Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

AND SO IT BEGINS!! New 52 continuity errors - a rant

Scot Lobdell recently said that Tim Drake was never ROBIN, but has always been RED Robin, and will be telling stories about that soon. Never mind that there was a picture of him in his Robin costume in Teen Titans #1.

Written by Scott Lobdell

I have to vent a little bit. We've been told that the Reboot was planned for the last 3 years, that the creators were carefully chosen, many of these books were in the works for a while before they were announced and that there was a plan to all of this.

I call shenanigans

"Batman isn't being touched" then "Batman had very few changes" then "Grant Morrison's Batman stories planned for this" and now they are just rewriting continuity SINCE THEY REWROTE CONTINUITY!!!!

I'm the LAST guy who gets upset about continuity errors. I LOVED Hyper-time because it was a great way to explain little glitches and such. I loved it when Mike W Barr said that he would pay attention to continuity when it meant as good story and ignore it when it meant a good story. However, DC has been touting how careful they were with this, how they were going to make sure there wouldn't be the kind of problems that happened after Crisis and Zero Hour, and they make a huge change like this, retconning what was already established.

Then again, this is the same editorial crew that gave us Teen Tony, the Hellions being killed in two subsequent issues of a comic and the Spider-Clone saga.

Either do it right, or DON'T TALK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME. If you're going to tout how tight the continuity will be, and how you had a grand design going into things, don't screw it up so quickly.

Comments

  • SolitaireRoseSolitaireRose Posts: 1,445
    The only grand design was to get a lot of publicity, sell a lot of books, and give Jim Lee a lot more royalties.
    Then DC should stop pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining,

    Honesty works. And in the current climate, if you feed me a line of crap, I'm spending my money elsewhere. If I wanted to be lied to, I'd read the e-mails from my bank about how they care about me.
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    The only grand design was to get a lot of publicity, sell a lot of books, and give Jim Lee a lot more royalties.
    Then DC should stop pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining,

    Honesty works. And in the current climate, if you feed me a line of crap, I'm spending my money elsewhere. If I wanted to be lied to, I'd read the e-mails from my bank about how they care about me.
    Honesty may work with you, but The Big Lie works with The Public.

    And apparently, a lot of folks like that warm, wet feeling on their calf.
  • LibraryBoyLibraryBoy Posts: 1,803
    When they were talking about Marvel Now on the show last week, someone (maybe Mike) compared that roll-out to the New 52, talking about how Marvel's attempt is so reactionary and sudden (I'm paraphrasing, obviously) compared to DC's, which had been in the works "for years."

    Well, I laughed out loud. While I've liked parts of the New 52 (Aquaman is popular! Supergirl gets away from all that creepy jailbaity storytelling! A Power Girl and Huntress buddy team-up book!), it has always seemed very much like a "making it up as we go along" kinda thing. Look at the whole thing with Cassie Cain and Steph Brown.

    "Cass is still the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler again, and they'll both remain part of Batman, Inc.! Well, Cass is the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler, and they were never Batgirl, and so we're re-drawing that issue of Batman, Inc. to put Steph in as Spoiler. Um, wait, we're just going to release that Batman, Inc. issue as is with the caveat that it happened pre-Flashpoint, but Cass and Steph will show up eventually as members of Batman, Inc. Wait, hold up... Cassie? Stephanie? Who are they? We don't know who you're talking about, so now let's just go and forget all about this bizarre cover up."
  • LibraryBoyLibraryBoy Posts: 1,803
    So I have a question for anyone who was there just immediately after Crisis on Infinite Earths (that was still in my Marvel Zombie phase, so I didn't encounter post-COIE DC until 2 years or so into it)... did everything seem so confusing and by-the-seat-of-their-pants then? Once I got back into DC I went back and started picking up stuff to get acclimated, and nothing really seemed too out of the ordinary, even with the whole "Wonder Woman was never in the JLA" thing and the reboot of Jason Todd's origin so he wasn't just Dick Grayson 2.0. In fact, everything seemed pretty smooth except for the Hawkworld snafu that messed up Katar's continuity but good.

