Legion World Forums LEGION CLUBHOUSE The Legion of Super-Heroes Levitz Interview on Legion Ending.

Given a lot of the way he's written the Legion since he's been back and his comments about "chronicler's error" a while ago, I am inclined to think he just doesn't remember what he did or didn't write. There have been a number of things that have happened or not happened with these characters over the past few years which lead me to believe he really has no handle on most of them anymore...

New interview on CBR. More of a general retrospective. Interesting that he doesn't mention anything from his work on the retroboot among his highlights.

^^Yeah, I assume he must mean something like that, though the way it's phrased in the interview sure doesn't sound like it.

Anyway, the really sad thing is that however this ends, I can't imagine it having anywhere near the emotional impact of the final scenes of the preboot in "End of Era". Those scenes choke me up every time I read them.

Yeah, I imagine they have even MORE impact in hindsight...considering how far the Legion has fallen in the interim and that more reboots were still to come.

Let's face it... Levitz being handed LSH to write was a massive DEMOTION. No wonder his heart wasn't in this run whatsoever.

That's a neat perspective on it. Good thinking, Ken!

Nitpick - the interview misspells Ferro Lad as Feral Lad. Boo!



Those don't sound like major WOW moments to me, if he's not sure they'll make long-time readers smile. But maybe he has something major planned and just doesn't want to spoil the surprise?

His whole response here sounds more like a "Whew I'm tired and ready to call it a night" feeling. It's making me feel just content to let the book die for a bit, rather than be mournful of its passing or highly excited for the future

That's how I read it too IB, like he had ran out steam and wanted a holiday.

"When I began writing "Legion" in the '70s the universal assumption was that comics were for kids and maybe "Legion" was for slightly brighter kids, a hair older kids than some of the other titles in the DC lineup at the time, and certainly was perceived to have a larger fan base. But there was no assumption at that time that there was likely to be anybody thirty years-old reading "Legion" and people in their twenties reading it were looked at with a little bit of suspicion. Now you have an audience for the books that includes, based on the people I've met at conventions who talk about reading it, young kids who discovered it fresh which is wonderful and people who are in their fifties and sixties to everything in between. That's a very different world."

I may be reading too much into this, but it seems to me that Mr. Levitz was blaming part of the "problem" with age difference in the readership itself. It's as if he was saying that he didn't know how to write for this multi-generational readership. What do you guys think?

That seems to be an issue, and probably one for all long-term projects. How to make a character (or team, or setting) that continues to appeal to the people who were reading it in the '60's and '70's, and yet also fresh and relevant to those reading it today, who have grown up in a somewhat different world and have different expectations, and, in some cases, even *wildly* different ideas what constitutes a 'hero.'

He also mentioned in one of these interviews the two-edged sword of writing in the age of the internet. He can throw in all sorts of cool stuff (like Diogenes or Panoptes or that pseudo-science theory about how Durlans add mass), but also is living in an age where fan reaction to an issue is coming out before the issue even hits stores (thanks to six page previews and / or digital delivery), possibly creating a bit of 'viral marketing' if the early viewers are raving about it, or 'poisoning the well' if the early viewers are not loving it...

The internet's easy access to information also means that any change is immediately noticeable to those who can look it up (or be told it was a change by other fans who knew that stuff cold, like Imra not being an orphan or Garth's folks being dead) which very frustrating when the writer doesn't realize that there are threads on this very message board that collect all that sort of information, so that fans are automatically better informed than the writer who doesn't know about Legion World, or one of the half-dozen other Legion fansites with rosters or Hero Histories or helpfiles or excerpts from the Who's Who to the Legion or whatever.

Honestly, I think his long break from writing hurt him as a writer. I wasn't overly impressed with the couple of issues of JSA that he wrote a few years back. I think that jumping back into a book as complex as the Legion, regardless of his history, was ambitious.

And unfortunately, I think his history hurt him, regardless of his writing. His last run on the book was hugely successful and extremely popular. Who didn't have pre-conceived notions of what he would bring back to the franchise? Unfortunately, its hard to re-capture that magic again.

Bringing back the original timeline was a wonderful idea, but maybe if someone else had been at the helm it might have grabbed the audience in a better way.

Probably no matter the writer, they would have been hampered beyond coherency by corporate dictates.

