his butt, while singing "I wear short shorts!"

Jordan T. Maxwell
Jan 12, 2005, 05:06 am
yeah, i bought The Kingdom in trade because i saw it was a sequel to the brilliant KC...and no one ever bothered to tell me "oh yeah, this sucks...just so's ya know." It put me off Mark Waid for years, sad to say as the man truly is a gifted writer. But he suffers a bit from Jeph Loeb Syndrome (ie: a compulsive and irrational need to undo all progress in the DC Universe and make everything like the Silver Age again).

DK2 i enjoyed...not so much as a sequel to the original, which was really only the window dressing for me, but as a critique and satire both of the comics industry and the state of the world at that time. Which if you look at it, was exactly what DKR was.

Days of Future Present was awesome, and remains one of my favorite X-Men storylines. but Days of Future Yet To Come just took it a bit too far...and i'm a bit wary of the upcoming Weapon X mini, Days of Future NOW! But Tieri's given me some good comics in the past, so i'll maintain a modicum of faith for now.

as for the return to AoA...no. Just...just, no. There's no need! nor is there logic! The story itself was incredibly solid, and in some points absolutely brilliant. But going back to it? No. Don't. i've heard people referencing "well, how are you going to get around the fact that the country got nuked?" Screw that! How are you going to get around the fact that the entire timeline was erased and negated? Legion never killed Xavier. They stopped it. The proper timeline was restored and the AoA never actually "happened." It's like thinking that the Tangent Universe in Donnie Darko continued to exist after he'd set everything right and sent the jet engine back through the portal. i'm tempted because of Chris Bachalo's involvement...but i doubt i'll actually pick this up. Not even morbid curiousity can force my hand in this instance.

oh, and for the record..."Of course, his death, like all events in the DC Universe, was comprehensively planned out by Batman" is one of the best damn things i've heard in a while. :)

bravelybravesirrobin
Jan 12, 2005, 06:48 am
I will be picking up the bookends however which are revisits to the past of AOA telling kind of untold stories with art by bacchalo.

Marty P
Jan 12, 2005, 10:14 am
Fast forward twenty years, and America is under the iron fist of Apocalypse, and not the oversized glove of Disney.
:rofl: Good one!

I agree with Jordan, the AoA was done, time repaired itself.
AoA was different, it was still 616, not an alternate timeline. That's what made it so damn cool.

I do plan to buy the new AoA comics though....
If they are any good that is, because I liked it so much the first time.
They will never be as good as the first, but even half of that is still enough for me. That's how good the first AoA was IMO. One of the best X-stories EVER. Period. (IMO ofcourse :p )
See, it could be that, when the time went back to original 616, that because of that, the AoA became an alternate reallity....Sort of has too, because, how else do you explain Blink and Sabretooth in Exiles?
The Timebroker said they will return to their own world in time, but how can they return, if the AoA is gone?

Lobster Johnson
Jan 12, 2005, 10:18 am
As long as it provides good stories i do not mind revisiting the Age Of Apocalypse. And even if the story isn't great I'll just buy it because I'm such a Bachalo fan.

Jordan T. Maxwell
Jan 12, 2005, 10:28 am
:rofl: Good one!

I agree with Jordan, the AoA was done, time repaired itself.
AoA was different, it was still 616, not an alternate timeline. That's what made it so damn cool.

I do plan to buy the new AoA comics though....
If they are any good that is, because I liked it so much the first time.
They will never be as good as the first, but even half of that is still enough for me. That's how good the first AoA was IMO. One of the best X-stories EVER. Period. (IMO ofcourse :p )
See, it could be that, when the time went back to original 616, that because of that, the AoA became an alternate reallity....Sort of has too, because, how else do you explain Blink and Sabretooth in Exiles?
The Timebroker said they will return to their own world in time, but how can they return, if the AoA is gone?

well, there is the fact that when Blink was taken from the Exiles, she just returned to the same timeline that they'd left Sabretooth in rather than returning to the AoA. Because it didn't exist anymore! lol

Marty P
Jan 12, 2005, 10:39 am
well, there is the fact that when Blink was taken from the Exiles, she just returned to the same timeline that they'd left Sabretooth in rather than returning to the AoA. Because it didn't exist anymore! lol
Oh, OK, didn't know that....Dropped Exiles after Winnick left the first time...