    So was it truly handled better back then, or were audiences more willing to let DC take the time to work out the kinks? Maybe a bit of both?
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    edited July 2012
    So was it truly handled better back then, or were audiences more willing to let DC take the time to work out the kinks? Maybe a bit of both?
    It was a frikking mess then, too, but overall, the ideas felt fresher, and less committeefied.*


    *Except for the poor Legion, who got repeatedly screwed over by the Superman editorial team.
  • I don't worry too much about what creators say in an interview, etc. It's all about what's in the printed stories. That's sort of what makes it fun. If Drake appeared dressed as Robin in an issue, it's as if it's been caught on film and has to be explained. And all the creators act as if, YES, this evidence has to be explained! It's always been a game between the creators and the readers. Hopefully editorial catches some of these things, but it's never perfect. Kinda like catching Dad eating the cookies set out for Santa. Not exactly a big deal IMHO.
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    So I have a question for anyone who was there just immediately after Crisis on Infinite Earths (that was still in my Marvel Zombie phase, so I didn't encounter post-COIE DC until 2 years or so into it)... did everything seem so confusing and by-the-seat-of-their-pants then? Once I got back into DC I went back and started picking up stuff to get acclimated, and nothing really seemed too out of the ordinary, even with the whole "Wonder Woman was never in the JLA" thing and the reboot of Jason Todd's origin so he wasn't just Dick Grayson 2.0. In fact, everything seemed pretty smooth except for the Hawkworld snafu that messed up Katar's continuity but good.
    I was there, and I ate up every issue. To put it simply - it was as complicated as you, the fan, were willing to let it become. Inconsistencies? I don't have enough fingers to count them...but it was still a great storyline that made for great books that followed it.

    Same deal with the New 52. If you mire yourself in the continuity of it all, you're going to get burned eventually. I'm enjoying what I'm reading but in the interest of full disclosure there's only one bat title and one super title in that mix (Red Hood and Supergirl, respectively), and both of those titles are pretty much "on the fringe" of their areas, so continuity doesn't seem to be affecting them that much.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    Of course I agree that DC shouldn't pat themselves on the back for all the pre-planning if things turn out to be a mess. But...

    ... have they turned out to be a mess? We're 11 months into more than 50 titles sharing a universe. "And so it begins" with something said in an interview that represents a continuity error? If this ends up going forward as an idea that doesn't get retracted or worked around, then I would say nearly a year in before such a contradiction is actually not too bad.

    (And I should also say, as caveats, that I don't much care about how carefully make-believe is coordinated, nor am I reading Teen Titans. So it it may be easier for me to dismiss this than someone more invested.)
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    We're 11 months into more than 50 titles sharing a universe. "And so it begins" with something said in an interview that represents a continuity error? If this ends up going forward as an idea that doesn't get retracted or worked around, then I would say nearly a year in before such a contradiction is actually not too bad.
    But the contradictions have been there from Day One.

    Batman's absurdly-compressed four Robins and a ten-year-old son in five years "timeline". And he was dead... no he wasn't. Dick was Batman for a while... or not. Barbara was Oracle... maybe. Flamebird was a Teen Titan... um...

    And that's just the Bat books.

    The Crises happened/didn't happen.

    Superman died/didn't die.

    There are seemingly half-a-hundred different well-established secret/semi-secret government/international organizations running/monitoring/hunting superheroes.

    Continuity be damned, There's no consistency or sense of a coherent DCU.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited July 2012
    We're 11 months into more than 50 titles sharing a universe. "And so it begins" with something said in an interview that represents a continuity error? If this ends up going forward as an idea that doesn't get retracted or worked around, then I would say nearly a year in before such a contradiction is actually not too bad.
    But the contradictions have been there from Day One.

    Batman's absurdly-compressed four Robins and a ten-year-old son in five years "timeline". And he was dead... no he wasn't. Dick was Batman for a while... or not. Barbara was Oracle... maybe. Flamebird was a Teen Titan... um...

    And that's just the Bat books.

    The Crises happened/didn't happen.

    Superman died/didn't die.

    There are seemingly half-a-hundred different well-established secret/semi-secret government/international organizations running/monitoring/hunting superheroes.

    Continuity be damned, There's no consistency or sense of a coherent DCU.
    I hear you. But, to be fair, are all the things you listed definitely contradictions at this point? Or are they questions we have as readers that may yet be adequately explained and dramatized? By that I mean that an image of Tim as Robin in one issue, and then a later issue (and, again, we only have an interview quote as of now, not a story panel) in which Tim says he was never Robin... THAT is a contradiction.

    A lot of Robins in a short amount of time may be hard to accept, but is not actually a contradiction or mistake. At least not yet. And in Batman Inc. #2 we see an image of Damien incubating in a sort of glass sphere, so it may be that we will yet find out that his aging was sped up.

