Hugh Neilson Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 So, if we applied the "no reboots, no retcons - let the characters age naturally", which movies would we be watching? Clearly, that would mean no revived Cap, no Namor and no Human Torch (android, or that retcon/reboot in FF). Avengers long since retired, of course. No silver age Flash, Green Lantern, Atom, Hawkman. Superman, Batman, Aquaman, Wonder Woman all left in the Golden Age. Cyborg should be what, mid-50s (and no rebooting him into the JL either). Why did the movie makers reboot these characters into film in the first place instead of creating their own, brand-new characters? death tribble 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death tribble Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 RDU Neil and I are about to clash. Just finished watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and I liked it. Bazza 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 14 minutes ago, death tribble said: RDU Neil and I are about to clash. Just finished watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and I liked it. death tribble 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted March 23, 2018 Report Share Posted March 23, 2018 17 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said: So, if we applied the "no reboots, no retcons - let the characters age naturally", which movies would we be watching? Clearly, that would mean no revived Cap, no Namor and no Human Torch (android, or that retcon/reboot in FF). Avengers long since retired, of course. The movies aren't (or wouldn't be) continuations of any existing continuity. They are part of a separate continuity where everything starts from scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 Marvel comics = Earth 616 . Marvel Cinematic Universe = Earth 199999 . Same but different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 I liked Guardians of the Galaxy 2. It was dumb and random and full of plot holes, but still entertaining. Just a "shut your brain off" movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 death tribble 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchman Mk. IV Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 That's part of what I liked so much about my namesake series. (Of course, it's slightly easier to maintain continuity over 12 issues than a far-flung 'universe.') Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 24, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 Rewatched Iron Man 2. It really is the quintessential Iron Man film, the one captures the spirit of the comic book series and why it has endured. Christopher R Taylor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 I agree. Iron Man 2 was my favorite of the series, and i'm baffled by how many people think it was the worst (that is, for me, Iron Man 3, which was the crappiest of the entire MCU bunch by far). Its got everything I want from an Iron Man movie including Tony finally admitting that Pepper is more than just a really good personal assistant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Walsh Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 I see it is the best of the three, followed by 1and then (more distantly) 3. I didn't really care for the Vanko character, but the Black Widow scenes more than make up for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 16 hours ago, zslane said: The movies aren't (or wouldn't be) continuations of any existing continuity. They are part of a separate continuity where everything starts from scratch. That sounds (at least to me) like the classic definition of a reboot. A brand-new, starting from scratch, separate continuity which reintroduces characters and elements from the prior continuity, some virtually identical, some subtly different, others markedly changed and still others absent entirely (or at least absent for now - like no Ant Man or Wasp in the Avengers). Not much point licensing content if you're not going to use it, of course, and I like much of the MCU's reinterpretations of various characters, but such a reinterpretation is, at least to me, a reboot. Hmmm...also applies to gamers. How many of us have taken an old favorite character and re-envisioned the character for a new edition, new game, etc.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 Not quite. The MCU is not a reboot of Earth-616 (or any other Marvel continuity), it is its own continuity entirely. The key distinction here is the continuity's historical timeline. Oddball crossovers notwithstanding, a new continuity shares nothing with any previous continuity except character names and essential origin elements. Continuity histories/timelines are completely separate, and that's what makes them separate continuities. Thus, Earth-616 is still Earth-616 no matter how many times you "reboot" it, and it will always be a separate continuity from Earth-1610 (Ultimates), Earth-199999 (the MCU), and so on. Bazza 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher R Taylor Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 I tried like 3 different games to make a heroic, crime fighting vampire (and that was before I read that brilliant Astro City story about the Confessor -- before it ever came out). It seemed like a great chance for role playing, the power set is good for a superhero, it has a kind of Batman vibe, etc. But none of the GMs seemed to like the idea so... Quote The MCU is not a reboot of Earth-616 (or any other Marvel continuity), it is its own continuity entirely. Yeah its kind of Ultimate Marvel with classic marvel personalities, and then some odd stuff mixed in like funny satirical Tony Stark and way too young hot Aunt May. