Nurhachi
Well-Known Member
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
There is none. Just opinion, otherwise there would be debate about it.
DIrishB said:
There is none. Just opinion, otherwise there would be debate about it.
Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM & UFF [editor notes begin on pg. 7]
- Thread starter notTHATtodd
- Start date
DIrishB
The Timeline Guy
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
Actually, its the contrasting evidence we've been given in the issues which leads to all those debates. Where'd the original Ultimate FF show up? Thats right, in the USM Super Special. Where did the current version first show up, Ultimate FF #1. Those are both comics, and thats where the main timeline debate arises from.
Nurhachi said:
Actually, its the contrasting evidence we've been given in the issues which leads to all those debates. Where'd the original Ultimate FF show up? Thats right, in the USM Super Special. Where did the current version first show up, Ultimate FF #1. Those are both comics, and thats where the main timeline debate arises from.
Irish makes a good point.
I'm perfectly willing to accept what the editors say as canon, but you can't just ignore the UMTU issues or pretend they didn't happen. They have to fit in somewhere.
Hopefully Stuart can get an answer for this and share it with us.
(of course, only as I type this is there no explanation...I still believe Millar will address things during his UFF run. It is possible that either Stuart or the Ultimate editors know this and don't want to divulge)
I'm perfectly willing to accept what the editors say as canon, but you can't just ignore the UMTU issues or pretend they didn't happen. They have to fit in somewhere.
Hopefully Stuart can get an answer for this and share it with us.
(of course, only as I type this is there no explanation...I still believe Millar will address things during his UFF run. It is possible that either Stuart or the Ultimate editors know this and don't want to divulge)
Mavrick889
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10
But are we sure the Ultimate Spider-Man Super Special is canon? It has more than a few errors in it:
1) The older FF (and Peter's first meeting with the Torch...until he meets him for the first time again later on in the regular series.
2) Peter mentions that he'd never met his father, which we know to be wrong from the Venom storyarc.
1) The older FF (and Peter's first meeting with the Torch...until he meets him for the first time again later on in the regular series.
2) Peter mentions that he'd never met his father, which we know to be wrong from the Venom storyarc.
Lynx
Well-Known Member
Mavrick889 said:
Nice catch! I didn't even notice that. . .Adds more fuel to the fire against the Super-Special being canon. :wink:
Arachnoman
Member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2005
- Messages
- 9
i think the handbook would have been much better if the characters strength was more specific, it would be better to include the graph you use and the approximate amount of tons that could be lifted.
this would be more useful since i only know the exact strengths of 2 ultimate characters. Spider-man and venom, but i learned this from the games official website. i would ask you to please include this info in the uxm/ultimate handbook and all future revisions.
this would be more useful since i only know the exact strengths of 2 ultimate characters. Spider-man and venom, but i learned this from the games official website. i would ask you to please include this info in the uxm/ultimate handbook and all future revisions.
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
We had a lot of debate about what name various characters would end up under, and we tried to avoid assuming they would automatically end up going by their 616 names. The FF members nearly ended up under their real names, as they didn't start using their codenames until quite recently, and it was only advanced scripts that saw them using their familiar 616 names. Norman Osborn nearly ended up listed under that name; it's been a few months since I wrote that entry, but iirc, the first time he gets called the Green Goblin is actually in the USM Annual. After debate between writers and editors, Venom got included under that name because the title of the project which created the suit was "the Venom project", but it was a close thing at first, and we recognised the deciding point which swung it for Venom was somewhat pedantic (as we didn't actually see Eddie in the Suit called by that name); Carnage got called Carnage because editorial decided (just as you suggested) that a profile titled "Little Ben" wouldn't cut it.
Fair enough - we didn't ask Bendis for confirmation of KS' name, as someone had to be cut anyway, and the lack of background meant he was one of the casualties (plus, what someone's initial intention and what makes it to the page can change - witness Franklin / William Storm). And yes, having him explicitly called Boomerang in the game would probably do the job, but we didn't have that when we were writing the Handbook. Maybe another one, if Marvel feels sales warrant it.
We were told to avoid trying to explain any of the early FF appearance discrepancies, since they will eventually be addressed. So while Widow's entry will discuss her being in the Latverian embassy, the not-overly relevant info (to her bio, at least) about who was seen in portraits to be the ruler of Latveria won't be. Iron Man's entry will address things, as much as space permits, but it's going to be a bit tricky, as UIM won't have finished coming out, and so anything that is covered in issues not published by the time the handbook comes out will have to be dropped; similarly we may have to trim bits out which refer to issues of Ultimates which may not have been released, depending on how the schedule for that plays out.