    Again, I am not saying that all the explanations will be SATISFYING, that is a different thing. Or that it will all fit. I'm just saying that, as far as keeping all the make believe trains running on time and not crashing into each other goes (or whatever mixed metaphor you may choose) they are not doing so bad so far.

    And I agree that coherence and consistency are more important than continuity. (And, hell, I think sheer entertainment value trumps all those other values). To me, I have not felt like there has been a lack of coherence and consistency so far in the book I am reading. But, again, I may be reading less books than many other people are.
  • random73random73 Posts: 2,318
    Red Robin is still a Robin, wouldn't you think?
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    I hear you. But, to be fair, are all the things you listed definitely contradictions at this point?

    {snip}

    To me, I have not felt like there has been a lack of coherence and consistency so far in the book I am reading. But, again, I may be reading less books than many other people are.
    We were told going into the New52 that these things had been worked out, and after several months, it's pretty apparent that whatever plan they had did not survive contact with the enemy.

    Honestly, I don't care much about the inconsistencies at this point. Once the promise of a new, wholly-conceived DCU showed itself to be a sham, and the central books to what "universe" there is bored me silly, I've contented myself with relatively stand-alone books like LSH, Demon Knights, Wonder Woman and The Flash.

    I do find it sad, though, that despite "years of planning" the New DCU seems to be a muddled as the Post-Crisis DCU was. In my opinion, too many compromises were made, and what could have been a brave new start is instead an over-cautious mess.

    Monday Morning Quarterbacking: Were I in charge, I would have said New Earth still exists, as do Earth One, Earth Two, etc., however, as of September 2011, we will be telling stories set on Earth 52. Perhaps someday, we'll revisit those other Earths, but for now, let's focus on what's happening in this place. That way Wally West, Stephanie Brown, the JSA, etc. all still exist*, as do the other versions of Bruce Wayne, Barry Allen, Barbara Gordon etc.: but right now we're telling stories about these other folks who are younger, more "realistically"-dressed versions of folks you used to know.


    *As much as any fictional characters exist, of course.
  • AnthonyAnthony Posts: 1
    edited December 2012
    Well, I can give a long list of how much screw ups it has. But in shorter terms, it is the most alienating, most disrespectful reboot i have ever seen and it is crossed one too many lines and it is messed up in so many, many ways, it is not even funny at all, no thanks to that douche Dan Didio, who had no respect for the DC character, who has a bad ego and cares about the money but not the fans and he makes me sick to my stomach and I will never forgive him of what he did to my favorites DC characters.

    At this point and time, I actually miss the real DC universe!!!
  • PlaneisPlaneis Posts: 980

    Scot Lobdell recently said that Tim Drake was never ROBIN, but has always been RED Robin, and will be telling stories about that soon. Never mind that there was a picture of him in his Robin costume in Teen Titans #1.

    Written by Scott Lobdell

    I have to vent a little bit. We've been told that the Reboot was planned for the last 3 years, that the creators were carefully chosen, many of these books were in the works for a while before they were announced and that there was a plan to all of this.

    I call shenanigans

    "Batman isn't being touched" then "Batman had very few changes" then "Grant Morrison's Batman stories planned for this" and now they are just rewriting continuity SINCE THEY REWROTE CONTINUITY!!!!

    I'm the LAST guy who gets upset about continuity errors. I LOVED Hyper-time because it was a great way to explain little glitches and such. I loved it when Mike W Barr said that he would pay attention to continuity when it meant as good story and ignore it when it meant a good story. However, DC has been touting how careful they were with this, how they were going to make sure there wouldn't be the kind of problems that happened after Crisis and Zero Hour, and they make a huge change like this, retconning what was already established.

    Then again, this is the same editorial crew that gave us Teen Tony, the Hellions being killed in two subsequent issues of a comic and the Spider-Clone saga.

    Either do it right, or DON'T TALK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME. If you're going to tout how tight the continuity will be, and how you had a grand design going into things, don't screw it up so quickly.

    I agree wholeheartedly. They acted like they had a plan. I'd say they had a plan for the first issue. Beyond that, they had no plan.
  • PlaneisPlaneis Posts: 980
    random73 said:

    Red Robin is still a Robin, wouldn't you think?

