Quote:

ManofTheAtom said:I bet I can prove you wrong on that

Besides comics, what kind of entertainment do your real life friends like?

What TV or video games?

I bet that they know some continuity from either a favorite TV show or a favorite series of video games.

In most cases that I've seen continuity isn't the problem, the problem is the medium.



If continuity ever got in the way of making a good game or a good TV show, I assure you they'd tell it to go fuck itself. They may now a game or a show's continuity very well (I know Superman's post-Crisis continuity fairly well) but still manage to keep their priorities straight. If not, then I'd be having this same discussion with them.
In fact, everyone I've mentioned this kind of arguments to thinks you're fucking nuts.

Quote:

Then those people are retards that think that comics can't be real entertainment, that they should be only for the simplistic minded.



You're the fucking idiot for thinking that they're idiots (BTW, I try not to use retard as an insult... I'm sorry that I changed the word for idiot, but I think we mean the same thing). They do believe in comics... however, believing in comics doesn't mean believing in continuity. Just because continuity is a vital part of comics for you doesn't mean the same holds true for everyone else. Some of us happen to enjoy comics for the stories.

Quote:

Throwaway reading for when you go to the bathroom.



For when you're looking for a good story, a concept you don't seem to understand. So, lemme get this straight, they're "throwaway" reading becuase they're not (necessarily) connected to the others comics? Then, I suppouse, standalone movies and books are throwaway reading too.

Quote:

That had nothing to do with continuity.

The quality of the stories is up to the writer and the penciler, nothing more.



And the work of the penciller and the reader can be affected by what they're forced to do and not to do. This is my theory: Forcing writers to do ANYTHING (follow continuity or not follow it) produces lame mediocre stories. Yes, there are times when a writer can work with continuity just fine -- but JUST LIKE THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN THEY CAN'T. One writer can produce a marvelous story that uses continuity and an awful one depending on how he feels about it in that particular case.

Quote:

Continuity's a tool... either you know how to use it or you don't, period.



Maybe you feel like disregarding the work of a writer just because he doesn't want to use continuity in a particular case, but I don't. I'll still give it a chance and maybe a find an amazing story you'll be missing because of your illogic intollerance.

Quote:

Blame the suckage of those comics on the writers not being good enough to use the tool, not on the tool itself.



A tool is something you CAN use or not use, not something you HAVE to use. Continuity is a tool and I agree on that, but you want it to be more than that, you want it to be a fucking unbreakable rule even though you know there's people who don't like it because of that ego distortion you have in your head that doesn't allow you to see things from any other point of view but yours. I mean, I can get in your shoes and understand why you like continuity and be an intelligent person: you can't get in my shoes and understand why in some cases I don't like it without thinking I'm a moron. I do think you're a moron, but no because you like continuity, because of your intollerance and limited view.

Quote:

A story without repercutions... what's the fun in that?



The story itself. Think about standalone books and movies again.

Quote:

I'm not saying that all stories have to be writen to address past continuity, just that once they are writen they become part of continuity.



And that can limit them: you have in some cases a shitload of comics, entire decades of them, to keep in mind and respect. Even if you don't plan to mention them, a consistent continuity must take into consideration everything that happens before. You can't ask every writer to agree with doing that.

Quote:

You're using the words good and bad like if they were a standard, when they're a preference.

What if we were talking about food and you were trying to convince me how great a burrito is?

You may love to eat burritos, but maybe I don't, maybe I hate the taste.



Then you'd call me and everyone who likes burritos a fucking simple minded moron and demand that burritos are banned from street stands and relegated to a few especialized restaurants.

Quote:

Same with comics.

You think that Superman between 86 and 99 sucked.