Anthony Lucynski
Jan 12, 2005, 11:00 am
I'm picking up AoA for the dreaded "nostalgia" reason: That event is what made me a full time collector of comics. I'd been picking up comics occasionally since I was 8, but that was the first time I bought an entire crossover, read them over and over, bagged and boarded them, and put them in a box. AoA made me an official comic book collector versus a guy who picked up random comics here and there to read. It made me go back and pick up the entire X-Cutioners Song, Fatal Attractions, etc.

In short, it sparked my need to concentrate more on the medium.

I don't expect to recapture the magic of my teenage years, but i'm giving it a shot based on how fun the originals were.

I'll most likely be dissapointed, but then again, this fool and his money has been through this before, and will most likely do it again at some point...

Anthony L

Mario J. Ramos
Jan 12, 2005, 11:44 am
I dont know about the new AOA series, but im gonna pick up the volumes of the original, cause i havent read it yet. :p

I absolutely loved DK2. Its completely different, in a way, to DK. But i think if it had been too similar to DK, people would have complained...like they're complaining now because its too different...people like to complain.

Ken Boehm
Jan 12, 2005, 12:04 pm
It's not just that DK2 was different (which in many ways it wasn't, why have Batman beat Superman again), but that you got rid of Klaus Jansen as the inker, and the coloring was just plain ugly on the book as well. I could create digitized blips that were meant to be explosions too. :)

Jordan T. Maxwell
Jan 12, 2005, 12:07 pm
Oh, OK, didn't know that....Dropped Exiles after Winnick left the first time...

you're smarter than me then. ;)

Blessed
Jan 12, 2005, 01:02 pm
Great collumn
Made me laugh :yes:
lol but i think i'm gonna check that new Aoa

James Groves
Jan 12, 2005, 02:36 pm
Great column Raul! :)

I'll check out the new AOA, at least to see how it goes. Not sure why Marvel's going back to old ground though.

The Batman comment was quality! :D

dizfactor
Jan 12, 2005, 04:55 pm
Hypertime was basically the idea that all DC stories, from the imaginary tales of the 60s to Elseworlds to Tangent, are real (or as real as comic books get), and still exist, despite Crisis. Kingdom #2 also stated that occasionally these other timelines would interact with the main one, so a character might recall someone they had never actually met or have their personal history changed and not notice... say good-bye to continuity.

... and good riddance, too. i've said it before, and i'll say it again: **** continuity. **** it hard.

Hypertime is the single best large-scale universe-shifting idea to come out of either of the Big Two in decades. it gives a nice, elegant in-universe explanation for the fact that the fictionverse the characters inhabit is constantly retconning itself, branching off, folding back on itself and creating fertile hybrids. it rescues the sense of wonder that should accompany superhero stories from the small-minded and petty bean-counting mentality that, unfortunately, pervades comic fandom and has been as responsible as nearly anything else for choking all the life out of the superhero genre. if you want to blame anything for the limp state of the mainstream superhero comic, blame continuity.

moreover, it replaces a dull, almost totalitarian insistence on One Single Truth with an open system that not only accomodates diversity and multiple, contradictory readings, but positively encourages them. philosophically and aesthetically, it's just beautiful.

now, there's nothing wrong with people building on stories that have come before, and mining stories of the past and building new stories on it. Geoff Johns, as just one example, does beautiful stuff with that. the problem lies in trying to force every creative team into that mold. we should let people write the Batman stories they feel need to be written, regardless of whether the Batman in, say, JLA Classified can be reconciled with the Batman guest appearing in Gotham Central. we should be able to tell the pissant whiners moaning "oh, but if he has a flying saucer, why doesn't he use it when he's fighting Two-Face?" and tell them simply "they're different books, with different needs. shut up." what we need is what Grant Morrison called "superconsistency" instead of strict continuity.

oh, and the original AoA was a big steaming pile of dog****.

Dragon
Jan 12, 2005, 08:03 pm
i loved the original AoA and i hope this new one is just as good and i feel it will be

raul grau
Jan 12, 2005, 08:44 pm
Thanks guys. Hopefully, even when you disagree with all of my opinions, I can still make you chuckle. ;)

hbk, I really enjoyed most of the original AOA storyline. Some of the series did not live up to the others, but there was some amazing work done by Warren Ellis and Scott Lobdell in that mix too. Though I do have that aforementioned affinity for alternate timelines. :)

I'll check out the new AOA, at least to see how it goes. Not sure why Marvel's going back to old ground though.

