Quote:

If you can't respect others opinions, then why do you expect others to do the same for you?



What? I don't disrespect your opinion, I said that your principles are all wrong. I don't like the fact that Gods of Gotham has more talking than action, but I didn't let that kill the story or Jiminez continuity for me in general.

Quote:

It took the steps to wipe out fifty years worth of continuity, and start over. It revitilized the entire DC Comics franchise. It brought DC comics up to date. What's not progressive about that?



Basically, you're saying that it couldn't be done properly without Crisis because continuity was such a mess...It seems you care about continuity after all my friend. Unless what you're saying is; because the writers wouldn't stop following continuity when they should have because of the outdated plot devices, things would suck without it. You know if I was to use this kind of reasoning (if my assumptions are correct), we'd have a crisis every year.

The mal progressiveness I find is the fact that the story created extra baggage. Continuity wasn't ENTIRELY wiped out. It would have been much easier and tidier just to reboot everything.

Quote:

I have no idea what "C.O.M.E." means. As for your opinions on Crisis, I can respect them. But, I don't agree. I loved it for what it was, what it stood for, and for what it accomplished. Nothing more or less.



Crisis on Multiple Earths (P.O.S.)

Alright then, I can understand that. I don't agree with the principles (again) but I can understand none the less.

Quote:

In what way? Did you read the interview at the top of the page?



The way I explained that was very self-explanatory. I don't know how to make it much clearer.

Writers still follow continuity and editors still look for it.

Quote:

Do you really want to get into a discussion about what kind of picture certain opinions create? Yours especially? Because I'm sure Mxy would be happy to add something here.....



Tell me please. I'm anxious. I probably already know what it is, but I'd like to hear your reasoning for it.

Another thing....

Despite all of our mongering and nagging about following continuity or not following continuity, one thing remains constant. We all have singular standards for these characters—Singular UNIVERSAL standards. Batman, Wonder Woman, Superman, J’onn… To relieve those characters or the happenings of the stories (that contained their defining moments) they were in is just like taking away their costume, their sex, or their entire reason for existence for that matter. Even worse, to defy rather than work with continuity would mean we might as well rearrange the panels of the books or even REMOVE panels for that matter.

I said this to Gimm:

Quote:

Y’know what?, while I’m ranting about continuity or “fellating” as you like to call it; a good story isn’t hampered by continuity or a writer being FORCED to use continuity within said story. It’s the writer himself who fucks it up. If you can’t work with what you’re given, what this job asks you to do, then you’re devoid of talent. And it’s not mainly the story that’s what fucks up continuity, it’s the freakin’ character. Because a writer can’t work with what’s given to him, he has to morph the main reason the comic is bought (the character. In my case most of the time: Batman) to actually create A story. Not a good one, not a bad one, definitely not a great one—Just a story with no highlights. The character you get with it isn’t really the one you bought the comic for, and because of this, the character’s OOC actions are carried into the next story and the next and then next and the next and the next (you get the idea)…



The point of this inclusion is that if writers even ATTEMPT to go off continuity—Which is pretty much what every writer does by putting a cape on Batman or tits on Wondy—Then they should, in fact, do it right and not make any sort of exceptions (purposefully OR mistakenly) or have excuses that border on moronic: “My mistake wasn’t THAT big”.