ret-conning good idea or bad idea

I think when its used well it can work but sometimes i think it just makes things confusing. Like the whole bottle city of Kandor thing there was several versions and then boom they fix it but will be only version or will they change it later.

retconning has saved many comic mythologies continuity errors. Never found them to be a problem with the characters/titles I enjoy. I'm sure Hawkman fans would say different, amongst others, but I'll lean towards good ideas.

kidspider2099 wrote:I think when its used well it can work but sometimes i think it just makes things confusing.

Got it in one. Just like most anything, it's quality can vary depending on the usage.

Depends.

I seriously am not a huge fan of ret cons, I don't even know what is what in Superman anymore. I really loved the retcon Bynre did and I feel it should of stayed that way, but sheesh, I am so lost now it is not even funny. It seems as if everything nowadys is being ret conned in someway or another.

Denim wrote:I seriously am not a huge fan of ret cons, I don't even know what is what in Superman anymore. I really loved the retcon Bynre did and I feel it should of stayed that way, but sheesh, I am so lost now it is not even funny. It seems as if everything nowadys is being ret conned in someway or another.

yeah the bryne redo has been erased from continuity even the mark waid story arc birthright has been erased.

When you have creative and editorial team change as often as they do retconing is a necessary evil. I just don't like it when they use it to erase a story or history because they don't like it......Quesada!!!

when used well, i dont have too many problems wit it

It's 50/50. It sorta makes a certain numbers of issues obsolete and forgotten yet it could be done in a good creative way that doesn't render everything obsolete without making you feel that getting "all the issues" was pointless and you might as well just stick with the blockbuster event books without the 100+ of ongoings of a certain book.