I think you just answered your own question, James. ;)

dizfactor, I disagree with you. Obviously, I disagree. I am not necessarily asking for the strictest adherence to continuity (Batman scrapped his knee in Gotham Central, so he should have a bandage in JLA), but there really should be some sort of logic to a character. The Doom Patrol should not suddenly be forgotten, for example. Batman should not suddenly remember a Batwoman he never met or wander between being a longtime JLoA member and a loner who never joined the team. I believe that sort of thing violates even 'superconsistency'.

- Raul

giantpacoctopus
Jan 13, 2005, 12:51 am
What was the point of this rant? To kill the buzz on an upcoming book? We get your point: revisiting alternate timeline stories rarely work. (What about the Exiles? I think the series works well, IMHO.) To me, the article seems to take aim at something that hasn't happened yet and to grind it into the mud. Granted, most of the time, these "sequels" are not as good as the original. But we (the comic-buyers) still buy them and then come to some sort of conclusion. It reminds me of the recent US presidential election when lackeys from the current administration were trotted out to exclaim that the challenger would absolutely weaken the US [in it's "war" on terrorism]. How in the world would anyone know that? Are clairvoyants that ubiquitous? I know everyone's entitled to their own opinion but this was unneccesary. I for one will check it out and reserve judgement until I've at least read an issue. I'm done now.

Jordan T. Maxwell
Jan 13, 2005, 04:35 am
What was the point of this rant?

um...

We get your point: revisiting alternate timeline stories rarely work.

...well, there ya go. is asking a question and then immediately answering it yourself the new "cool" thing to do?

anyway, what was the point of asking this question? Raul saw a new series scheduled to come out soon...said series is a revisit to an alternate timeline...Raul looked at the messes such revisits often are. and thus expressed his worry that this one will be such a mess. He didn't say it definitely would be, but using history and precedent showed the possibility. Oh yeah, real slanderous opinion there. How dare he? :rolleyes: Why get worked up over it? If you're going to read it, read it. If you're not, don't. And if you disagree with Raul's opinion, say so. But your argument doesn't seem to so much disagree with Raul as concede the point that he might be right about what he's saying, he just shouldn't be saying it for...some reason or other...

Oh, and diz? Ease up on the language there, buddy. Filter or not, swearing's still against the rules on the site. and as for your views on continuity and superconsistency...i don't see how Hypertime does anything to affect that, beyond shoehorning every imaginary story and Elseworlds into the DC Universe proper so that they all "count." Why can't a story just stand on its own merits without someone having to say, "well if Superman doesn't know about this reality, then it doesn't actually exist"? it's the same ridiculous attitude that keeps people from buying the Ultimate titles because they don't take place in the "real" Marvel Universe. Who CARES? it's quality that counts, not how you can wedge a story into some non existent fictional model of the universe.

Ann Nichols
Jan 13, 2005, 05:02 pm
You're kidding, right, Jordan? There are fans who won't touch the Ultimate titles because they're not in the 616 universe? Admittedly, I buy only "Ultimate X-Men", but I don't buy the 616 versions of the other Ultimate titles, either. ;)

Hey, when I returned to the X-Men in 2003, I looked for guidance. I wish I'd read a review of one of the "special" back issues I picked up [can't remember the exact title because I haven't looked at it since the first time] because I thought I'd wasted my money and time. Okay, returns to Alternate Universes usually stink. Fine. If I buy this new AOA, I'll go into it with my eyes open, the way I do when I pick up a book by one of those horror authors noted for gruesome details. If it turns out to be good, I'll be pleasantly surprised. If it stinks, *shrug* I can't say I wasn't warned.

dizfactor, continuity helps to make a character and his/her world seem real. Take the classic Warner Brothers cartoon characters once their personalities evolved and became recognizable. The setting didn't matter from cartoon to cartoon because we know the characters and how they're going to behave in the situations in which they find themselves. Bugs Bunny will be bullied only so far before he decides, "Of course you know, this means WAR!" and no matter how much bigger or better armed his foe, even if it's a wrestler with rippling muscles, a rude construction worker, a hungry vampire, the Sheriff of Nottingham, or Marvin the Martin; you know that Bugs' wit and a lot of lovely cartoon devices will have that foe on the ropes before the cartoon is over. Half the fun is anticipating the predetermined outcome. WB even proved that Daffy would still be Daffy if you gave him a body that has no counterpart in reality in "Duck Amok".

