Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:26 pm

I have been re-reading some later valiant stuff lately. (timewalker and the Visitor to be exact) This is what i have noticed. Timewalker is not too bad. The visitor is near unreadable for most issues. However i have noticed some continuity mis-cues that are really annoying to me. 1) In Timewalker 6,7,8 (the harbinger wars) Ivar brings back that future Sting from the timeline that he averted by his time travel. 1st of all, that should not have happened. Ivar has stated many times that if you arrive in a timeline you should not worry because you were always meant to be there. I liked this approach since it avoided all of this alternate reality/divergent timeline crap. That was thrown out the window in this harbinger wars story and it really annoyed me.
2) When The Visitor is revealed(visitor #12) to be the future Sting from the above mentioned issues he looks NOTHING like the pete that was brought back from that alternate timeline. Suddenly the Pete from the future timeline (who originally looked like an older white haired version of pete)is a bald dude with a bar-code on his face. WTF??? Going back to the Harbinger wars issue the scene plays out the same as the Visitor issue reveal but with that glaring difference. Why???? The visitor was finished anyway so it's not like they were trying to alter his look for future stories...
Forgive me if this has already been posted before. If it has someone direct me to a link please...

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:30 pm

if anyone has any other continuity errors i would love to read about them.
The early Valiants were so charming due in large part to the tight continuity. I don't just mean pre-unity either. The 1st few years were pretty tight IMO.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:41 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:I have been re-reading some later valiant stuff lately. (timewalker and the Visitor to be exact) This is what i have noticed. Timewalker is not too bad. The visitor is near unreadable for most issues. However i have noticed some continuity mis-cues that are really annoying to me. 1) In Timewalker 6,7,8 (the harbinger wars) Ivar brings back that future Sting from the timeline that he averted by his time travel. 1st of all, that should not have happened. Ivar has stated many times that if you arrive in a timeline you should not worry because you were always meant to be there. I liked this approach since it avoided all of this alternate reality/divergent timeline crap. That was thrown out the window in this harbinger wars story and it really annoyed me.

I agree. That for me is the only weak point in the arc.

2) When The Visitor is revealed(visitor #12) to be the future Sting from the above mentioned issues he looks NOTHING like the pete that was brought back from that alternate timeline. Suddenly the Pete from the future timeline (who originally looked like an older white haired version of pete)is a bald dude with a bar-code on his face. WTF??? Going back to the Harbinger wars issue the scene plays out the same as the Visitor issue reveal but with that glaring difference. Why???? The visitor was finished anyway so it's not like they were trying to alter his look for future stories...
Forgive me if this has already been posted before. If it has someone direct me to a link please...

That can be chalked up to the same problem with Rai #0 and Secrets of the VALIANT Universr #3, mainly Sho's clothing being different from one to the other.

Artistic license?

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:42 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:if anyone has any other continuity errors i would love to read about them.

Crescendo died in X-O Manowar and then was run over by a car while in possesion of a guy's body, yet she was back in her original body in the crossover with Iron Man.

That doesn't make a lick of sense.

magnusr · Post by **magnusr** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:43 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:Ivar has stated many times that if you arrive in a timeline you should not worry because you were always meant to be there.

This seems to have been the one deliberate exception.

2) When The Visitor is revealed(visitor #12) to be the future Sting from the above mentioned issues he looks NOTHING like the pete that was brought back from that alternate timeline.

Yup, clear error.

/Magnus

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:18 pm

wow. You guys are fast. Thanks for the quick replies. I was under the impression that the Iron man Crossover was out of continuity. I could be wrong. That was just an assumption on my part based on alot of these cross company mettings not being considered canon as far as the big 2 are concerned.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:20 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:wow. You guys are fast. Thanks for the quick replies. I was under the impression that the Iron man Crossover was out of continuity. I could be wrong. That was just an assumption on my part based on alot of these cross company mettings not being considered canon as far as the big 2 are concerned.

If only it was.

Technically speaking, the crossover contradicts so many aspects of VALIANT continuity that it shouldn't count (the foundations of the crossover are akin to a brick house built on toopicks), but unfortunately it did have an effect in continuity as it led to the replacement of the original VALIANT characters with watered down Marvelized/DCfied versions.

tarheelmarine · Post by **tarheelmarine** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:35 pm

magnusr wrote:
eternalwarrior wrote:Ivar has stated many times that if you arrive in a timeline you should not worry because you were always meant to be there.
This seems to have been the one deliberate exception.

2) When The Visitor is revealed(visitor #12) to be the future Sting from the above mentioned issues he looks NOTHING like the pete that was brought back from that alternate timeline.
Yup, clear error.

/Magnus

Perhaps he had grown his hair back, and used his abilities to get rid of the tatoo.

The Harbinger · Post by **The Harbinger** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:18 pm

For Timewalker, in issue #7, he talks about how he "can" change it if he tries hard enough. So we can go with it.