I loved Superboy and his role with silver age Legion. Connection to Green Lantern and Flash history made some of my favorite stories. But MAYBE fans AND corporate have not shown an ability to deal with a few inconsistencies and ignore those few that get hung up that what is shown 1000 years later isn't EXACTLY consistent with what is shown present day.

LSH, it's a complicated enough story but it's become an impossible story to write.

It worked with Superboy until corporate dictates affected that character. A lot went blewy after that. If they had just made their changes to Superman and let LSH in the future continue as it had and try to explain the differences, instead of changing the book, I think all would have been smoother. No reboots. Legion characters could have continued to age. New characters added organically and to reflect modern reader's desires...

IMO, experience has shown Legion works best stand-alone.


Story-wise, I also wonder if fans/sales have shown a distaste for a PREVALENT xenophobia angle. Maybe that's just me. It's clearly a social issue but to be the whole basis the team exists, to combat xenophobia ON EARTH? I think that might have over-played for a fan base that was looking for stories about a future with promise, a future to look forward to. Of all man's ills, I think that was one readers of LSH wanted to believe had been solved on Earth.



BUT, can't change the history of it all. I don't think I'll ever pick up another boot of Legion unless it is an entirely self contained entity, separate from DCU or at least with some guarantee of being separate from mandates resulting from stories set in present day.

Set's reply to this is very thoughtful and mindful of the changes in fandom , but my reply is simple:

Tell the BEST DAMN stories you can possibly tell! All the generational/technological-catering crap will take care of itself if you do that one thing. I don't think anyone feels Levitz did that one thing.

I can completely forgive a creative team that tries its heart out to give you an excellent product but still somehow never finds an audience (like the great Dial H book that's being cancelled at the same time). That's not the case with Paul Levitz and the LSH. I've seen his best; we didn't get anything near it.

Even if Levitz was out of practice, he is a professional writer and his work on Worlds Finest has gotten good reviews, so there must be other reasons this run on the Legion has been so unsatisfying.

When Levitz came back to the Legion in the 80s it was clear that he had stories he wanted/needed to tell and that he was motivated to do better than he had in his first run.

To me, the last half of the Baxter run felt like Levitz tying up loose ends, trying to tell some definitive tales , and bring long-running stories and themes to their logical conclusion (like the Universo Project, the Emerald Empress, and the Time Trapper). This was a writer finishing a story.

I think that one of the problems with this most recent run is that he didn't have Legion stories he felt he needed to tell. And his previous run was so successful that there was no hunger to outdo himself.

I do like that he listed the Universo Project among his favorites. That's my favorite in-continuity Legion story (with Superboy's Legion being my favorite alternate-continuity Legion story). It did have the advantage of only having to really delve into characterization of four Legionniares, 'though, and that's not always going to be an option for a team with twenty-plus members...

When you think about it, the LSH of "Superboy's Legion" is no more 'alternate-continuity' than the pre-boot LSH. Yes, the latter certainly had a longer run than that (or any other) version, but the concept has been restarted so many times that it's difficult to assign one as a 'true' version anymore. Even the retro-boot is not exactly the return of the pre-boot it was billed as.

Of course, that can also be applied to the DCU in general, now, but the Legion franchise applies even more so.

Continuity has always been a kinda/sorta thing anyway. The various Legionnaires celebrating Superboy's admittance that were recolored later to include Brainy? The dozens of very similar looking dudes training to be Legionnaires in that Colossal Boy story? The Adult Legion story? Mekt Ranzz, Eve Aries and Leavar Bolto, who may not have existed, until they retroactively did?

The Reboot and Threeboot continuities actually *were* self-contained continuities, unlike the 'classic' continuity which was a mish-mash of occasionally contradictory stories, including multiple first appearances of various characters, and complete revamps of classic stories (such as Universo turning Earth against the Legion or Mordru taking over Sorcerer's World, or, most recently, and, IMO, disappointingly, the 'first meeting with the Fatal Five').

And yeah, the DCU itself, with this massive reboot, has also muddied the waters. Continuity, IMO, has always been less important than consistency. If some relatively unimportant bit of prior continuity gets in the way of writing a really great story, then I'm totally in support of tweaking that past story (preferably through an in-story explanation for why Brande was always Reep's father, and couldn't shapechange because of some Durlan disease or something, for instance, and not just changing stuff without an explanation).

