Is it even desirable at this point for the Multiverse to return?

[JulianPerez]

I agree that there is nothing really wrong with both general-interest superhero comics (Busiek's Avengers, All-Star Superman) and extremely arcane fan-fic miniseries about what happened between issue 53 and 54 of some now-cancelled comic starring a group of mutant rollerskates from the Disco era that you need a decoder ring to figure out.

Is there really a perception that retcons nitpick and obsess over little things" Because a defining trait of a retcon is that it isn't usually done about minor details, but rather about really significant events. An example would be the Avengers making the decision to execute the Great Intelligence when he was in their power around OPERATION: GALACTIC STORM. This was obviously an out of character behavior, and it makes SENSE that it would be revealed to have been a result of Immortus's time-tampering.

I chalk up the perception that comics retcons are done over "little things" to ignorance. If you don't know who the Vision is and what has happened to him, it's hard to understand why the Byrne revelation that he was not "really" the android Human Torch is such a catastrophic one, and why the restoration of this aspect of the character's backstory by Busiek in AVENGERS FOREVER is as significant as it is.

This is not to say that there aren't retcons that work in itty-bitty details - an example that comes to mind is the retcon in UNTOLD TALES OF SPIDER-MAN that the Green Goblin revealed his secret identity to Crime-Master as "J. Jonah Jameson" (in other words, he bamboozled C.M., previously the only guy to learn the Goblin's identity before AMAZING #36).

But these little details things are never the centerpiece of an entire story.

By the way, this is not to say that retcons aren't done for petty and egotistical reasons. A classic example would be Jim Starlin causing the Thanos stories he didn't like to never happen (which in practice, meant just about most Thanos stories not written by HIM), or the unbelievably childish John Byrne, who showed the Doctor Doom that Chris Claremont used in an issue of X-MEN was merely "just a robot."

The Fantastic Four movie didn't have an invasion of monsters from the center of the Earth, led by a myopic little man; nor an interstellar Entity trying the eat the planet - The Superman movies haven't shown Superman shrinking and dropping into an incredibly advanced miniature city (imagine that in live action!), they haven't shown any wonders inside his Fortress - we finally get to see a Fortress in a movie, and what's in it?  NOTHING!  How pointless!  Nor have they shown any intergalactic threats; no alien civilizations; no mermaid romances, nada!  The time travel has been lame - why not travel 1,000 years into the future, or into the past?  How about a million years?  How about some space exploration?  Visit another solar system or galaxy or try some dimensional travel.  Would Superman flying in space have some sort of hyperspace effect like the Millenium Falcon does?  They haven't even shown him go up against any Nazis in WWII!  At least Captain America had that much!  Where are the giant robots?  The interplanetary Zoo?  The space fleet attacking Earth? The Kryptonian Thought Beast?  Brainiac stealing New York City?  The Sun-Eater?  With all this supposedly great FX technology, they could show so many incredible things from any era or from any time or place in this Universe or any other - and what do we get?  A bald man with an inferiority complex.

I have to agree that superhero movies have to put in more STAR WARS type stuff into their pictures. A CGI Attillan in the Himalayas would be an incredible sight. And the FF movie was a monumental letdown: it was just another actioner - I was expecting to see Vin Diesel pop up somewhere, and something like the FF deserves something far less like lazy, traditional Hollywood.

Still, this is not to say that movies haven't thus far delivered on imaginative spectacle. Superman's feats in SUPERMAN RETURNS were breathtaking.

[Super Monkey]

I thought Hellboy was just like the comic.

[TELLE]

Is there really a perception that retcons nitpick and obsess over little things" Because a defining trait of a retcon is that it isn't usually done about minor details, but rather about really significant events. [...]
I chalk up the perception that comics retcons are done over "little things" to ignorance.

I wasn't really picking on retcons but on retcons masquerading as comic book series nominally intended for a mass audience.  Your average retcon, in and of itself, is a value neutral storytelling device, in my opinion.  Many of the things I love about superhero comics and other serial fiction revolve around retcons (what a wonderful word!).

And yes, my perception is that retcons often do concern themselves with minor arcana or nitpicking.  And no, I don't think is always de facto a bad thing.  Busiek is the king of the retcon as fine-tuning, a mantle he has inherited from the creator of the term, Roy Thomas.  A series like Untold Tales or the Secret Years titles of both Superman and the X-Men have as much to do with tying up loose ends, continuity-wise, as they do with universe building or dealing with "the big questions".  A retcon can add to a story in a small way or a large way (Crisis and the post-Crisis "History of the DC Universe") or totally take away from or destroy a continuity (Crisis and HDCU).  Retcons can be clumsy or artful.  An insult to our intelligence, a waste of time, or a blessing for all eternity.

Your own example of the various retcons of Marvel's the Vision character is interesting.  Not exactly a minor character in terms of the Avengers, he is still no Captain America.  The revelation that Cap was, say, a Nazi agent would be a major retcon, whereas Byrne's revelation in Avengers West Coast and elsewhere that the Vision was not based on the android Human Torch from WWII (and that the Torch's story was not as simple as we had been led to believe in the pages of the Invaders and Fantastic Four) seems relatively minor by comparison  --it didn't ultimately effect how Vision felt for Wanda, etc. (I like Busiek's "have your torch and byrne it too" AF retcon that said both Torch histories happened).

And I agree that retcons can be petty --Roy the Boy had a fiefdom over retcons and WWII heroes and still maintains that most DC and Marvel superhero adventures take place in alternate universes or involve clones since he doesn't like the current stories.


 

[carmelo]

The point is that with multiverse ALL KINDS OF PERSON would have been theirs kind of world.Those that want sense of wonder and simple clean stories could have 40s-50s versions of Superman,Batman ,Wonder Woman on earth-1 and 2,those that loves moderns and drammatics charapters could have earth DC.Could have a earth for readers that likes cartoons style charapters (like Captain Marvel) and others for more adult readers.Why i not can have my silver age style Superman? MULTIVERSE IS FREEDOM.

[TELLE]

MULTIVERSE IS FREEDOM.

Carmelo, that is my new motto!

[Mighty Man]

Yeah, this current continuity will remain the same.

If they "Create" or "Bring back" the other universes. It will be another universe and shouldn't affect any outcome or undo any writers writing, especially the JSA recent stuff. I love it!

I believe they already got a fuddy duddy Shazam book out there that has nothing to do with continuity. Probably the Earth S world I would assume and would assume they will say that is what it will wind up being once everything unravels.

My two cents.

[TELLE]

If they manage to create a quality kids comic featuring shazam (and I'm not convinced Jeff Smith is the man to do it), I say set it on whatever world they can as long as it has nothing to do with current dc continuity.