|
Post by coke & comics on Jan 22, 2016 1:02:37 GMT -5
I'm assuming Spider-Man: The Other eventually got retconned? Not really. It was more just a case of nobody ever mentioning the story or the new powers it granted Spidey ever again. Parts of the story got revisited for the Spider Verse arc.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Jan 22, 2016 1:31:41 GMT -5
Byrne's decision that Lockjaw was actually an Inhuman who just looked like a dog rather than an actual Inhuman dog was retconned by Peter David by editorial decree, but he deliberately had the retcon make little sense so that people could choose to believe it or not.
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jan 22, 2016 2:33:49 GMT -5
Byrne's decision that Lockjaw was actually an Inhuman who just looked like a dog rather than an actual Inhuman dog was retconned by Peter David by editorial decree, but he deliberately had the retcon make little sense so that people could choose to believe it or not. Really? I recall the issue. The characters seemed to be laughing at the idea that Lockjaw was a dog. They seemed to be making fun of Byrne in-story.
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on Jan 22, 2016 3:48:09 GMT -5
In the first volume of Swamp Thing, there was a storyline involving Swampy being turned back into Alec Holland that was so ill-received that it was erased by editorial fiat, in the letter column of Saga Of The Swamp Thing #6.
"In issue #6, editor Len Wein declared, in response to a published letter, that Alec never had a brother and that every Swamp Thing series story after issue #21 of the original series never happened."
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Jan 22, 2016 4:05:02 GMT -5
Byrne's decision that Lockjaw was actually an Inhuman who just looked like a dog rather than an actual Inhuman dog was retconned by Peter David by editorial decree, but he deliberately had the retcon make little sense so that people could choose to believe it or not. Really? I recall the issue. The characters seemed to be laughing at the idea that Lockjaw was a dog. They seemed to be making fun of Byrne in-story. Which, if you read the original Byrne story, makes no sense, as Gorgon and Karnak-the two characters David claims were perpetrating the hoax on Ben Grimm-were actually standing right next to Grimm at the time and clearly quite serious. David later said that he didn't agree with the decision to retcon Byrne's story, so as far as he was concerned the hoax claim was just a lame excuse cooked up by the Inhumans in order to hide Lockjaw's secret away again.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Jan 22, 2016 4:06:47 GMT -5
In the first volume of Swamp Thing, there was a storyline involving Swampy being turned back into Alec Holland that was so ill-received that it was erased by editorial fiat, in the letter column of Saga Of The Swamp Thing #6. "In issue #6, editor Len Wein declared, in response to a published letter, that Alec never had a brother and that every Swamp Thing series story after issue #21 of the original series never happened." Effectively erasing a sizeable chunk of the mid 70s revival of Challengers of the Unknown, too...
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 22, 2016 6:43:34 GMT -5
I think Valeria Richard's existence is a mistake. Byrne wrote a powerful issues of the FF and it was retconned, I feel, as a dig at Byrne. I'm not saying that Byrne didn't deserve it (he's certainly done stuff like that himself) but doing that to a story where a character experienced a miscarriage doesn't sit well with me. Totally Agree. This is what happens when you don't own the character;anyone can disavow a story they don't like.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 22, 2016 6:45:24 GMT -5
In the first volume of Swamp Thing, there was a storyline involving Swampy being turned back into Alec Holland that was so ill-received that it was erased by editorial fiat, in the letter column of Saga Of The Swamp Thing #6. "In issue #6, editor Len Wein declared, in response to a published letter, that Alec never had a brother and that every Swamp Thing series story after issue #21 of the original series never happened." This is what I was thinking of. Didn't he get turned into a superhero,costume and all ?
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 22, 2016 6:47:34 GMT -5
You can make an argument that the entire Parker/Mary Jane marriage was a "bad Idea" that was erased... ( Ducks)
|
|
|
Post by earl on Jan 22, 2016 8:29:33 GMT -5
It's been years since I read them but I seem to recall a story in the Incredible Hulk which explained away the Savage Hulk magazine stories as being a TV show created by aliens of the Hulk or something of the like.
I guess the clever and genius Marvel element was the use of "Doombots" to explain away any bad or awkward Dr. Doom story.
Turning the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver into being Magneto's children was retconning the retcon with the Whizzer.
|
|
|
Post by tingramretro on Jan 22, 2016 8:33:10 GMT -5
It's been years since I read them but I seem to recall a story in the Incredible Hulk which explained away the Savage Hulk magazine stories as being a TV show created by aliens of the Hulk or something of the like. I guess the clever and genius Marvel element was the use of "Doombots" to explain away any bad or awkward Dr. Doom story. Turning the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver into being Magneto's children was retconning the retcon with the Whizzer. The Whizzer being Wanda and Pietro's father wasn't actually a retcon, as we'd never previously had any indication of who their parents were. It was simply new information, at the time. To me, it still makes more sense than the Magneto thing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 9:52:30 GMT -5
And that retcon of the retcon has itself been retconned - the last volume of Uncanny Avengers turned Wanda and Pietro back into the Whizzer's children (or something - I forget the details, but they're definitely not Magneto's any more. Or not until mutants are back in fashion and inhumans are out again)
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 22, 2016 12:21:09 GMT -5
See, I couldn't figure out why Marvel chose to screw up those Lee/Ditko tales exactly for this reason. With his present a mess, it seemed that readers could at least say, "Well, things are pretty bad now, but at least we have those old stories to remind us why we should be rooting for the guy". With Chapter One however, it seemed as if Marvel was dead set on making Spider-Man's timeline a wasteland of bad stories.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 22, 2016 12:23:07 GMT -5
See, I couldn't figure out why Marvel chose to screw up those Lee/Ditko tales exactly for this reason. With his present a mess, it seemed that readers could at least say, "Well, things are pretty bad now, but at least we have those old stories to remind us why we should be rooting for the guy". With Chapter One however, it seemed as if Marvel was dead set on making Spider-Man's timeline a wasteland of bad stories.
Did someone go into your room and erase all the Lee/Ditko stories from your books?
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 22, 2016 12:28:52 GMT -5
See, I couldn't figure out why Marvel chose to screw up those Lee/Ditko tales exactly for this reason. With his present a mess, it seemed that readers could at least say, "Well, things are pretty bad now, but at least we have those old stories to remind us why we should be rooting for the guy". With Chapter One however, it seemed as if Marvel was dead set on making Spider-Man's timeline a wasteland of bad stories.
Did someone go into your room and erase all the Lee/Ditko stories from your books?
It didn't affect them at all, but it did prevent me from regarding the Spider-Man Marvel was publishing in 1998 as compatible with the Spider-Man of the early 60's. You'd think Marvel would be trying to recapture some of the magic of a period that is so highly regarded rather than distancing itself from it at a time when things were looking pretty bad for the guy.
|
|