On the other hand, writers who express contempt for continuity are pissing on every writer who has come before them (and the fans who loved their work), and probably shouldn't be allowed within 10 miles of an established character or setting. If they're so darned smart and cool and awesome that they don't need to respect the property that has made DC (or Marvel, etc.) millions of dollars over multiple decades, then perhaps they should go and write their own very special terribly precious million dollar property, instead of crapping all over someone elses.

It comes off as arrogant and petulant when a new writer totally throws away past stories about a character (or team) to re-invent them or modernize them, while complaining about how comics aren't selling the way they used to...

Also, a bit ironic.

I agree with you, Set. Even in real life we learn new things about people's pasts all the time, so tweaking character's backstories and past events to make current stories plausible is alright in my book. Just don't outright contradict a past story. With modern technology and the vast archives that I'm sure DC MUST (and if not, SHOULD) have of past comic book issues, there shouldn't be an excuse.





Great minds, Miss B



I agree, even in the interview Levitz just read like he was BLAH about the whole thing. Like he wasn't feeling any magic or motivation. I've had that feeling before, and it really messes you up.



He also cited the Great Darkness Saga, the Sensor Girl mystery arc and the LSV arc. Although the climax of the Sensor Girl mystery featured only 5 Legionnaires (Dreamy, Gim, Brek, Tellus and Jeckie), the buildup explored many others. And the Great Darkness featured the whole team and then some, as did the LSV story. At his best, Levitz was so skilled that whether a story featured a handful of Legionnaores or juggled the whole team, the results were highly satisfying.

Sharing a link from rickshaw's thread about George Perez leaving DC. Blacula mentions speaking with Perez, and we get some interesting insights.

http://www.legionworld.net/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=779141#Post779141

Perez confirmed to Blacula that the plot of comics these days is dictated by businesspeople and the writers have much more limited creative say in the stories. I wouldn't be surprised if Levitz' tone in the interviews is because of htat.

It sounds like it has become more like movie development, in which the story is pretty much known but a screen writer is hired to implement it.

We, Perez, comics writers and artists can lament that the big companies have gone that way but as we've seen in the Siegal lawsuits, these characters are "owned." They don't belong to the writers that do not originate them.

The companies are doing what they have every right to do and if this process is making more "profit," then those operating the companies are doing their jobs correctly. What I really cannot see though, is how this process is leading to more profits? The stories suck. They have generated a wave of new competitive ventures going after limited consumer dollars.

Yet they must be making more profit or they wouldn't be permitted to continue operating this way would they?

As best I can figure, the profit from even a marginally successful flick so outstrips the profits from even a phenomenally successful comic that the corporations are correct in keeping the comics consistent with movie properties instead of vise-versa.

The cart does indeed lead the horse.

I think you're right, Blockade Boy. Perhaps DC is now also just cutting their losses and ignoring those properties (like the Legion) that they feel aren't profitable enough - much like a consumer goods company would cut product lines.

And if the comics closely follow what happens in the movies, I suppose those comics have a good chance of capturing new fans - perhaps DC feels that'll be enough to offset the number of old fans who leave in disgust.

From a cold-blooded business standpoint, in a market that is turning more and more on turning their characters into big budget movie deals, and gaining only thin margins on paper comic books, it makes some degree of sense for both DC and Marvel to jettison any property that doesn't seem adaptable to the big (or small) screen.

Marvel is busy over at the House of No More Ideas turning every one of their titles into an Avengers franchise, more or less, even to the point of soft-selling the Fantastic Four (which they can't make movies about), or making a new 'mutant menace' without saying the word 'mutant' in this Inhumanity event upcoming (as a possible tie-in to the rumored introduction of the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver as Inhumans in Avengers 2, since they can't use the word 'mutant').

The cart of movies seems to be leading the horse of comics, at this point, and it's possible that, with the success of Batman and Superman, more and more DC titles are going to live or die based on the strength of their connections to the Justice League's big names.

What are you talking about, Set? Please forgive my ignorance, but why can't Marvel use the word "Mutant?"

Because Fox "own" the X-Men and their concepts as far as their use in movies goes - potentially forever, if they keep churning out movies within the specified intervals. [Go look up the fiasco that was the "Mutant X" TV show and, more importantly, the lawsuit from Fox that followed.]

To be honest, if Fraction's "Inhumanity" thing that Marvel appear to be basing the movie-Inhumans on is sufficiently mutant-like, Fox would probably have a case to sue all over again.