Not allowed to discuss who is and isn't in the book, beyond what the cover and official solicits give away.
cmdrjanjalani said:
We had a lot of debate about what name various characters would end up under, and we tried to avoid assuming they would automatically end up going by their 616 names. The FF members nearly ended up under their real names, as they didn't start using their codenames until quite recently, and it was only advanced scripts that saw them using their familiar 616 names. Norman Osborn nearly ended up listed under that name; it's been a few months since I wrote that entry, but iirc, the first time he gets called the Green Goblin is actually in the USM Annual. After debate between writers and editors, Venom got included under that name because the title of the project which created the suit was "the Venom project", but it was a close thing at first, and we recognised the deciding point which swung it for Venom was somewhat pedantic (as we didn't actually see Eddie in the Suit called by that name); Carnage got called Carnage because editorial decided (just as you suggested) that a profile titled "Little Ben" wouldn't cut it.
Probably - but we didn't want to assume. Too easy to get burned if you do, when a writer deliberately changes something from the 616 version to highlight the differences between realities.
Fair enough - we didn't ask Bendis for confirmation of KS' name, as someone had to be cut anyway, and the lack of background meant he was one of the casualties (plus, what someone's initial intention and what makes it to the page can change - witness Franklin / William Storm). And yes, having him explicitly called Boomerang in the game would probably do the job, but we didn't have that when we were writing the Handbook. Maybe another one, if Marvel feels sales warrant it.
It'll all be down to sales.
We were told to avoid trying to explain any of the early FF appearance discrepancies, since they will eventually be addressed. So while Widow's entry will discuss her being in the Latverian embassy, the not-overly relevant info (to her bio, at least) about who was seen in portraits to be the ruler of Latveria won't be. Iron Man's entry will address things, as much as space permits, but it's going to be a bit tricky, as UIM won't have finished coming out, and so anything that is covered in issues not published by the time the handbook comes out will have to be dropped; similarly we may have to trim bits out which refer to issues of Ultimates which may not have been released, depending on how the schedule for that plays out.
Not allowed to discuss who is and isn't in the book, beyond what the cover and official solicits give away.
Ice
Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Thanks, Stuart, for coming on and helping with this. Really, it's much appreciated and very kind of you to do so.
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
That certainly had a lot to do with swinging things when the comics left it unclear, though even then we tried to avoid giving codenames when they weren't explicitly given - one reason why Harry Osborn was listed as such, and not as Hobgoblin (the other being that for most of his appearances, he's been Harry, not the mutated creature we saw in the last arc).
Exactly the case. That said, now that BMB has said that, once I can confirm the source, I'd be willing to risk including it as the official name - however, the risk would remain that another writer (or BMB himself, if he changed his mind) might come in and change it as they were unaware of this intention.
I can and do make errors - I'm only human. If KS was named in the comics themselves, then I have made an error in this instance in saying he hadn't been officially named. If KS was named elsewhere, then I haven't - anyone who reads old issues of Marvel Age can see plenty of examples of planned names, characters and plots which never made it to fruition (anyone remember the New Mutant team member Cougar? Nope? Case in point, because he was shown and named as part of a sneak preview in Marvel Age, but got dropped somewhere before making it into the comic.)
Correct - we do get some leeway to fix continuity issues (we generally go to the original writers and editors if possible, or suggest a couple of solutions which go to the writers and editors for approval); however in this case, we were asked to steer clear of the UFF issues, so we neither contradicted the explanation to come, nor gave it away prematurely. We made a conscious decision to also avoid trying to fill in too many gaps in this book, as the Ultimate Universe is a very young one, and we wanted to leave the writers plenty of space to fill those gaps themselves.
Exactly.
ourchair said:
That certainly had a lot to do with swinging things when the comics left it unclear, though even then we tried to avoid giving codenames when they weren't explicitly given - one reason why Harry Osborn was listed as such, and not as Hobgoblin (the other being that for most of his appearances, he's been Harry, not the mutated creature we saw in the last arc).
Exactly the case. That said, now that BMB has said that, once I can confirm the source, I'd be willing to risk including it as the official name - however, the risk would remain that another writer (or BMB himself, if he changed his mind) might come in and change it as they were unaware of this intention.
