fodigg's forum posts

#1 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: I guess. But so many things have broken the timeline or reality or all realities lately it's hard to keep things straight. Still, if that was when the new editorial mandate went into effect irl, it makes sense to tie it to those events within continuity, however justified. We haven't seen age of ultron as an alternate universe since it was undone. (Same for age of x, but that was a "pocket reality" or something.) Only older alternate timeline storylines have been treated as static realities. So that's consistent as far as I know.

#2 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

I just want battleworld to end with Scott shooting Phoenix-Void energy through a m'kraan visor that destroys all reality. Is that too much to ask?

#3 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: Well, he's not wrong, but if you establish that going forward but we have all these old characters in the past that stuck around, it creates the incongruity I'm struggling with. I wonder if that's why they killed of all but one of the Miguel O'Haras, to clear the board.

Making that change without a retcon to past timelines-turned-realities causes issues, but the new secret wars could be a way of cleaning all that up. If all realities get jumbled together, maybe this is a fundamental change to how the multiverse works in the MCU. This has such a "crisis on infinite earths" vibe to it I can't even tell you.

#4 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

@fodigg: Well irl theoretically you can't change the past even if you somehow invented a time machine, the laws of quantum mechanics wouldn't allow it. It would require that yesterday was first one way, and then another — first you didn't arrive by time travel on that day, and then you did? But if you did arrive by time travel, and so the first option never happened, and so the past was not changed by your arrival — again because it didn't make something different happen. The past is always the past, you can't change it.

Unfortunately that theory doesn't allow for much narrative drama. However, "hard" looks at time travel stories can be successful. I never even finished Primer—I found it impenetrable—but there are people who rave about it. I personally don't mind the softer side of sci-fi.

Technically if you go back to change the past, you end up in a different reality to your own...

Example: Rachel Grey

It seems like that's how Marvel solves most of these issues, especially in reality hopping narratives like Exiles. And yet we get stories like Eva's where, if it's really just a matter of finding the right reality, the narrative stakes and drama just bleeds away. So either some alternate timelines "count" as static alternate realities (e.g., Days of Future Past, Age of Apocalypse) while some don't (e.g., Age of Ultron) and others seem to kinda straddle the line (e.g., 2099), or there are in-universe mechanics that determine how these things play out. That question is what prompted me to write this.

@awesomeperson: That used to be the rule for Marvel but Brevoort says it isn't anymore.

I didn't realize he'd answered that one. I even sent him an "ask" on his tumblr regarding this. I'll update if he replies.

@ec2277 said:

@jonny_anonymous said:

You can't change the past, even with time travel.

A change of the past caused by a time travel of Legion was the origin of Age of Apocalypse and if I remember well another time travel, this time made by Bishop, was necessary to restore the original timeline.

I thought Bishop was from the Days of Future Past timeline while Cable was from the Age of Apocalypse timeline. Or was that only in the 90s X-Men cartoons?

@ec2277 said:

@fodigg said:

[…]

[…]

I have a little question: do someone know what is the chronological positioning of All New X-Men and Uncanny X-Men annual?

I have always thought that they have to be positioned after the story arc of the Xavier's testament, but that story and a dialogue between Tempus and the Cuckos in Uncanny X-Men 28, made me thought that it could be positioned before.

I also assumed after. That's a good question though. I'm not sure.

Anything that goes in an "annual" issue can be tough to work into the monthly continuity. Even worse when time travel is involved.

#5 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

You can't change the past, even with time travel.

In the MCU? I've read too many plots by nazis to go back and win WWII in Marvel to believe that.

#6 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

dopeeee

~MiB

Thanks!

What about Black Canary and Zatanna?

Both good picks, but I felt like Canary and Question and Batgirl would all overlap too much. That's why I left off Katana as well. With Zatanna, I just have a hard time thinking of her as anything but "Justice League Dark" in the new 52. I was more fond of her animated portrayal. She'd definitely work in "the smart one" slot instead of Montoya though.

#7 Edited by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

Of course they can. They're already working on their own "trinity".

I think you could put together a pretty strong six or seven hero squad.

  1. Green Arrow
  2. Flash
  3. Vixen
  4. Atom
  5. Firestorm
  6. Black Canary
  7. Red Arrow? Katana?
#8 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

@fodigg: I actually whole heartedly disagree with that; I personally think Johns is highly overrated and the book got better about halfway through its run with the introduction of some of my favorite characters (Ravager and Kid/Red Devil). The only earlier issue I loved was the Identity Crisis tie-in which was mainly because I love Tim Drake so much.

Kid Devil and Miss Martian were the two things I actually cared about but the book as a whole went pretty much nowhere.

#9 Posted by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

Ha. Yeah, that's Father Time. Not every character in a domino mask is Damian.

#10 Edited by fodigg (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

If you're going for different, I think the full-on golem approach from this fan-art by Aaron Diaz was pretty interesting.

The downside, of course, is that undercuts the humanity of a character who for many exists solely to represent the fact that women are also human. You could use that to create an interesting story, but if you make that question a fundamental part of the origin it kinda weakens the message. The question shouldn't have to be asked. So I like the concept, but I wouldn't want them to go with it.