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted March 24, 2018 Report Share Posted March 24, 2018 46 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said: I tried like 3 different games to make a heroic, crime fighting vampire (and that was before I read that brilliant Astro City story about the Confessor -- before it ever came out). It seemed like a great chance for role playing, the power set is good for a superhero, it has a kind of Batman vibe, etc. But none of the GMs seemed to like the idea so... You should visit Champions Online. It seems every fourth PC in that game is a vampire or demon of some sort. But many of them don't even try to be heroic -- they just want to revel in killing people and wrecking stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 On 3/24/2018 at 10:33 AM, zslane said: Not quite. The MCU is not a reboot of Earth-616 (or any other Marvel continuity), it is its own continuity entirely. The key distinction here is the continuity's historical timeline. Oddball crossovers notwithstanding, a new continuity shares nothing with any previous continuity except character names and essential origin elements. Continuity histories/timelines are completely separate, and that's what makes them separate continuities. Thus, Earth-616 is still Earth-616 no matter how many times you "reboot" it, and it will always be a separate continuity from Earth-1610 (Ultimates), Earth-199999 (the MCU), and so on. So where does one draw the line? The MCU is recognizable as the Marvel Universe. Like Earth-616 and the Ultimates Universe, it has a Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Ant-Man and on and on. It even has a Pepper Potts and a Happy Hogan, Jane Foster, Peggy Carter, Betty Banner. The heroes have the same civilian names, similar backgrounds, similar origins, similar power sets. The similarities far outweigh the differences. Characters unique to the MCU are noteworthy in not having their roots in the comics (Phil Coulson). Fans wanted the "marvel universe" translated to the Big Screen. That's what the MCU is. That's not a criticism, by any means, but arguing it is not a customized, somewhat different, vision of the same Marvel Universe makes no sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zslane Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 There is no one Marvel continuity; in fact there there is a fairly lengthy list of them. Throwing around the term "universe" will just confuse things. Each continuity is basically self-contained, and no matter the similarities, they are separate from each other. The MCU is a re-imagined, mashed together riff on several different continuities, and is not a reboot of any one of them. It is its own thing. It shares no timeline history with any of them, and that's what makes it its own continuity (with its own continuity number) rather than a reboot of an existing continuity. It is a matter of definitions (Marvel's, not mine). You may think you know better than Marvel does what a "Marvel continuity" is, but you can't expect Marvel (or me) to agree with you. Bazza 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 Bugs Bunny, A-Lad-in His Lamp (1948): [after Mad Man Hassan points his sword to Bugs' chest] "Just a minute doc, let's not start splitting hares." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 2 hours ago, zslane said: There is no one Marvel continuity; in fact there there is a fairly lengthy list of them. Throwing around the term "universe" will just confuse things. Each continuity is basically self-contained, and no matter the similarities, they are separate from each other. The MCU is a re-imagined, mashed together riff on several different continuities, and is not a reboot of any one of them. It is its own thing. It shares no timeline history with any of them, and that's what makes it its own continuity (with its own continuity number) rather than a reboot of an existing continuity. It is a matter of definitions (Marvel's, not mine). You may think you know better than Marvel does what a "Marvel continuity" is, but you can't expect Marvel (or me) to agree with you. Yep. I tried to explain it to a friend who just starting watching the MCU. I explained 616 & 199999 using Lord of the Rings: 616 is the books, and 199999 is the films. I was fairly successful with this. (Posting so others can get their heads around 616 & 199999. ) Oh, the X-Men film series has a different Earth/Universe/Contuinity number too. But I'm sure you knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Neilson Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 My comments on reboots and "continuities" basically started from here, asking what movies we would be watching had we held to this standard. On 3/23/2018 at 9:32 AM, RDU Neil said: This is why I've been enjoying the movies more than the comics. The characters are allowed