Came across this article...lets see how the anti-DP respond to this reboot.
Don’t expect to see the regular band of space pirates in Anderson and Garza’s new Starjammers however. “First off, readers have to be prepared that this is a completely new version of Starjammers, retooled from scratch,” Anderson told Newsarama. “In fact, my instructions from the Powers that Be were to scrap everything, keep the good stuff, and begin over. This has no continuity with the old series or with other parts of the Marvel Universe. No Shi'ar Empire, no "Corsair" Summers -- it's an original science fiction tale that will have some familiar aspects for those who remember the old issues, but new readers don't have to haunt comic shops to pick up all the back issues. It's standalone in the Marvel universe, with no continuity with other titles.
blah blah blah...
They're stuck fighting a hopeless war against a corrupt empire... but nothing is exactly black and white, and they find allies in unlikely places. You'll see several of the main characters -- but they're in different roles, now. Raza, Cho'd, Hepzibah. From the outset though, I was told not to include Chris Summers.”
Those who grouse about "reboots" don't realize they are nothing new. I have mentioned before how much of comicbook "history", how much of the stuff we take for granted would not even exist without "reboots" (which were not identified as such at the time), but consider this short list:
The most famous and far reaching reboot has to be Superboy. Superman was introduced as an adult who had not begun his career as a crimefighter until after his parents died. Superboy was retconned in 6 years later, effectively rebooting the continuity.
Both Superman and Batman routinely killed badguys in their early career, but by the mid-40s we were being told neither had ever killed. There was no "Earth 2" to explain this discrepancy -- clearly a reboot.
And speaking of Earth 2 -- there's another biggie! Altho many who claim to loathe reboots and retcons invoke Earth 2 to "explain" how the difference between the Golden and Silver Age characters at DC was neither, Earth 2 was perhaps the biggest reboot of all. The Silver Age characters were introduced into the same reality as Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow and several others who had been published in the 30s and 40s and who continued publication thru the 50s and 60s. When the concept of Earth 2 was introduced, at first DC was careful to avoid any reference to the Big Guys over on Earth 2, and focused on such folk as the Flash, Green Lantern, the Atom and various characters who had not been given new versions (yet) on "Earth 1". The moment Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were introduced on Earth 2, the whole thing split off from all previous continuity -- a reboot. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow -- suddenly they were not the same characters we had been reading since their debuts. This was done so long after the introduction of Earth 2, in "The Flash of Two Worlds", that most fans at the time did not even recognize what they were seeing, and instead much energy was concentrated on trying to calculate when the "division" was. (Some invoked the "new look" Batman as the dividing line -- pre yellow oval was Earth 2 Batman. This despite the fact that DC had already done a story that hinged on a badguy remembering Batman without the yellow oval.)
Over at Marvel, as previously noted, Captain America returned in a manner that not only completely ignored the issues of his comic which had been published after WW2, but which went on to erase most of the stories that had appeared before the end of the War. Eventually this was all explained -- with a retcon. Does a retcon de-reboot a reboot?
For the bulk of their history, superhero comics have been elastic enough to accomodate just about any stories their writers and editors wanted to tell. Was Superman the "sole survivor of the doomed planet Krypton"? Indeed he was, launched to safety in a rocket built by his father whose own superhuman powers (able to leap tall buildings in a single bound) were not up to the task of escaping an exploding planet. But later, when it was decided Superboy needed a super-pet (every boy has a dog) it turned out that "prototype" rocket in which baby Kal-El was launched away from the dying world had been preceded by a "model" which Jor-El had tested -- in front of Kal, by the way -- by firing Kal's pet dog into space! And when it was decided Superman needed his own Mary Marvel, his cousin Kara arrived via the convenience of an entire city having been blown into space whole. (And then there was Kandor. . . ) All these elements were "explained", yet none of them really fit what had been established -- at least not by modern standards.
"Modern standards" is the key -- most of these retcons and reboots happened either before most current readers were even born (they encountered a Superman who already had a dog and a cousin and a bottle in his fortress) or when they were young enough to accept them (as I did), Today, what might happen?