Granted, most super-heroes inhabit worlds with at least a nodding acquaintance with Real Life. That demands a little more consistency than a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Cyclops is currently a widower in a relationship with Emma Frost. We may see different facets of their characters from title to title (they tend to be nicer to the students than their teammates or fellow teaching staff members, for instance), but they are together in each title. We don't see them together only in "Astonishing" while Scott is having a hot affair with Lorna and Emma with Bobby in "X-Men", and Scott with Logan and Emma with Ororo in "Uncanny", for instance. The Mansion looks the same [give or take whatever gets trashed in an issue] across the books. Xavier is a paraplegic living in Genosha across the board. It's great when characters known to be old friends who are now inhabiting different books interact through guest appearances. I enjoy getting the "feel" of who these people are and where they live.

If a character changes, I want some adequate preparation, not just have it appear full blown without at least some clues that something led to this or All Is Not As It Seems. How would you feel if Wolverine suddenly became completely pacifist and used his claws only on the food he prepares in his new role as the chef of Xavier's -- and there's never any explanation?

I've got an old girls' mystery series where, for most of the books, the heroine is very competent and even ran her father's newspaper when he was kidnapped in one book.
Then in one book she was very inexperienced and was fumbling her attempts to become a reporter. The new version stuck and there was no explanation for the change. :wt: I never felt the new version was the heroine I'd liked so much. The last time I reread the series, I didn't even bother with most of the altered-heroine books.

Old fashioned Imaginary Novels and What If mini-series can handle the great out-of-continuity stories. For the rest, I want continuity. I want the characters to make sense in light of their pasts -- or I want to know the reason why.

Raul: Well of course Xavier held them back -- he's just not ruthless and nasty enough to train them under the conditions that made the AOA versions more ingenious & with better control of their powers. If you were given a choice between living under brutal and unloving conditions where you would be more powerful or living under conditions where you wouldn't be as powerful but your loving friends would watch your back & you'd have a loving father figure & be one big somewhat-functional family, which would you choose? I'd go for option B.

Anthony Lucynski
Jan 13, 2005, 05:24 pm
I disagree. I believe the Magneto's X-Men were better because quite frankly Magneto gave them the push Xavier wouldn't/couldn't etc.

I believe that Mageneto's X-Men were cared for each other just as much, if not more so, than the 616 versions. if anything, Magneto and Rogue acting as the father/mother of the family.

Now, the conditions and state of the world made it so they HAD to be tougher, but i disagree on the lack of family feeling.

This could get seriously off topic, I think :)

Anthony L

James Groves
Jan 13, 2005, 06:45 pm
I think you just answered your own question, James. ;)

oh ar, yeah. :blush:
:LOL:

CrazyFool83
Jan 13, 2005, 07:10 pm
I've read somewhere that Exiles will be going to the AoA universe around the time the new mini comes out, with both Blink and Sabretooth as a part of the team.

nightwing
Jan 13, 2005, 09:27 pm
... and good riddance, too. i've said it before, and i'll say it again: **** continuity. **** it hard.

Hypertime is the single best large-scale universe-shifting idea to come out of either of the Big Two in decades. it gives a nice, elegant in-universe explanation for the fact that the fictionverse the characters inhabit is constantly retconning itself, branching off, folding back on itself and creating fertile hybrids. it rescues the sense of wonder that should accompany superhero stories from the small-minded and petty bean-counting mentality that, unfortunately, pervades comic fandom and has been as responsible as nearly anything else for choking all the life out of the superhero genre. if you want to blame anything for the limp state of the mainstream superhero comic, blame continuity.

moreover, it replaces a dull, almost totalitarian insistence on One Single Truth with an open system that not only accomodates diversity and multiple, contradictory readings, but positively encourages them. philosophically and aesthetically, it's just beautiful.

now, there's nothing wrong with people building on stories that have come before, and mining stories of the past and building new stories on it. Geoff Johns, as just one example, does beautiful stuff with that. the problem lies in trying to force every creative team into that mold. we should let people write the Batman stories they feel need to be written, regardless of whether the Batman in, say, JLA Classified can be reconciled with the Batman guest appearing in Gotham Central. we should be able to tell the pissant whiners moaning "oh, but if he has a flying saucer, why doesn't he use it when he's fighting Two-Face?" and tell them simply "they're different books, with different needs. shut up." what we need is what Grant Morrison called "superconsistency" instead of strict continuity.

