Marvel's sliding continuity
Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*
*Membership spots not really limited!
Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*
*Membership spots not really limited!
|
||
|
||
You're citing characters that have been continually published since the 40s and had themselves repeatedly tweeked to fit the era they were in at the time. The rest were not. Few could ever really be moved forward as you want. They just would not work. As for urban legends... they could be just that, myths and not at all real yet inspire the modern characters. As it is, why have this unless you want basically legacy characters, both direct or indirect. |
||
|
||
|
||
Considering some of the absurdities of 80's fashion, Starman's costume wouldn't be too much of a problem. ![]()
Will you please stop being hooked on the 80's? I'm talking about placing the JSA's starting point in a period of time 20-30 years from the JLA's ever-present "now". The particular decade doesn't matter that way, at it will always be 30 years from the "present." The JSA exist in normal time. The JLA exists in sliding time. The JSA were founded in 1940, the JLA was founded (let's say) 5-10 years from an ever-present now. The JSA ages normally (juryrigged things like slowed metabolisms and limbo notwithstanding). The JLA doesn't age. The absurdity of this just gets worse as time goes on, if you wanted the two teams interacting with each other on a regular basis.
Why is it weakened? The JSA would be strengthened by living "outside" of time like the JLA does. They woudn't be getting older and older like they are now. |
||
|
||
|
||
And there's the problem. You have one set of characters stuck in normal time, and one set that isn't. This can't go on forever without more and more elaborate explanations to explain the discrepancies away.
I would hope that there's more to the JSA than just being "legacy" characters. |
||
|
||
|
||
Considering how none were used at the time, you're still wrong. Will you learn math and just when Reagan, whom you invoked, was President? 20 to 30 years ago was what? THE 1980S!. ![]() Again, the JLA have been published continuously since they began, the JSA has not been. You want them interacting on a regular basis, it's been answered already, it's called time travel. You're being obtuse again, the JLA would be weakened and it was obvious that that was what I said. ![]() |
||
|
||
|
||
Worked before. Pre-COIE and Post-COIE. There is no problem. You want them all to stay the same relatively, yet still have some sort of progress? Again, time travel meetings. Works. Hope all you want, it won't change the reality of the concept. |
||
|
||
|
||
It's not the date that matters. Yes, for stories written now, the thirty-year point technically would be in the 80. But for stories written ten years from now, the 30-yr point would be in the 90's. The point in the past moves along with the ever-present "now." Just like Superman rocketing as a baby from Krypton happened a certain point of time before the present.
Time travel just makes things more complicated, not less complicated. I'm not too crazy about every JLA/JSA story having to deal with stuff like time paradox, etc) |
||
|
||
|
||
How the the JLA get weakened if the JSA is in their 50's instead of their 80's and getting older and older. |
||
|
||
|
||
There wasn't a problem Pre-Crisis, when the JSAers were in only about 30 years older than the JLAers.That's not counting the revelations about the JSAin All-Star Squadron Annual #2. The WWII era wasn't as distant in the past as it is now, or will be in the future. The problem is more going forward. |
||
|
||
|
||
40 year difference as of 1981. That annual hit in 1984. Still failing in your argument. |
||
|
||
|
||
![]() You still have no proof of your point. |
||
|
||
|
||
It was annual 3 instead of annual one. My bad. It's still 40 years in the past back then as opposed to being about 72 years as it is now. |
||
|
||
|
||
Fixed. ![]() |
||
|
||
|
||
Oy vey. ![]() |
||
|
||
|
||
That's a bad example for the kids. |
||
leave a comment with facebook
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: FaceBook [Linkcheck], Google [Bot], uz000 and 39 guests
Advertisement |
---|
|