Oh my fucking Gob...
What's inside that head?
Are you a rocket scientist or something so your brain is completely full and you can't enter any new information?
How many times have I said that I actually like Man of Steel? I liked Byrne's Superman. I loved Ordway and Stern's Superman. I like the Jurgens Supersquad. Afer 1994 things started decreasing... they were good, but not as good as before. Then they were lame and mediocre. Simple run of the mill superhero stuff with no depht and nothing interesting happening. Not even something cool.
But, in general, I liked the 86-99 era. Overall, the lameness in the end was overshadowed by how good the beggining and middle were. I liked it. But it's over. Just because I liked a story doesn't mean I like to see it continued forever. Quite opposite: as a story goes along it tends to get harder and harder to produce good stories (this is why people like Gaiman, Moore, Ennis and Morrison are smart enough to stop the stories by themselves before they get lame). Precisely BECAUSE of my love for those stories is that I want to see the one, big story finished. I can always go back and re-read it, or find a rare issue I didn't have.
Now, all this just entered your brain through the right ear and flew away through the left.
I guess you also think I always hate continuity and love the Silver Age.

Quote:

I think it was great.

To me it was good, to you it was bad.

Not a standard, but a preference.

See the difference?

You can't use terms like good and bad like you're doing.



Okay, now that that's clear... that had nothing to do with what I said. This is what I said:

"Maybe you buy comics to see a story continued for eternity, not caring if it's good or bad, but I think that's pointless and a waste of money. You can have your continuity following "stories" for all I care, but don't expect everyone to accept that every main comic should be like that."

Ok, let's analyze that step by step.
"Maybe you buy comics to see a story continued for eternity,"

I would rather let them end once when their time comes. That's the nature of every story. A beginning, a middle, and an end.

"not caring if it's good or bad, but I think that's pointless and a waste of money."

I mean if the individual stories are good or bad. The ones that are being produced at the time. By 1999 the stories were, let's face it, lame. Yet you still would have liked the same writers to keep going on forever. You've admitted it yourself several times: you prefer a continuity abiding lame story to a continuity disrespecting good one, because, for you, the good story stops being a good story once it disrespects continuity (something completely irrational: a good story is a good story, period. Continuity is secondary.)

"You can have your continuity following "stories" for all I care, but don't expect everyone to accept that every main comic should be like that."

I mean that you can have one, three, five, ten, twenty comics that stretch one continuity forever for all I care, but don't expect everyone to feel the same way. Precisely because not everyone feels the same way, there should be space in the main monthly comics for stories that (lemme put it in a way you'll understand) start new continuities, wether the writer intends someone else to follow them or not. A continuity can be one single issue.

Quote:

Looking at sales in the last five years, which is when the Superman writers stopped using continuity, it's "bad luck" not just for the readers but for the writers.

Writers and pencilers in the Superman comics were just fired for sucking, for being so "bad" that no one wanted to read their crap.

Ignoring continuity cost them their jobs.




Sigh... I've explained that the problem there was that the writers didn't stop using continuity altogether: it remained lurking behind the scenes, never defied or openly contradicted, because the writers wanted to please everyone. Or HAD to do it, which would be even worse.

Quote:


You say that using continuity is just as bad.



When it's forced, of course it is. Just like it would be bad to force writers to make their characters wear clown clothes. As long as they're forced to do something they don't agree with they'll do their job lamely: this is the source, I think, of the lameness of most part of the 90's.

Quote:

It's their right, and many writers used that right.

Those writers no longer have a job because of it...

Funny how using continuity leads to popular stories and ignoring it leads to unpopular ones, eh?



What the fuck? Okay, so you got Birthright: but it didn't do bad because it didn't use continuity, it did bad because of the own merits of the book (people bought the first issue knowing that it didn't use continuity: that's now what made them stop buying, it's the story itself). And you got the last five years of Superman: but they did use continuity, in a half-arsed sort of way to try to make everyone happy but failing miserably. Just for curiosity (I have no idea about this) how did the first issues of the Return to Krypton arc sell? It openly defied continuity (seemingly: it was later explained to fit it, but nobody knew that at the time).
What other cases have you got of out of continuity stories being unpopular just because they're out of continuity?

Quote:

Which I bet had continuity in them...



Exactly. Except the Bat-Man issue. It was a self-contained arc. All the others used continuity heavily.