I can and do make errors - I'm only human. If KS was named in the comics themselves, then I have made an error in this instance in saying he hadn't been officially named. If KS was named elsewhere, then I haven't - anyone who reads old issues of Marvel Age can see plenty of examples of planned names, characters and plots which never made it to fruition (anyone remember the New Mutant team member Cougar? Nope? Case in point, because he was shown and named as part of a sneak preview in Marvel Age, but got dropped somewhere before making it into the comic.)
Correct - we do get some leeway to fix continuity issues (we generally go to the original writers and editors if possible, or suggest a couple of solutions which go to the writers and editors for approval); however in this case, we were asked to steer clear of the UFF issues, so we neither contradicted the explanation to come, nor gave it away prematurely. We made a conscious decision to also avoid trying to fill in too many gaps in this book, as the Ultimate Universe is a very young one, and we wanted to leave the writers plenty of space to fill those gaps themselves.
Exactly.
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
USM#46 in and off itself doesn't prove the running order, as it was out of sequence anyway, though I see where you are coming from on that. If we've missed something in the events of the story itself (Electro's comment aside, as I've already explained that), then please let me know; if we are wrong, I'll recognise that, and try to ensure it is corrected in future volumes or any reprints.
I've seen it, and it is very good. I deliberately steered clear of looking at it too closely prior to writing the Handbook, as I wanted to make sure the timeline decisions made came from mine (and the other writer's) own readings of the actual comics, plus the information supplied by the Ultimate writers and editors. That we seem to largely agree (as far as I can tell) on the order of events does please me though, as you've obviously put a lot of work into it, and so where we both reached the same conclusions independently it suggests to me we both probably got it right.
Fair enough.
It is out of place, though not as much as you suggest. As you said, it can't go where the sentence implies, since Peter lacked a costume at the time. The error arose because the profile was originally much longer and had to be trimmed down; at some point during that process, the sentence order got rearranged, and what should have been the latter half of the sentence which began that paragraph became the former half. The Danny Rand encounter doesn't come between Learning Curve and Double Trouble, because at the start of Double Trouble Ben Urich has only seen Spidey up close during the Doc Ock fight, according to his dialogue with Jameson. He hasn't interviewed him yet, or else he would cite that encounter (and knowing what Spidey's voice sounded like) while arguing the bank robber was an imposter.
At the end of Double Trouble MJ dumped Peter, and the impression given by the Venom story suggests this follows on pretty well immediately. True, the Danny Rand encounter is so brief, it could have been slotted into a gap early in the Venom tale, before Peter lost his costume, but given Peter's state of mind, I doubted he'd be in the mood to spend time giving Urich a coherent interview - he was too busy moping. It had to happen before the Kingpin tale, as during that story Spidey's name was mud anyway (so JJJ's glee at having something negative to say about Spidey would have been out of place) and that story resolved itself with JJJ re-evaluating his hostile stance towards Spidey. Hence the decision was made to place it just after the Geldoff encounter, when he had finally gotten MJ and his costume back, and was in a better frame of mind. However, as stated, at some point the two halves of the sentence in the profile got switched round - it should have read
"Shortly thereafter, Spider-Man got back together with Mary-Jane; offered guidance to unstable...; and stopped martial artist....during a street fight."
I don't doubt it. However, so do I, and the other writers, and we had the advantage of being able to pick editorial and writer brains and see advanced storylines.
That might have been Millar's initial plan, but if so, Human Torch's appearance in USM marked a change in that plan. What you've said he planned is exactly what I put forward as a solution to the apparent continuity glitches, and I was told "No, it won't fit with what is to come." (or words to that effect).
Author's original intention can and does get superceded all the time, or else 616 Wolverine would be a teenager and the son of Sabretooth.
Covered above. It is in the wrong point in the history, but not by as much as you suggested. Nonetheless, regardless of the reasons why it got misplaced, I will concede it as an error in the entry as it currently reads.
It's not the editors - maybe I should have made it clearer - when I presented the "UFF came first, and we have big gaps between arcs to bring them up to present day" solution, my editors took it the various Ultimate editors, who took it to the writers, at least one of whom then said (paraphrased) "It won't fit our coming stories". The writers have plans, which I don't know (because that way I can't accidentally let slip), didn't ask to know, and don't wish to either pre-empt or contradict.
Like I said, it wasn't just the editors - there are plans to make it all work, but we won't know how until the writers are ready to explain them.
I totally agree with that - titles are. However little throwaway nods to the UFF prior to their appearance aren't.