    Except I also think he explicitely said he was NEVER Batman's sidekick.
  • batlawbatlaw Posts: 879
    I never had any issues or problems with any previous DC reboots (or whatever you wanna call what they've done). I carried on just fine in my DC reading from COIE up until now with this mess. DC has broken my heart : (
  • When they were talking about Marvel Now on the show last week, someone (maybe Mike) compared that roll-out to the New 52, talking about how Marvel's attempt is so reactionary and sudden (I'm paraphrasing, obviously) compared to DC's, which had been in the works "for years."

    Well, I laughed out loud. While I've liked parts of the New 52 (Aquaman is popular! Supergirl gets away from all that creepy jailbaity storytelling! A Power Girl and Huntress buddy team-up book!), it has always seemed very much like a "making it up as we go along" kinda thing. Look at the whole thing with Cassie Cain and Steph Brown.

    "Cass is still the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler again, and they'll both remain part of Batman, Inc.! Well, Cass is the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler, and they were never Batgirl, and so we're re-drawing that issue of Batman, Inc. to put Steph in as Spoiler. Um, wait, we're just going to release that Batman, Inc. issue as is with the caveat that it happened pre-Flashpoint, but Cass and Steph will show up eventually as members of Batman, Inc. Wait, hold up... Cassie? Stephanie? Who are they? We don't know who you're talking about, so now let's just go and forget all about this bizarre cover up."

    I think the whole "DC had this planned for years" came from the fanboys and not DC themselves. They used that logic to white knight DC. From interviews with Didio and Lee, they mentioned that real planning for the relaunch started after Wonder Con (end of February 2011). So they had about 6-7 months of planning on the relaunch.

    Geoff Johns and Jim Lee were planning a new Justice League book for longer than those 6-7 months, but their plans had to change to incorporate the new52. Johns mentions that their initial arc was dumped for the Origin story. I believe that Graves could have been their original idea.

    A lot of the new52 has been DC making it up as they go along. I don't mind this approach. They dumped a whole continuity. Why try to recreate it back to what it was. There shouldn't be any backpedaling unless sales suffer (e.g. Firestorm)
  • Planeis said:


    random73 said:

    Red Robin is still a Robin, wouldn't you think?

    Except I also think he explicitely said he was NEVER Batman's sidekick.
    Nope, Robin was still Batman's sidekick. The Teen Titans "0" issue pretty much spelled that out. They even recreated the scene from the photo in Teen Titans #1. In the Red Hood and Nightwing zero issues, they showed the other "Robins" first on monitor duty, then eventually in the field. That's Batman's sidekick training program. How long Tim stayed a sidekick is up for debate.
  • WetRats said:

    We're 11 months into more than 50 titles sharing a universe. "And so it begins" with something said in an interview that represents a continuity error? If this ends up going forward as an idea that doesn't get retracted or worked around, then I would say nearly a year in before such a contradiction is actually not too bad.
    But the contradictions have been there from Day One.

    Batman's absurdly-compressed four Robins and a ten-year-old son in five years "timeline". And he was dead... no he wasn't. Dick was Batman for a while... or not. Barbara was Oracle... maybe. Flamebird was a Teen Titan... um...

    And that's just the Bat books.

    The Crises happened/didn't happen.

    Superman died/didn't die.

    There are seemingly half-a-hundred different well-established secret/semi-secret government/international organizations running/monitoring/hunting superheroes.

    Continuity be damned, There's no consistency or sense of a coherent DCU.

    1. Damien's leads to contradictions in the whole Batman timeline. They'll never solve that. They'll just ignore it forever.
    2. Batman was never dead, before or after the relaunch. After the relaunch, all they said (in the print comics) is that he went "away". Vague at best.
    3. Nightwing was Batman for a time (Nightwing #1). Also recently shown in Batman Inc #0. That has yet to be contradicted (in print).
    4. Batgirl was never hinted as being Oracle in the comic books. They may have discussed it in editorial meetings and online but the book itself hasn't shown that at all.
    5. Crises happening or not was Dan Didio's decision. Before the decision, there was no mentions of Crises in the book. Hawk and Dove mentioned a crisis (little c) and a lot assumed that it meant COIE. Sterling Gates said that wasn't the case.
    Superman died was mentioned in Swamp Thing #1. It has not been contradicted. Too much history in between Action and Superman that hasn't been addressed.
    6. There's always been secret organizations monotoring/running/hunting superheroes. What's wrong with that? Checkmate (Int'l Spy Agency), Cadmus (Checkmate Science Arm), Blackhawks (monotoring advance Tech), ARGUS (US Super-hero support/monitoring), DEO (FBI of metahumans). It's not like regular gov'ts don't have many intelligence agencies/special forces, etc.
  • Morrison has fixed the Damien issue by having him be "grown" in a tube.

