|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 15:11:18 GMT -5
A spin off thread from the Roy Thomas Strongest Work Thread:
Was COIE good or bad for DC fans? For me I liked the story when it came out but hated the aftermath. I missed the loss of DC's Multiverse & all the changes that caused. So I'm not asking if you liked the story itself but did you like the changes that it caused? |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 5, 2016 15:22:32 GMT -5
I liked the Crisis and the aftermath was mostly good until they redefined the history dependent comics. Legion and AS Squadron took a major hit. I also thought they should have started ALL the titles over at #1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 15:49:56 GMT -5
I only read a smattering of DC through the 70s and early 80s being mostly a Marvel kid. I knew and liked the DC characters, but mostly from other media (George Reeves Superman, Superfriends, Lynda Carter Wonder Woman etc.). Crisis came out when I was in high school and able to afford buying my own comics for the first time because I was old enough to have a job, so for me personally the DC golden age was the period from Legends to Zero Hour where I was reading most of the DC line and liking all of it. It's also the period often referred to as the DC Renaissance where DC actually not only became relevant to the industry again, but became the industry innovator under Giordano and Khan.
As an older fan with more resources I was able to go back and sample more of the DC Gold, Silver and Bronze Age stuff and like quite a bit of it, but in my heart, my DC is that period in the late 80s and early 90s in the aftermath of Crisis, so I have to vote yes, I like the aftermath, but it comes form my particular experience in discovering and exploring DC the way I did.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Apr 5, 2016 16:15:14 GMT -5
Hated the aftermath if for no other reason than for what it did to Superman. I think the fact that John Byrne didn't appear to be much of a fan of the comic character outside of his first few years (describing his motivation for doing the reboot as "scraping the barnacles" off the franchise) helps explain my belief that it was designed as "Superman for people who don't like Superman". That's sort of the problem I have with most reboots - it's great for those who want to buy comics starring a character they hate, but if you actually like these characters you're kind of screwed.
The only other character I feel strongly enough about to have an opinion on during this period is Batman and things are kind of complicated since it's hard to define what changes were made to him due to Crisis and what were made due to Dark Knight. |
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Apr 5, 2016 16:20:31 GMT -5
It's a decent story with some gorgeous art by Perez, but the aftermath was godawful, especially for characters like Superman and the damage it did for ancillary properties like the Legion and the Hawks.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 5, 2016 16:28:05 GMT -5
I liked the new energy and excitement that followed Crisis. As with any company-wide change, there were positives and there were negatives, but I respect the excitement and new beginnings in a time before such a thing was overdone. Of course, the continuity was a total clusterf*ck.
But I think there's a reason why all my biggest review threads have been from this era.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 5, 2016 16:42:40 GMT -5
It was a fairly nonsensical story that didn't fix the non-existent problem it was supposed to fix and set a horrific precedent leading to a never-ending series of nonsensical and unnecessary events.
Guess which way I voted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 5, 2016 16:46:49 GMT -5
Hated the aftermath if for no other reason than for what it did to Superman. I think the fact that John Byrne didn't appear to be much of a fan of the comic character outside of his first few years (describing his motivation for doing the reboot as "scraping the barnacles" off the franchise) helps explain my belief that it was designed as "Superman for people who don't like Superman". That's sort of the problem I have with most reboots - it's great for those who want to buy comics starring a character they hate, but if you actually like these characters you're kind of screwed.
The only other character I feel strongly enough about to have an opinion on during this period is Batman and things are kind of complicated since it's hard to define what changes were made to him due to Crisis and what were made due to Dark Knight. Wow. I think almost the opposite. I have read from Byrne himself, that he loved Superman and loved the Movie version so much that he wanted to bring that version to the comic book pages. I though he succeeded. He did sort of " Marvelize" Superman, but I thought it was for the better. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 5, 2016 16:47:39 GMT -5
It was a fairly nonsensical story that didn't fix the non-existent problem it was supposed to fix and set a horrific precedent leading to a never-ending series of nonsensical and unnecessary events. Guess which way I voted. Wham ,Bam thank you Slam.  |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Apr 5, 2016 18:16:45 GMT -5
I read the 12 issues in the mid 90ies. Most of it made no sense and it surely didn't hold itself together. If this is the reason why so many great DC comics from the late 80ies and 90ies exist, then hurrah anyways. Does it negate the great comics that came before, surely not to me. So I want to vote that I like what came before and after, and mostly hated the series iteslf for it being a convolutated mess and a painfull read.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Apr 5, 2016 18:25:50 GMT -5
Right - It's a terrible piece of writing, but it had the correct artist.
And it gave the sense that EPIC EVENTS WERE HAPPENING, even though the actual story was an unfocused mess. (Marv Wolfman seems to generally agree with this, and says the novelization is way better. Is that true?) I guess that since it felt right fans were willing to forgive the terribleness of the actual narrative?
The aftermath...
Ooh boy. I didn't like the general TONE of it, but I liked a lot of the actual comics produced. Crisis was a device to move DC AS A COMPANY from being rooted in Science Fiction to X-Men style soap opera, and I'm far more interested in the former than the latter.
But I loved JLI, Suicide Squad, the Flash... Wonder Woman is as good as it had been in 35 years. I'm not sure DC ever had a stronger slate of continuing superhero titles.
|
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Apr 5, 2016 18:25:57 GMT -5
Considering the post-COIE DCU is the one I was introduced to when I picked up my very first comics in the late 80's, I have to go with "Liked the changes". I had no other point of reference, so I was learning as I went along (just like many DC editors, apparently).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 19:06:51 GMT -5
I hated the aftermath of Crisis because it's literally destroyed my love of All-Star Squadron and having said that - I was devastated period.
|
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Apr 5, 2016 21:10:07 GMT -5
I always thought it was unlikely that anyone really had a problem understanding the multiple earths until our family watched the recent Flash crossover on TV's Supergirl show. My wife was on some pain meds, granted, but she was genuinely befuddled by the idea that Kara and Barry were from different universes, and all my attempts at explanation failed me.
"I thought Flash was on OUR earth!"
"It's just like Earth-2 on his show, it's a different reality than Supergirl's."
"But Earth-2 was the alternate earth, he's on our earth."
"No, he's not on our earth, our earth doesn't have superheroes."
"But it's supposed to be our earth, right?"
"No, it's an earth where there's a Flash."
"But Supergirl is on the real earth? They didn't say Barry was on an alternate earth!"
"No, there's one earth where there's a Supergirl, another where there's a Flash, and they're different."
"But which one is our earth?"
"Neither of them! It's like which one is Friends on? Ross and Rachel don't exist on Flash's world. Each show we watch is like a glimpse into a different universe where those characters really exist."
"But Barry is on ours, right? Earth-2 is the different one. Is Supergirl on Earth-2?"
And even on meds, I should point out, my wife is like a super-genius person. She just couldn't get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 21:37:24 GMT -5
For me I was baffled why DC gave up on their Multiverse. You could have stories about a single Superman or stories about a married Superman on another earth & have both be canon & not an imaginary story. I felt it could give writers more freedom to tell different stories. And it wasn't like DC was telling stories about a lot different earths anyway. Most stories were on Earth-1 & E-2 & sometimes Earth-S.
And like others have said it made things worse for some of my favorite characters.
|
|