We know, after a fashion. Steve Englehart, voicing what would, a few decades later, become a common mentality in fandom, was enough disturbed by the "discrepancies" in Captain America's background that he felt he needed to write a story to explain them away. A story which created its own set of problems, as do most of the "fixes". Roy Thomas and even Roger Stern have built much of their work on "explaining" things. Some very good stories have come out of this -- but they were not really necessary stories. And in the end they served to encourage the kind of thinking that now has people looking to CRISIS and ZERO HOUR and even JLA/AVENGERS (surely the ultimate "imaginary story") to "explain" later events. At least, the events they want to explain.
So, hey! I claim CRISIS, ZERO HOUR and JLA/AVENGERS as the "explanation" of the new DOOM PATROL, this new Starjammers, and anything else that ever happens in superhero comics !!!
Amen. Enough with the year one stories to fix things. They cause 90% of the problems. Just tell good new stories, and try not to place any specific date references.
This topic made me wonder what other Marvel or DC property could most benefit from a "together again for the first time"-style relaunch. My candidate; the Challengers of the Unknown. Use the same four characters; update their backgrounds and experiences for the 21st century, have their plane crash in issue one, and go from there. Just out of curiousity, what comics character or team do y'all think would benefit the most from being relaunched in this manner?
Since I threw the continuity fans the JLA / Avengers bone over at the DC Boards just to see if it would work, I feel the need to express once more that for me it's not necessary and putting any cross company meetings into continuity violates continuity (which was kind of my point in bringing that up there; they'd leap for an out of continuity explanation and bring it into continuity just to keep continuity.)
The Meditative Mike N. (Login ArgentFox) Byrne Victim
Re: Another reboot comic
April 15 2004, 2:26 AM
I was looking at the Marvel Age books in my LCS today and they all have that crappy kiddy manga art. Manga style done right is really powerful, done in the style of Transformers Armada it screams "For Kids" and no kid ever buys a book that screams "KID BOOK!"
Kids want books that say Adventure Book, Funny Book, not Kid Book. Don't talk down to your audience with your story or your art.
Mike Nebeker - Super Genuis Good Judgement comes from Experience and Experience comes from... Bad Judgement.
There's a lot of rubbish that's happened in the last ten years that we could do without.
Oh, and make it one book again, please?"
Not heresy Melissa, I think a lot of old X-Fans would go along with that. The only thing is the title doesn't need a total reboot just the removal of the last 15 years or so.
I suppose there is a good case to reboot the entire Marvel line back a couple of decades.
While i agree a reboot of the X-Verse wouldn't be the worst thing by any means - i do think expecting them to go back to just one book is a little too unrealistic -- "X" is now a franchise, and is more plausable for multiple titles than the solo characters like Superman, Batman or Spider-Man who all carry multiple books by themselves. Market forces should determin if there is room for however many X-books - but perhaps wisdom would be to let each book have enough separation from the others to stand or fall on their own - i think the interlinking of all of them served more to drag the whole down, rather than crosspromote. In the late 80's or early 90's i was happy reading one or two X-books, and ignoring the rest - but shortly thereafter, that became impossible and i was unwilling to read stories where i HAD to buy 20 other books i had no interst in.
and a well-reasoned point. I knew it was fantasy to ask for one book, but then making a wish on an internet messageboard is a bit like asking Santa for a horse...
____________________________________________
You are a god among insects. Never let anyone tell you different.
Wolverine was one of the worst examples of this - if Wolverine was the only book you picked up from about #80 onwards it made little sense unless you went out and got all the other X-Comics.
Happiness is a state of non-contradictory fact-recognition.
This message has been edited by Charlesknight on Apr 15, 2004 10:22 AM
I'm no continuity hound by any means, but in the case of the Starjammers it just seems pointless. The characters have so few appearances that it would be simple to read those and then shape/mold the characters to the writers liking. Why is that difficult? If Marvel wants to cut ties with the X-MEN then simply don't mention that Corsair is Cyclop's father. And wouldn't trade paperbacks of the Jammers earlier appearances be more likely to sell if it was all in-continuity?
I'm not sure they need that excuse - some of the writers don't seem to know what has occured in the last five issues - yet along the last fifty issues.
Happiness is a state of non-contradictory fact-recognition.
"Reboots" are necessary so that writers brought in from outside of the industry do not have to read piles of back issues when taking on a title.