oh, and the original AoA was a big steaming pile of dog****.
your insistence that continuity is bad really doesn't hold up, as continuity was a big part of comics back when they were most popular and selling in the millions. "superconsistency" is for the writers sake and not for the customers sake. if a writer really is good enough, he/she'd find ways to reconcile their own views on the character with what else is out there. hell, i see fanboys come up with ways to do it all the time.

you don't really see the lack of continuity in many mediums today. tune in into most TV shows, and you won't see each story not building upon the next or randomly changing a character's personality because they got a new writer.

btw, if you're going to badmouth the AoA (which many X-fans believe to be one of the best X-stories), the least you could do is give reasons why.

Ann Nichols
Jan 13, 2005, 11:54 pm
Anthony L: serves me right for writing from what I'd gathered from reading the four issues of "Generation Next" (I got them for a quarter each or I wouldn't have bothered. At look at my avatar should be all the explanation you need for why I haven't tried to collect the rest of the AOA.)

giantpacoctopus
Jan 14, 2005, 01:00 am
um...



...well, there ya go. is asking a question and then immediately answering it yourself the new "cool" thing to do?

anyway, what was the point of asking this question? Raul saw a new series scheduled to come out soon...said series is a revisit to an alternate timeline...Raul looked at the messes such revisits often are. and thus expressed his worry that this one will be such a mess. He didn't say it definitely would be, but using history and precedent showed the possibility. Oh yeah, real slanderous opinion there. How dare he? :rolleyes: Why get worked up over it? If you're going to read it, read it. If you're not, don't. And if you disagree with Raul's opinion, say so. But your argument doesn't seem to so much disagree with Raul as concede the point that he might be right about what he's saying, he just shouldn't be saying it for...some reason or other...



Maybe I didn't approach this as gingerly as you might haved liked, nor was I as clear as I had intended. Still, I guess I am tired with of what I perceive as negativity in our public sphere from the get go. You're right, I don't necessarily disagree with his opinion. However, I do not necessariy embrace it as I have not read all of the books in question (only about half). It seems to me that all to often folks approach things with guns drawn, rather than open palms, if you know what I mean. Maybe not. I feel like I'm talking in circles so I don't really know if I am making sense.

Scourge
Jan 14, 2005, 09:46 pm
All of the people who say the AOA was classic and shouldn't be revisited: you're right. To me the AOA was everything in 1995 and the two Tales. If I ever write a comic I'll give the finger to anything neo-AOA related that carries on. I'll even retcon this series. What a stupid, stupid idea.

Better yet: retcon the Blink mini, the Exiles series, and the AOA sequel. That way we can have a Blink in the world who isn't freakin' purple arggh! God I hate Marvel sometimes. :grind:

The only good thing to come out of this is the TPB...

I have never bought a Ultimate book, and after unfortunately reading a few, my sympathies go out to those who have.

Although I do think it's a bit silly to give the original four AOA survivors stick. In what way exactly are "Beak" and "Stepford Cuckoos" particularly interesting? In what way is Wolverine and his clone(s) interesting?

Marvel if you're listening, save yourself the trouble of continuing this any further beyond this stupid mini. AOA was a classic the kind that rat Quesada can only look at in bewilderment. This is just another Nu-Marvel con.

Jordan T. Maxwell
Jan 14, 2005, 11:31 pm
I have never bought a Ultimate book, and after unfortunately reading a few, my sympathies go out to those who have.


um...your sympathies for my reading some of the best drawn and written books in the market today are accepted. i think. :?

Ann Nichols
Jan 15, 2005, 12:29 pm
<snip>Still, I guess I am tired with of what I perceive as negativity in our public sphere from the get go. <snip> It seems to me that all to often folks approach things with guns drawn, rather than open palms, if you know what I mean. <snip>

There's an old saying: a burned dog dreads the fire. I think those who are so negative have been burned once too often.

Scourge: this site does not permit insulting real people*. Whatever your opinion of Mr. Quesada, do not call him a "rat". Such insults are worth 3 warning points for inappropriate behavior, which is 1/5th of the points needed to be banned. The mod for this thread may choose to give you those points.

*historical figures guilty of horrible crimes, such as Hitler, are probably safe.

giantpacoctopus
Jan 18, 2005, 09:22 pm
There's an old saying: a burned dog dreads the fire. I think those who are so negative have been burned once too often.



Thanks. :D