As for Vis #13, that wasn't an error. Chang came on these boards and talked about how they changed it because they thought it looked cooler. You just gotta roll with it.

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:06 pm

the Timewalker #7 quote is still contradictory to previousley established logic in regards to time travel. Especially in light of the fact that the status quo had been established in an internal monologue at one point. It's just sloppy. Why on earth would Ivar think to himself one thought throughout the series and then when the exact opposite happens he clearly has no problem with it. It was established early on that Ivar could affect the outcome of future events by doing things in the past, but if he were to affect the timeline it was always that way. After this storyline he goes about his merry way and doesn't worry about affecting any timelines. Which certainly should be a concern considering he just drastically altered the timeline and caused a future that was there before he interfered to cease to exist!
As for the Visitor #13 explanation; that is still an error. Whether you want to consider that an error in judgement or an error done without knowledge of the prior continuity (i am assuming you consider it the former since you said they altered it to make it "cooler") it's still an error in continuity. It's not like he had on different colored ankle bracelets. He had a barcode on his face! A barcode that was mentioned in the story as being a mark of doom to him if he were to ever escape from the clutches of Harada. The fact that the creative team in question knew of the previous established appearance of the character and chose to ignore it drives my point even further. By that point in the overall valiant universe the continuity was not as tight, and to make it even worse it didn't seem to be of concern at all to some editors! It's pretty bad when one of the line's early strengths (tight continuity) is not a consideration when they could make something look "cooler".

The Harbinger · Post by **The Harbinger** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:11 pm

viewtopic.php?t=3057&highlight=bernardchang

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 pm

Thanks for the link. I still can't believe that they did that. They should have had a flashback of Magnus's youth with him being raised by a busty brunette instead of 1-A while they were at it. I think Chesty brunettes are way "cooler" than stupid robots.

Rubiks-Q-Bert · Post by **Rubiks-Q-Bert** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:19 pm

Epitome of comic nerds are on these boards.

Read the stories and enjoy them. It ceases to be as much fun when you overanalyze it. At least for me anyways. Don't think. Just read.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:57 pm

Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:Don't think. Just read.

That's the most fanboyish comment I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, it's a mentality held by MANY people.

BloodOfHeroes · Post by **BloodOfHeroes** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 5:20 pm

VALIANT was just like any other company--as the number of titles grew, it became harder and harder to keep continuity tight. However, even the "Shooter produced" issues had continuity errors, many of which I've pointed out in the past, perhaps even on these boards. It's just that, given the relatively small number of issues that Shooter was directly involved in, they seem smaller in comparison to, say, the Visitor appearances OR the tribute to a dead Jack Boniface in Rai #0 and U2K.

BoH

Rubiks-Q-Bert · Post by **Rubiks-Q-Bert** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 6:30 pm

ManofTheAtom wrote:
Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:Don't think. Just read.
That's the most fanboyish comment I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, it's a mentality held by MANY people.

Why unfortunately? If you enjoy it, just read it. No need to analyze every single comic or compare it to this or that. For the record, I would rather be referred to as a fanboy then overanalyze every comic like you do.

The Harbinger · Post by **The Harbinger** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 7:46 pm

Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:
ManofTheAtom wrote:
Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:Don't think. Just read.
That's the most fanboyish comment I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, it's a mentality held by MANY people.
Why unfortunately? If you enjoy it, just read it. No need to analyze every single comic or compare it to this or that. For the record, I would rather be referred to as a fanboy then overanalyze every comic like you do.

agreed, comics are for entertainment. As long as the error isn't a huge problem, say Marvel has Uncle Ben walking around like nothing happened, I can overlook these minor errors.

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 7:54 pm

Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:
ManofTheAtom wrote:
Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:Don't think. Just read.
That's the most fanboyish comment I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, it's a mentality held by MANY people.
Why unfortunately? If you enjoy it, just read it. No need to analyze every single comic or compare it to this or that. For the record, I would rather be referred to as a fanboy then overanalyze every comic like you do.

"No need to analyze every single comic or compare it to this or that"
A message board is, amoungst other things, a place to do just that. I don't think you are reading any comics on these boards, so i am assuming that you are here to discuss storylines or news etc.
You obviously have an interest in the analysis of the subject matter or you would have never clicked on this thread.
Having said that; i am in agreement that if you OVER-analyze something often times it becomes a little less enjoyable. On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with being interested in something enough to want to analyze a story or point out something that you don't like. I personally find continuity glitches interesting. That was my reasoning for citing the 2 examples i did. I was interested in finding out if maybe there was a good reason behind these errors, and if anyone knew of any more. I do understand that over time with a variety of books and creative teams/editors that continuity problems are inevitable. I just find it to be a poor decision when continuity is ignored on purpose.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:13 pm

Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:
ManofTheAtom wrote:
Rubiks-Q-Bert wrote:Don't think. Just read.
That's the most fanboyish comment I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, it's a mentality held by MANY people.
Why unfortunately? If you enjoy it, just read it. No need to analyze every single comic or compare it to this or that. For the record, I would rather be referred to as a fanboy then overanalyze every comic like you do.