  • PlaneisPlaneis Posts: 980

    When they were talking about Marvel Now on the show last week, someone (maybe Mike) compared that roll-out to the New 52, talking about how Marvel's attempt is so reactionary and sudden (I'm paraphrasing, obviously) compared to DC's, which had been in the works "for years."

    Well, I laughed out loud. While I've liked parts of the New 52 (Aquaman is popular! Supergirl gets away from all that creepy jailbaity storytelling! A Power Girl and Huntress buddy team-up book!), it has always seemed very much like a "making it up as we go along" kinda thing. Look at the whole thing with Cassie Cain and Steph Brown.

    "Cass is still the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler again, and they'll both remain part of Batman, Inc.! Well, Cass is the Black Bat and Steph is Spoiler, and they were never Batgirl, and so we're re-drawing that issue of Batman, Inc. to put Steph in as Spoiler. Um, wait, we're just going to release that Batman, Inc. issue as is with the caveat that it happened pre-Flashpoint, but Cass and Steph will show up eventually as members of Batman, Inc. Wait, hold up... Cassie? Stephanie? Who are they? We don't know who you're talking about, so now let's just go and forget all about this bizarre cover up."

    I think the whole "DC had this planned for years" came from the fanboys and not DC themselves. They used that logic to white knight DC. From interviews with Didio and Lee, they mentioned that real planning for the relaunch started after Wonder Con (end of February 2011). So they had about 6-7 months of planning on the relaunch.

    Geoff Johns and Jim Lee were planning a new Justice League book for longer than those 6-7 months, but their plans had to change to incorporate the new52. Johns mentions that their initial arc was dumped for the Origin story. I believe that Graves could have been their original idea.

    A lot of the new52 has been DC making it up as they go along. I don't mind this approach. They dumped a whole continuity. Why try to recreate it back to what it was. There shouldn't be any backpedaling unless sales suffer (e.g. Firestorm)
    The problem is they didn't dump a whole continuity. They dumped half of it and are piecing random bits together and people are confused.
  • PlaneisPlaneis Posts: 980

    Planeis said:


    random73 said:

    Red Robin is still a Robin, wouldn't you think?

    Except I also think he explicitely said he was NEVER Batman's sidekick.
    Nope, Robin was still Batman's sidekick. The Teen Titans "0" issue pretty much spelled that out. They even recreated the scene from the photo in Teen Titans #1. In the Red Hood and Nightwing zero issues, they showed the other "Robins" first on monitor duty, then eventually in the field. That's Batman's sidekick training program. How long Tim stayed a sidekick is up for debate.
    Wrong. Just wrong. Teen Titans #0 spelled out the exact opposite. Even Tim Drake's Wikipedia page says he was never a sidekick.

    http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=41229

    Lobdell even says "He is still Batman's partner (not really a sidekick, admittedly) and he still came on screen with an independent streak... "

    I think a lot of people liked Tim because he did a lot of growing up as Batman's side kick, I don't know how old he was when he first appeared, but it seems to me we say him go from a child to an adult. Now... he's just an adult and its hard to really go along with Scott that things in the past still "mostly" happened when soooo much has been changed and undoubtedly more will be changed when other writers come on.
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    Planeis said:


    I think a lot of people liked Tim because he did a lot of growing up as Batman's side kick, I don't know how old he was when he first appeared, but it seems to me we say him go from a child to an adult. Now... he's just an adult and its hard to really go along with Scott that things in the past still "mostly" happened when soooo much has been changed and undoubtedly more will be changed when other writers come on.

    The appeal of Tim Drake (pre-N52) was that he was a "thinking" partner. Dick Grayson was a skilled gymnast who could hold his own with Batman on the physical level. Jason Todd was a thug who knew streetfighting techniques. Tim Drake used his noggin a lot more (IMHO) than the other two and relied less on his fighting prowess (which he had as well). So many people, I think, saw him as the ideal candidate to replace Bruce Wayne if he ever did hang it up...he would be more than able to step into "the Detective's" shoes.

    And I believe DC editorial got wind of this, because I seem to remember and issue or storyline where Drake told Batman in no uncertain terms he didn't plan on being Robin...or Batman...or anything involving a cape...forever. He wanted a normal life.


  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314

    Morrison has fixed the Damien issue by having him be "grown" in a tube.

    Where's the "barf" emoticon when we need it?
Sign In or Register to comment.