• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

DC Comics Continuity

I'm not a huge DC fan -- back when I was more into comics, I was all about Marvel. I've heard all these horror stories about continuity at DC, but I'm not really sure what supposedly happened. Can anyone summarize (or point to a good online summary) of all the supposed continuity faux pas DC has committed?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm pretty into DC, and I don't recall any great changes since Crisis, Zero Hour and Superman: Birthright (which replaces parts of Byrne's Man of Steel miniseries).

Oh, and Hypertime.
 

I'm not really sure what you mean, exactly. DC has changed it's continuity several times in certain ways. This page on Crisis on Infinite Earths is a good summary of the hows and whys, as well as numbering the various changes.

There was Crisis, which cleaned out all the multiple universes so there was one and (retroactively, only had ever been) only one Batman, one Superman, etc. Beforehand, Earth-2 was a kind of Golden-Age dumping ground that existed to justify the fact that there had been a Batman during WW2 when obviously the current Batman was much too young to have even been alive during that time. The early adventures had 'occured on Earth-2'. Another series of notes can be found here. Probably some of the most sweeping changes involve the heroes who were around in WW2, the JSA, the kings of retroactive continuity..

After that was Zero Hour which kinda of fixed a number of the various loose ends as well as justifying certain other retroactive changes to continuity. There was Hypertime, which re-introduced the concept of multiple universes (timelines) in a different way, and now we're going into some other sort of continuity-changing event with 'Infinite Crisis'.

Obviously with all this going on, some things still slip through the cracks. I think most of the 'Faux pas' some might mention are probably things that now, especially because of Zero Hour, 'didn't happen'.
 

I know more about DC than Marvel, but here goes...

DC's continuity issues are no worse than Marvel's continuity problems. Its just that the two companies handle the continuity problems differently.

Marvel ignores continuity. Each writer/editor team decides pretty much on their own what they are going to do. At least that is the impression I have gained from reading Captain America.

DC had a greater emphasis on continuity, but since the 80's, has rebooted the universe several times. Crisis on Infinte Earths, etc.
 

Endur said:
Marvel ignores continuity. Each writer/editor team decides pretty much on their own what they are going to do. At least that is the impression I have gained from reading Captain America.

DC had a greater emphasis on continuity, but since the 80's, has rebooted the universe several times. Crisis on Infinte Earths, etc.

Oddly enough, back in the day this was a reverse situation. DC had to do its "Crisis on Infinite Earths" bit because they never paid much attention to continuity, and had all kinds of Elseworlds books, alternate Earths, alternate timelines, multiple titles, and no real consideration for continuity. It became a big mess for them, and they tried to clean it up, a couple of times, with varying degrees of success. Currently, they are very continuity conscious, to the extent that they recently hired on two well-known writers (Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison) in a continuity oriented editorial capacity. For the last couple of years, in particular (since the Titans/Young Justice crossover), DC has had a "long-term" plan for bringing more of a sense of shared universe to all of their titles, across the board, which is finally coming to fruition this year, in the Prelude to Infinite Crisis and its related titles. They've had some editorial shakeups to facilitate this, as well as many other changes.

WayneLigon said:
...and now we're going into some other sort of continuity-changing event with 'Infinite Crisis'.

I don't get the sense that its a continuity change on the scale of Crisis or Zero Hour- no retcons or anything that are going on, at least from what I can tell. Just a tightening and refocusing of the shared universe feel of DC, and of the titles (and brands, such as the Bat-family of books) in general.

On the other hand, Marvel seemed to have a lot more emphasis on the shared universe continuity from its earliest days. Part of which had a lot to do with the fact that, at its inception, most of the titles were all written by one man, Stan Lee, so they couldn't help but benefit. Even post-Stan, though, there was largely a great degree of interconnectedness among the titles. I think it was at its strongest point during Jim Shooter's era, because of Shooter's management style and editorial mandates. It got to a degree of ridiculousness at some point, I think largely during the Harras era, though it might have started during the end of Shooter's run- to the point where you'd get little editorial "see issue #xx" notes in several panels on the same page at some points. To be fair, I don't think this was all of Harras' fault, I think a lot had to do with Mark Gruenwald, who was an amazing writer and trivia-guru, but could sometimes be a little excessive in his use of continuity. Tom DeFalco is another writer/editor who does the same.

In any case, Marvel fell into its current "continuity-lite" phase when Joe Quesada became EIC. Continuity was basically thrown out the window, under the premise that it hindered new readers from coming into the comics industry, and that getting rid of all that pesky continuity would change that... nevermind that comics haven't really been successfully getting new readers even since that change, and that the audience who reads them is largely the same audience that likes that continuity... or seemingly so, anyway, depending on what info/statistics you read/believe.