to grow and change and time passes. I absolutely HATE the eternal youth of and reinvention of the characters in the comics. I want Spider-Man to be pushing 70. I want Capt. America to be defined as a man who is out of time, and ages slowly, and watches his friends and allies continue to pass along the way. I want to watch Wanda age, while the Vision doesn't, and read the inevitable funeral issue. Stark and Barton and Romanov should all be old and/or dead by now. Legacy heroes would mean something, with the old ones passing. Thor becomes a tragic figure, as he is the one who will outlive all the rest, etc. I've always felt that the comic universes had the unique chance to create a massively complex, litereary "other world" and actually have the ability to explores years, decades, more of that universe... but they have routinely chucked that concept for constant rehash posed as reinvention. Stories lose all pathos and impact when they are just going to be rewritten. It is such a waste. On 3/24/2018 at 10:33 AM, zslane said: Not quite. The MCU is not a reboot of Earth-616 (or any other Marvel continuity), it is its own continuity entirely. The key distinction here is the continuity's historical timeline. Oddball crossovers notwithstanding, a new continuity shares nothing with any previous continuity except character names and essential origin elements. Continuity histories/timelines are completely separate, and that's what makes them separate continuities. Thus, Earth-616 is still Earth-616 no matter how many times you "reboot" it, and it will always be a separate continuity from Earth-1610 (Ultimates), Earth-199999 (the MCU), and so on. As long as the "new continuity" simply restarts (i.e. reboots) the same characters in the same basic framework. that is a reboot as I would define it. Whether we reboot "Earth-616" or call it "Earth 161" is irrelevant - the same basic universe is rebooted. 9 hours ago, zslane said: There is no one Marvel continuity; in fact there there is a fairly lengthy list of them. Throwing around the term "universe" will just confuse things. Each continuity is basically self-contained, and no matter the similarities, they are separate from each other. The MCU is a re-imagined, mashed together riff on several different continuities, and is not a reboot of any one of them. It is its own thing. It shares no timeline history with any of them, and that's what makes it its own continuity (with its own continuity number) rather than a reboot of an existing continuity. It is a matter of definitions (Marvel's, not mine). You may think you know better than Marvel does what a "Marvel continuity" is, but you can't expect Marvel (or me) to agree with you. I don't care how Marvel classifies it. "This one differs from that one" is fine - a re-imagining begins with a reboot. To read under the definition above, unless we just re-tell the exact same stories in the exact same way, it's not a reboot of an existing continuity. Sorry; too narrow a definition for me to buy in. All we are doing is making up a different word for "continuities" or "reboots". Actually, to take Marvel lore, if we reboot Earth-616, and take a different path, Earth-616 is still out there somewhere. Each different path branches off into two different universes/continuities/whatever we wish to call them. And each is a variant of the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 The technicalities of the definition of reboot or different continuities do not matter as long as the stories are good and internally consistent within the framework created. So far, so good in this cinematic continuity. If you don't 'reboot'/remake/reimagine (whatever) the key elements of the written universe, then you can't have a cinematic universe. Period. Matt the Bruins 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDU Neil Posted March 26, 2018 Report Share Posted March 26, 2018 I think of these things as one of 3 concepts. Reboot, Re-imagining, Retcon Reboot: negates previous canonical details to take an established setting/character in a new direction. (Crisis on Infinite Earths, the old stories don't count anymore) Re-Imagining: takes ideas/concepts from the original, but tells its own stories without interacting or conflicting with previous source material (Marvel comics versions vs. the movie versions, both exist separately) RetCon: exists WITHIN the source material canon, but provides "new evidence" that canonical events didn't play out like it was believed, but doesn't negate them. (The "You thought Sharon died, but really she faked her death to go deep cover!" type of deal.) Re-imaginings are great things. Marvel primary AND Ultimate Universe AND Marvel Cinematic Universe, etc. Each does its own thing with similar ideas, but none of them negate the other. RetCons used to be great dramatic vehicles, but are so overused, and no one even tries to make them seem plausible anymore. Reboots can be done well, or horribly... usually the latter, because they never make a clean break. slikmar, Doc Shadow and Christopher R Taylor 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted March 27, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2018 Phil Coulson will be returning to MCU films in Captain Marvel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.