Quote:

Again, writers that ignore continuity end up getting fired, while writers that honor continuity become popular.

Remember Geoff Johns?



That thesis has no foundation. You came up with it just now.

Quote:

It's their choice, sure, but you can't ignore the fact that writers that ignore continuity don't produce good or popular stories.



We don't know that because it hasn't happened yet. I insist: the Superman comics aren't a good example of out of continuity stories. We haven't seen out of continuity stories within the main titles yet, we don't know how much they would sell.

Quote:

But you don't care about the quality of the story, you only care about the quality of the issue.



Which is a story by itself!!!! You consider the whole series a story ALWAYS, I don't, not necessarily, only if it's meant that way.

Quote:

You just want something to read to kill time.



Agh! I want a good fucking story, not because I want to kill time, but because I enjoy good fucking stories. They inspire me. Once in a while a good story comes along that renews my faith in comics.

Quote:

You won't follow a series if it uses continuity, you only want to buy something by impulse so you can read in a day or whatever.



I'll follow a 100 issue series that uses continuity as long as it's good. I'll buy a self conclusive issue as long as it's good.
I think you have a problem understanding something: of the two, I'm not the one that closes himself to things. I'm open to let continuity give me a good story and I'll enjoy it. You're the intollerant one.
See, there's only one thing I can't stand: mediocre stories. Lame shit. That pisses me off. That's my achile's heel. When I come across a lame story, a waste of paper, a waste of money, I get fucking mad. And when I find out that that story was forced on the writer (for example, a forced crossover or a forced issue to explain how something fits in continuity), I get mad at whatever the reason for forcing it was. And I've found that in many cases it's continuity.
This is why I need to be selective with my comics. I can't buy any piece of shit just because it's part of the same continuity as the other stories like you do. This is why I buy less comics than you, not because I don't love comics as much.

Quote:

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that you are a reader that ISN'T going to buy a comic every single month, it's not within you.

But you still have the right to read a story with that character if you want to.

Buy a one shot, it has a beginning, middle and end.

Why buy an ongoing series that you're not going to follow?



I'll follow it as long as it's good. That's the difference between you and me: you don't care if it's good as long as it's in continuity.

Quote:

Don't tell me that the moment comics stop using continuity you'll start buying Superman on a monthly basis.



Not if it's not good, no. On the opposite hand, if someone comes along and actually makes a good run out of a story that respects EVERYTHING that's happened from 1986 to now (something that would completely shock me), I'd sure as fuck buy it.

Quote:

What you want is for the ongoing series to be turned into a series of 12 one shots a year, each one individual from the other.



No, I want a series of 12 good stories a year. I don't care if they're self conclusive or not: I'm open for a one shot just as I'm open for a 100 issue run as long as they're good.

Quote:

So each comic should ignore continuity because it's someone's first?

That doesn't work, that's impossible to do.



Not immediate continuity, that would be contraproducent, but certainly decades old continuity. Not only is that possible to do, it's very necessary.

Quote:

You're generalizing what I said.

I said the ongoing series for the continuity fans and the one shots and minis for the impulse buyers, those that like you don't care about continuity, only want to read a random Superman story that doesn't depend on what came before or comes after.



No, that's what I said: you want the main titles to be for old readers only. Isn't that a bit selfish?

Quote:

Doesn't work.

The non-continuity fans don't want it and the continuity fans do.

Why fight over the ongoing titles when we can each have what we want?



The one shots and minis are not enough. I wish they were, but they're not.

Quote:

Good is subjective to your preference, it's not a standard.

You keep saying that I buy "bad" comics... just because YOU don't like them, doesn't make them bad.



No, I call them bad because you admit they're bad. You've admitted that you've continued to buy every Superman comic for the last five years even though you hate them. That's what I'm talking about.

Quote:

There's no such thing as good.

Good is a subjective term.

You can't use it as a standard



You bought Superman comics for those five years: you helped it get published for those five years. As simple as that.