Marvel is currently having a "Crisis on Infinite Earths" sort of storyline (House of M) that may or may not bring a sense of shared universe back into Marvel. Remains to be seen, but there are definitely some massive changes that are to result, and there are strong hints that there may be some retcons involved as well.
 

The thing is that until the 80s DC didn't really dwell much on continuity. It's not that it didn't have any, just that it wasn't a big deal. Most stories ended back in the old statusquo, anyway. Plus, DC wasn't one world it was a bunch of different 'Alternate Earths' cobbled together, each with it's own continuity.

For Marvel, continuity was, like, their thing. It wasn't perfect, but they kept a pretty good leash on it.

Then in late 70s/early 80s following the success of more Marvel-like DC titles and signifiantly dwindling sales in other departments, DC went the Marvel route policy-wise, resulting in Crisis of Infinite Earths, where they attempted to sweep the state clean. Gone were Alternate Earths and continuity mis-match... in theory. If they'd just rebooted the whole thing and started from scratch, it probably would've, but fearing alienating their fans and mess with their most successful titles (like Teen Titans and Batman) they only rebooted a chosen, badly selling but important, few (like Superman and Wonder Woman).

This resulted in a continuity mess. Failed attempt to try to make order from chaos. They made several attempts to fix the continuity, but it only complicated things as not all the writers followed the new contiuity and kept re-introducing old ideas.

Now these writers and editors are running DC and we're actually getting functional continuity. The 'how'? Streamlining. They're basically rebooting the DC as we speak, but not by changing past continuity, but by ignoring it. They've gone back to the archetypes of old DC. They're slowly introducing a new status quo. The old stuff still happened, it's just not really important. Many believe that the whole Infinite Crisis thing that's running through the DCU titles now is the final step to this new status quo.

A good example is the Superman titles. Last year they wrapped up all the big plot points of the last ten years. Then they did a Superman origin retelling. Then we have a new Superman story: One that did not directly reference the old continuity, but did not refute it, either.
 

Currently, pretty much every DC title plays directly into the continuity of the shared universe. That is, the events of the one book do not contradict the events of another, and characters aren't pulling the "three places at one time" kind of thing. In fact, all the titles taken together feel like parts of one big story, but not in the massive crossover kind of way. As has been noted, Geoff Johns (superb writer of JSA, Flash, Teen Titans, Green Lantern) is working in an editorial consulting capacity, making sure each title is in line with the overall continuity. Grant Morrison has similar duty as an editorial consultant and "idea guy" preparing for the "new" DCU that comes into being after Infinite Crisis, whatever that may be. It sounds like DC is doing exactly what should have been done 20 years ago after Crisis on Infinite Earths: making sure there is a real game plan for the continuing universe.
 

We shall see, I guess. Interesting the Morrison has something to say about it all. I was a little torked when the "Doom Patrol" came back in a fashion that Ret-Con'd Morrison's run of Doom Patrol out of existence.

My first experience of continuity weirdness: Shade the Changing Man (long hair version) who knew John Constantine, who consulted with Swamp Thing, who interacted with the Suicide Squad, who had among their number...Shade the Changing Man (short hair version)? One was a moody artist, the other a space-cop, but they were the same guy? Weirdness.

Plus there is the whole "Death of the Thinker" (Suicide Squad)/"Oh, no, its the Thinker!" thing. It wasn't that the villain didn't stay dead. Of course you can't keep a good villain down. It was that it was never acknowledged that he had died. Then he died again. (Flash).

Ambush Bug was a fun series with "Jonni DC, continuity cop". :)
 

Particle_Man said:
We shall see, I guess. Interesting the Morrison has something to say about it all. I was a little torked when the "Doom Patrol" came back in a fashion that Ret-Con'd Morrison's run of Doom Patrol out of existence.

Ah, John Byrne again. I forgot about that. Add this to his time traveling, Golden Age version of Wonder Woman. As long as he's working at DC, I don't think their continuity is going to be safe. :(
 

Gentlegamer said:
Currently, pretty much every DC title plays directly into the continuity of the shared universe.
That's intercontinuity, which they've been doing in spades since the new editorial mandate.
A bit too much, in my taste, but at least it's been done reasonably well. It's not getting that
hung up on past continuity, though, with the exception of Geoff Johns (and I think he's been
overdoing it a bit. Two years back I saw him as the new star of DC, but now some of his
stuff is just getting boring, too hung up on 'fixing' the DCU, not enough spent on telling good
stories).

But anyhooo. Marvel is still wanking to it's history. Back-continuity all the way. It just threw
away the intercontinuity. It's not as big a deal as some want to make it. There are some big
holes in the universe, but mostly it all kinda fits together loosely if you just go with the idea
that most of the stories are not taking place at the same time.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top