Oooookay, here we go...

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Forever and ever because that's the ORIGIN.
Actually, it's not. It's an origin. The third one, we could say, since Kal-L's origin differed a litle from Kal-El's.
"Forever and ever..." Do you realize how silly that sounds? No, I'm talking about the election of words, I'm talking about what you're trying to say. "Forever and ever..." Thank God you don't run DC.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
People don't read comics to read ORIGINS (plural), they read tyo read ONE origin and then new adventures.
Possible reply #1: How would you know what people think?
Possible reply #2: People read to comics to read good stories. PERIOD. All the rest is instruments to tell those stories. A writer that values anything above a good story stops being a writer. (anything concerning his stories, obviously...)

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins over and over again doesn't mean it should be like that.
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins only one time doesn't mean it should be like that.
Think about that for a sec, ok? Seriously. (hey, how about that... the word limited fits in better in my phrase than in yours... heh.)
(by the way, what do you mean by "some writers"? Waid and who else?)

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The characters only need ONE origin and then they should move on, tell new stories without altering the past.
That'd be cool... but it can't be done.
Why not? Because the characters can't age more than a couple of years. You want them to keep the same continuity "forever and ever..." but that in those... let's say 50 years your continuity would consist in, only two or three years would pass in comic time (cause you gotta keep the character young, DC says). You can't say that wouldn't be a big fucking mess. Even bigger than the one we have now for having three or so comic years in 17 real time years.
The only way to keep the character young (like DC demands) and have good stories all the time is... yep, you guessed it, reboot or modify constantly.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Marvel does it all the time. They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the characters origins (remember Chapter One? They tried to screw with an origin and it screwed them back).
They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the character's origins... which is what really matters, right? That's what you're saying? Marvel having a shitty continuity is just an unimportant side effect... right?
They have a shitty continuity? But isn't continuity the most important thing EVER? Shouldn't all the real non-whiner writers be guided by the continuity, as if it was their writer's bible? How can they be guided by it, how can it be the most important thing EVER... if it's shitty?
According to you this decades old "forever and ever" continuity is what makes a character. If it's shitty by now, wouldn't it be even shittier in 20 more years? How can the character be molded after his continuity, if it gets shittier all the time?

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The origins shouldn't have to be touched every 'decade' or every half decade, they should be left alone and the only thing the writers should worry about is telling NEW stories instead of re writing the past over and over again.
An origin can be a NEW story.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Plenty of comic books do that (Batman does it, Wonder Woman does it, Green Lantern does it), so it can be done, it's just a matter of wanting todo it.
I explained the difference between those comics and Superman earlier. Eventually, they're gonna get just as convulted as Superman is now.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
You may read comics to read the characters origin's over and over and over and over and over and over again, but other people don't.
No, I read comics to get good stories. Which I don't get in my favorite character's titles because of the convulted continuity they force themselves to follow.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
There's no reason to alter MoS, except to please some whinner writers and old readers who don't like the changes Byrne made.
I like the changes Byrne made. I just don't think they should be left "forever and ever". Just like MoS was necessary at one point, a new origin is necessary now and another one after that and another one after that...
The great irony is that you're defending definite origins over revisited ones... but the Superman origin you prefer is a revisited one!
Yeah, yeah, Crisis happened, yadda yadda yadda... I personally think that a Crisis isn't really necessary to make a reboot (a Crisis, as cool as it is to read, is an excuse, not a reason). BUT let's assume for a second that a Crisis IS necessary to make a reboot. Then, we're gonna have a new Crisis sometime soon. And about 10 or 15 years later we're gonna have another one. And then another one. And then another one.
I'd rather make the reboots without making all the Crisis stories (they'd be basically the same thing... unless they find a clever way of making it different), but that's up to the Editors.
It's just the way things are. Things get crappy and intelligent people can see the reasons behind that and take measures to fix things so good stories can be told again.

quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
As for your question about MoS being modernized... nope, not really, but it doesn't have to, there's NOTHING on it that needs to be modernized.

I just gave you an entire list of EVERYTHING that happened on that mini series and you weren't able to pick ONE thing that would need to be modernized, not ONE...
Because I'm not writting a revamp. If DC said to me, "Hey Mxy, write a Superman revamp, willya?" I'd start thinking hardly about what should be changed and what shouldn't.