I see your point re: the Avengers, but I'm not so sure you can apply it to Superman. All Marvel characters and teams are the sum total of their long, convoluted and near-impossibly byzantine back-stories.
You're...well, right, of course, but the words you use are not the ones I'd use. I'd substitute "rich, engrossing, detailed and immersive" for your choice of words, "long, convoluted and near-impossibly byzantine."
It's like the difference between saying "my girlfriend is curvy and buxom" and "your girlfriend is really fat."
I do think potential new fans are scared off by the increasingly self-referential nature of comics.
With respect, I don't agree with this. The detailed level of worldbuilding that went into the Marvel Universe (and before the goose that laid the golden egg murder that was CRISIS, could also be used to describe the DC Universe as well) can be a DRAW to new readers. Okay, sure, they pick up an issue of JUSTICE LEAGUE, and they won't know right away who somebody like Ultraa is, or who the Gordianians and Guardians of the Universe are, but the fact there is so much detail there in and of itself arouses curiosity, and makes one WANT to know more about who these little blue headed guys are, or what Earth-Prime is and why Ultraa comes from there.
If having an extended, cohesive backstory is what is killing comics, detail-heavy shows like MELROSE PLACE, STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE, DEADWOOD, and BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER would be failures among the general public instead of attracting new fans even after they were canceled.
I'm fascinated by the mentality that goes into distrust of the use of comics' history. On one hand, that very fan praises books like DUNE and LORD OF THE RINGS and Michael Moorcock's work for creating elaborate, detailed, rich settings filled with backstory, but on the other hand excoriates comic book worlds for doing the same thing.
Obviously something created by human beings is never going to be entirely perfect. But even mistakes in previous stories can be used to launch new ones as long as there is something concrete there to build on. Peter David got tons of mileage in his Star Trek novels out of the fact that Gary Mitchell mispelled his "best friend" James T. Kirk's name "James R. Kirk."
Building a decades-long continuity that makes sense for characters that don't really age will lead to stupid conflicts. Think about any number of good ol' "Lois and|or Jimmy are trapped" stories that'd fall apart in the modern era owing to cell phones. Should Supes reference those? At what point would it become problematic to do a modern retcon of old stories for them to make sense in the current day and age?
Interesting point. In fact, there is a case to be made about leaving stories as "period." Superman, for instance, even when updated to being a resident of the year 2005, is essentially a holdover from the 1930s, a time when we liked our heroes the way we liked our steak: beefy and All-American. One cannot divorce Superman from his World's Fair style futurism; note that every single version of Superman has had an art deco Metropolis and Superman being an alien from a distant planet.
We're very comfortable with characters like the Shadow, Doc Savage, Sherlock Holmes, and Tarzan being period characters; why not superheroes, too?
If they had been more courageous at the DC and Marvel offices, they ought to have made one of two decisions:
1)
Leave stories as period pieces. Who says they have to have their pasts rolling up behind them all the time? That is, it's (for example) 1974, Gerald Ford is president, and Reed Richards, Ben Grimm and Nick Fury fought in World War II. Black Canary on Earth-2 is in her fifties, but she has good genetics and works out a lot, and though she sports a gray hair or two, she is still an active though rusty JSA member.
2)
Let characters age normally. Alan Moore has taken this approach in his ABC Comics, particularly TOM STRONG, as well as in SUPREME. A "Supreme" story that was "published" in the year 1954 "actually happened" in the year 1954. Obviously this gives rise to a host of questions, but ones that have interesting solutions: for instance, notice the explanation for how Black Canary could be so youthful when it was apparent the age difference between the Earth-2 characters that fought in World War II was becoming greater and greater: the one in the JLA was the DAUGHTER of the original Black Canary.
I welcome "All Star Superman" because, in my mind, I've already grown accustomed to rejecting huge blocks of continuity. I not only don't want to read about "Electric Superman," I don't even want to read about a guy who five years ago used to be Electric Superman. I still can't get into Superman here in 2005 because nearly 20 years ago he murdered three Phantom Zone villains. why should writers be hobbled right out of the gate by staying true to dumb stories by idiots from five years ago? Or worse, spend their whole time on the book trying to undo, explain or make right some other writer's goofs? Far too much time is spent these days either mucking up continuity or trying to fix it again. Enough already. DC's tried to create a Universe with continuity and time and again they have failed. Time for a new approach.
I absolutely agree with your statement, Nightwing. Writers should not be hobbled by the fact they are to work with broken, unworkable variations of a character. You can't see far if you're standing on the shoulders of midgets.
However, the fact that DC handed the job of recreating the DC Universe to bunglers like John Byrne, Mike Grell, and Howard Chaykin, as well as "just okay, but uninspired" writers like Jerry Ordway and George Perez, does not mean that having characters remember their pasts and having a solid history that can be used to propel future plots, is always going to be doomed to be an exercise in futility.
I too, look forward to ALL-STAR SUPERMAN because DC history, as I stated above, at least at this point in time, is so broken and dysfunctional that classic versions of the character are a breath of fresh air.
My problem with the All-Stars is that it's a sign of people throwing their hands into the air and saying "I give up" about the idea that characters can live in an immersive world, just because men that lacked vision were given the keys to the car and totally blew it.