*************
How about the potential readers who are put off by years and years of "continuity" -- and the folk hanging 'round the comic shops who will insist they "must" know every word of it* -- but who might try a book if they felt they were coming in on the ground floor?
Nobody really wants to start a new title knowing there is a ton of "homework" necessary before they can read word one.
*Like the people who insisted you could not read GENERATIONS 2 if you had not read GENERATIONS.
My feeling is, if you are so into continuity that it is going to upset you when something comes along that doesn't play by your rules of continuity, then you've been reading comics too long and need to quit, and go live a little. It's a hobby and it's something you're doing because you enjoy it, and nothing more, you know? If you're getting upset over something like continuity, I think it's just unhealthy!
Doom Patrol is being "rebooted," so what!? If you're someone who liked the original team and wants them back, then read it and enjoy it, without all the baggage that'd been piled on over the years. Simple as that.
Of course, having said all that, I don't think a Starjammers reboot is necessary (as opposed to DP). I mean, what baggage is there to get rid of!? Like someone else said, just don't mention that Corsiar is Scott's father, But ultimately, it doesn't matter. I've always liked the Starjammers, I might pick it up. If I like the writing and art, I'll continue buying it...
But it will be interesting to see if anyone freaking out over the Doom Patrol will freak out over this. Without JB's name attached, I suspect not!
Moderate fans of Byrne. Professes fondness for 80's work, particularly FF. Feels Byrne has been "hit or miss" lately. Will try out at least the first issue of DP.
Those who no problem with the reboot and want to try out a new book. They never read any past DP, or they read Arcudi's recent run but were disappointed with how it turned out.
Those who don't care for DP at all, reboot or not.
Fans of Morrison's DP. Interesting to note that there's hardly a soul who remembers the 60's or 70's series.
Most vocal of all, those who oppose the reboot on the basis that it harms continuity. They don't seem to have been regular readers of any previous DP books.
Hopefully the first three groups will be able to make JB's DP (JBDP?) a home run.
What do you think of the idea of dropping the issue numbers from the cover, altogether? It could still be listed in the indicia, like in the old Dell and Gold Key comics, though.
I wondered this because as JB rightly states, new readers can be put off at the idea that they have to know a book's history in order to enjoy the current story. Some new readers might be put off by larger numbering, but I don't like the trend of restarting everything over with a new number one. Besides, companies like Marvel use such tactics for short term sales boosts, and not necessarily to get wholly new readers.
I think that keeping the numbering, but removing it from the covers could help motivate newer readers to pick up a series while keeping the older fans happy.
A long time ago, I gave up the ghost on continuity and just decided to go with the flow. The only thing that really bugs me is if the character is not true to him or herself. ( Like Batman always being the angry guy out to break a few bones...tired of it!! Let's move on!!) I always kind of just figured there must be some story out there that would explain things, the powers that be just hadn't done it yet.
I like having issue numbers on the cover - it lets you know if you've missed an issue or not. Comics aren't like Time magazine - who cares if you miss an issue of Time?
However, I love JB's idea of resetting the numbering every year. Vol 1. gets 12 issues, the thirteenth issue is Vol. 2 no. 1.
You know, if this were all taking place in the 1970's, we'd have Roy Thomas putting out a series called "Mighty Marvel Reboot," in which each issue some obscure Marvel character would have his powers and origin re-done.
TG: I like having issue numbers on the cover - it lets you know if you've missed an issue or not.
---
JT: If you're a monthly, months accomplish the same thing.
---
TG: Very good point!
(If the books come out as scheduled)
---
Now you're making me feel old. It is simply incomprehensible to me that a monthly comic book doesn't ship. I remember framing sequences being slapped around already prepared filler issues for just such an emergency. When did the industry stop caring about deadlines?
The Meditative Mike N. (Login ArgentFox) Byrne Victim
Re: Another reboot comic
April 15 2004, 2:30 PM
I think this is a case where it would have been better to not use the Starjammers, but rather create a property from scratch.
If it isn't going to be The Starjammers as we know it, leave them in limbo and start totally fresh. The Starjammer name isn't much of an asset without the full cast and setting, it's not much more of an asset with it. So you piss off the fanboys for little gain.
Mike Nebeker - Super Genuis Good Judgement comes from Experience and Experience comes from... Bad Judgement.
