As I pretty much only read DC, the example I point out is from DC. I think Marvel suffers from a similar problem.
********************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Ok I just finished reading the latest JSA. And the surprize ending is that Jean Loring is now Eclipso. However over in Superman, there is an Eclipso story taking place, where Eclipso is looking for a new host body. Is Jean Loring becoming Eclipso the result of that story? Why wasn't that story finished before this story line started?
I really think that DC needs an over-all head of continuity. Someone who can say "Wait, so-and-so is currently being used in this story. You can't use him/her until that story ends." or "Hey Teen Titans editor, in the coming months Bart is going to be featured in Flash, make a note of it and coordinate with the Flash editor."
There I have vented.
Posted by Vee on :
Yep. Posted by profh0011 on :
I've often thought it was commen sense (and common courtesy) to have different stories published in the order they take place. If they're published several years apart, that's one thing-- an earlier story published later can be considered a flashback. But then when come out within a few months of each other, it's just editorial incompetence.
I recall this happening in the 70's with IRON FIST. Colleen had been kidnapped, IF was searching for her, she was eventually rescued, but a few months later, IF appeared in a SONS OF THE TIGER story, and was shown to be "searching" for the missing Colleen. The editor (or was it the writer) said on the letters page, "Sometimes our stories are not all publihsed in the order they happen." Thanks to whoever for merely stating the obvious!
Posted by RTVU2 on :
That person suffers from what everyone else suffers from, not reading the fine details.
If you read the Superman stroyline, it leasds into DOV. If you read JSA you saw on the cover that it is a DOV crossover.
Posted by Quislet, Esq. on :
quote:Originally posted by RTVU2: That person suffers from what everyone else suffers from, not reading the fine details.
If you read the Superman stroyline, it leasds into DOV. If you read JSA you saw on the cover that it is a DOV crossover.
I did figure that out. However, I don't think the Superman story is finished yet. But now I know the ending.
Bad editorial management.
Posted by ferroboy on :
quote:Originally posted by Quislet, Esq.: As I pretty much only read DC, the example I point out is from DC. I think Marvel suffers from a similar problem.
********************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Ok I just finished reading the latest JSA. And the surprize ending is that Jean Loring is now Eclipso. However over in Superman, there is an Eclipso story taking place, where Eclipso is looking for a new host body. Is Jean Loring becoming Eclipso the result of that story? Why wasn't that story finished before this story line started?
My personal assumption would be that Story A takes place before Story B. Each comic _can't_ line up perfectly each month. It's pretty much impossible, especially since some books are in multi-part stories while others aren't. IOW, the 12-part "For Tomorrow" storyline in Superman covers a few weeks or months while the six-issue Green Lantern: Rebirth (which takes place before Countdown) only takes a day or so.
While I didn't buy it because of Byrne's presence, I did flip through the latest issue of Action. Aside from the art being Byrne's best in well over a decade (a great inker makes a difference), it also had a little editorial asterik on the first or second page that said "This issue takes place before Comic #X".
Posted by Bicycle Repair Man on :
Um, Quis, you might want to check with your retailer, because Superman 216, which contained the conclusion of the Eclipso/Captain Marvel story, shipped on May 4. At least, my store got copies ...
And it did end with Jean Loring getting the black diamond, so there was no problem with shipping vs. story sequence, at least as far as JSA was concerned.
Posted by ferroboy on :
I think the "problem" actually occurred when DoV came out since that was simultaneous with the Superman issue. Still, I think what I say above stands.
Posted by MLLASH on :
Nothing is s crappy as having the current Giffen/Maguire humourous Super Buddies tale being published after/during the grisly deaths of 2 of its stars.
Posted by Reboot on :
quote:Originally posted by ferroboy: I think the "problem" actually occurred when DoV came out since that was simultaneous with the Superman issue. Still, I think what I say above stands.
The actual problem was that Jim Lee ran very late on Superman, pushing the Super-Crossover back. Considering that Jim Lee's name on a book literally doubles it's sales, I don't think DC will be firing him over it any time soon.
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
It must be noted at this time that Jim Lee rawks!
(I'm also a stickler for continuity, although I'm not having the toughest time with the current series coming out when they do. What *really* bugs me is when recent histories are often ignored or obscure characters are written wrong. For example, dozens of Marvel villains in the last ten years).
Posted by Jorg-EM on :
Quislet personally i think comics are being under editted as well. It seems in the 90s when the superstar creator really took off editing took a back seat.
Sure guys like Shooter were pricks in the 80s but damn that was some tight continuity and story telling...not stifling. This is a business...yes an art to a certain degree but a business.
In films screenwriters get their stuff redone to death. You look at some of those guys that worked in the 80s...they all still have that work ethic. Waid, Stern, Priest, PAD (all editors as well btw).
I hate the anything goes approach as long as it's a good story. I've read dozens of great stories that in hindsight should've been tweaked b/c they've caused some screwy continuity things. When these add up you have the LEGION OF SUPERHEROES!!! Or Crisis, etc.
New Avengers? Yeah let JIM SHOOTER edit Bendis on that. That bald bendis wonder would have cried and quit on day two. But DisAssemble would have been much better!
Posted by profh0011 on :
Whenever I think of Jim Shooter, I never know quite what to make of him. The man is SMART, and has TALENT-- but his personality must be the worst in the world for a job as an Editor! It's one thing to know what's right, but another to play absolute dictator to "immature" creative types. (They're creative types-- what does he expect??)
Early on, one of Shooter's edicts was to eliminate multi-parters, except when the story really called for it. For about a year, there were a lot of single-issue stories. I believe one of the first exceptions was the 3-part DAREDEVIL story that brought the Kingpin out of retirement. Tight, INSTENSE plotting, and something I really liked was, each chapter ended on a low point, a natural "break", not a contrived cliffhanger. But soon multi-multi-parters ran rampant, and it got worse when they started doing multi-book crossovers, some of which you needed a roadmap (or CHART) to be able to follow at all!
And do I need to mention SECRET WARS? What was that-- a 4-parter STRETCHED to 12? And how about NICK FURY VS. S.H.I.E.L.D.? Certainly another 4-parter stretched to 12 (but published as 6 "prestige" format books so they could charge DOUBLE for it!).
Behind the scenes, Shooter did a LOT to further page rates, royalties, etc. for creators. In fact he butted heads with upper management so often trying to do better for the employees, he made a LOT of enemies. From what I've read, when it all came down, a lot of talent wound up siding with management just to keep their jobs.
Still, it would have been VERY interesting to see what might have been had Shooter's attempt to BUY the company in the early 90's succeeded. I imagine Shooter could have done a HELL of a lot of good for Marvel and comics in general, as PUBLISHER-- providing he had an editorial staff to act as buffer between him and the "talent".
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But DisAssemble would have been much better!