Well, I'm not calling you a fanboy, I'm calling you the lowest common denominator.

Your statement "don't think, just read" says that readers should shut down their brains when reading comics.

As someone who wants to write comics for a living (and is as we speak working on publishing a graphic novel next year), that kind of statement is VERY insulting.

You're saying that I, as a writer, should write stories for the lowest common denominator, that I shouldn't bother with stuff like "characterization", "consistancy", "subtext", "imagery", "layers", "depth", or anything else that could make the story compelling in any way. You're saying that I should write stories that requiere the audience to "not think, just read".

Just because the medium of comics is made of paper and staples instead of film (like movies and TV), or a stage like theater, it doesn't mean that the stories have to be aimed at the lowest common denominator.

It's possible that 99.99% of readers ARE in fact "the lowest common denominator", but I for one won't write for them, I'd much rather write for the 0.01% who is actually proud to have an active brain that makes them ask questions and critique what they read.

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:22 pm

[quote=

agreed, comics are for entertainment. As long as the error isn't a huge problem, say Marvel has Uncle Ben walking around like nothing happened, I can overlook these minor errors.[/quote]
Agreed, comics are for entertainment. Whether that be in the form of the actual read, the conversation, the message board, the admiration, the trade, the treasure hunt, the sale, (i could go on for a while) Comics are a form of entertainment. Just because someone's enjoyment ends with the last page does not mean that someone else has nothing left to gain from the experience. If manoftheatom wants to analyze every comic he reads to the nth degree there is nothing wrong with that. Alot of people get satisfaction from bagging,boarding and alphabetizing their collection. There is no amount of money i could be paid to do that with the thousands of books i have. If someone else gets a sense of excitement from doing so then there is nothing wrong with that. It would be a waste of time for me because i would get no enjoyment from the action or the end result. Condemning someone else because you have a different way of enjoying something is silly. I would have to assume that the "don't think, just read" statement was meant as a way of saying "relax, you can enjoy things more if you are not bogged down by every little thing that bothers you about it."

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:26 pm

If you meant "don't think just read" more literally then i refuse to waste any further time adressing your posts.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:27 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:I would have to assume that the "don't think, just read" statement was meant as a way of saying "relax, you can enjoy things more if you are not bogged down by every little thing that bothers you about it."

The problem is that that is the wrong mentality.

You bring up many good points, about how if one's enjoyment of comics ends with closing it and bagging it, then they're not experiencing the entertainment to the fullest.

Discussing the content of the comics (be it "who's stronger, Hulk or Superman?" or "why did Pete look different in Timewalker than he did in Visitor?") IS part of the entertainment of it.

Last year at the Newsarama boards I tried to discuss the continuity placement of All Star Batman in relation to Dark Knight Returns and the first reply I got was "continuity doesn't matter". I told the guy that posted that "it may not matter to you, but this thread is for people who DO care, so move along and let US discuss".

Which is basically what it boils down to.

Threads like this one are for people who ENJOY talking about the content of the stories, not for people who berate it and want others to shut their brains down.

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:49 pm

ManofTheAtom wrote:
eternalwarrior wrote:I would have to assume that the "don't think, just read" statement was meant as a way of saying "relax, you can enjoy things more if you are not bogged down by every little thing that bothers you about it."
The problem is that that is the wrong mentality.

You bring up many good points, about how if one's enjoyment of comics ends with closing it and bagging it, then they're not experiencing the entertainment to the fullest.

Discussing the content of the comics (be it "who's stronger, Hulk or Superman?" or "why did Pete look different in Timewalker than he did in Visitor?") IS part of the entertainment of it.

Last year at the Newsarama boards I tried to discuss the continuity placement of All Star Batman in relation to Dark Knight Returns and the first reply I got was "continuity doesn't matter". I told the guy that posted that "it may not matter to you, but this thread is for people who DO care, so move along and let US discuss".

Which is basically what it boils down to.

Threads like this one are for people who ENJOY talking about the content of the stories, not for people who berate it and want others to shut their brains down.

Right. Trying to understand the meaning of that statement was my goal. That's not my opinion, but my interpretation of what i think he might have meant. Apathy is no way to gain satisfaction. If something bothers you then let it be known. If you like something let it be known. This is a place for that, no?

eternalwarrior · Post by **eternalwarrior** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:51 pm

If you meant "don't think just read" more literally then i refuse to waste any further time adressing your posts.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:53 pm

eternalwarrior wrote:Trying to understand the meaning of that statement was my goal. That's not my opinion, but my interpretation of what i think he might have meant.

Yeah, I got that, heh

This is a place for that, no?

In theory...

ValiantFans.com Board - Since 2004

Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe

Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe

Re: Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe

Re: Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe

Re: Continuity Errors in the Valiant universe