As stated, a solution was proposed, but we were told that it wouldn't fit with what was to come, and to steer clear of trying to clarify this one prematurely.DIrishB said:
USM#46 in and off itself doesn't prove the running order, as it was out of sequence anyway, though I see where you are coming from on that. If we've missed something in the events of the story itself (Electro's comment aside, as I've already explained that), then please let me know; if we are wrong, I'll recognise that, and try to ensure it is corrected in future volumes or any reprints.
I've seen it, and it is very good. I deliberately steered clear of looking at it too closely prior to writing the Handbook, as I wanted to make sure the timeline decisions made came from mine (and the other writer's) own readings of the actual comics, plus the information supplied by the Ultimate writers and editors. That we seem to largely agree (as far as I can tell) on the order of events does please me though, as you've obviously put a lot of work into it, and so where we both reached the same conclusions independently it suggests to me we both probably got it right.
Fair enough.
Explanation accepted.That was in reply to Ourchair's remark. It was meant in a sarcastic and snarky fashion, not to hurt anyone's feelings. You'll find a large part of this site's content is insulting each other's parentage/lineage. We're just simple like that.
It is out of place, though not as much as you suggest. As you said, it can't go where the sentence implies, since Peter lacked a costume at the time. The error arose because the profile was originally much longer and had to be trimmed down; at some point during that process, the sentence order got rearranged, and what should have been the latter half of the sentence which began that paragraph became the former half. The Danny Rand encounter doesn't come between Learning Curve and Double Trouble, because at the start of Double Trouble Ben Urich has only seen Spidey up close during the Doc Ock fight, according to his dialogue with Jameson. He hasn't interviewed him yet, or else he would cite that encounter (and knowing what Spidey's voice sounded like) while arguing the bank robber was an imposter.
At the end of Double Trouble MJ dumped Peter, and the impression given by the Venom story suggests this follows on pretty well immediately. True, the Danny Rand encounter is so brief, it could have been slotted into a gap early in the Venom tale, before Peter lost his costume, but given Peter's state of mind, I doubted he'd be in the mood to spend time giving Urich a coherent interview - he was too busy moping. It had to happen before the Kingpin tale, as during that story Spidey's name was mud anyway (so JJJ's glee at having something negative to say about Spidey would have been out of place) and that story resolved itself with JJJ re-evaluating his hostile stance towards Spidey. Hence the decision was made to place it just after the Geldoff encounter, when he had finally gotten MJ and his costume back, and was in a better frame of mind. However, as stated, at some point the two halves of the sentence in the profile got switched round - it should have read
"Shortly thereafter, Spider-Man got back together with Mary-Jane; offered guidance to unstable...; and stopped martial artist....during a street fight."
One thing is certain Stu, I know my Ultimate continuity.
I don't doubt it. However, so do I, and the other writers, and we had the advantage of being able to pick editorial and writer brains and see advanced storylines.
That might have been Millar's initial plan, but if so, Human Torch's appearance in USM marked a change in that plan. What you've said he planned is exactly what I put forward as a solution to the apparent continuity glitches, and I was told "No, it won't fit with what is to come." (or words to that effect).
Author's original intention can and does get superceded all the time, or else 616 Wolverine would be a teenager and the son of Sabretooth.
Covered above. It is in the wrong point in the history, but not by as much as you suggested. Nonetheless, regardless of the reasons why it got misplaced, I will concede it as an error in the entry as it currently reads.
They do, and I kept notes of all of them as I worked my way through every Ultimate title, trying to figure how to fit them in. However, for now, we have to just glance past all those little nods and references, in the same way we do when a specific president or other real life figure is referenced in a story to make it feel current (because in five years time, it can't be that specific president, thanks to the ever present sliding timescale).
It's not the editors - maybe I should have made it clearer - when I presented the "UFF came first, and we have big gaps between arcs to bring them up to present day" solution, my editors took it the various Ultimate editors, who took it to the writers, at least one of whom then said (paraphrased) "It won't fit our coming stories". The writers have plans, which I don't know (because that way I can't accidentally let slip), didn't ask to know, and don't wish to either pre-empt or contradict.
Like I said, it wasn't just the editors - there are plans to make it all work, but we won't know how until the writers are ready to explain them.
I totally agree with that - titles are. However little throwaway nods to the UFF prior to their appearance aren't.
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
BMB wrote the earlier UFF appearances, pre-UFF #1. But he also wrote the USM issues where Peter meets Johnny Storm for the first time, which contradicted his own earlier UFF stories, and which blew the "UFF #1 is set some time back" theory.
The writers would be that evidence - they did check with them on the points the Handbook writers raised (and in some cases, we checked with the writers directly - we do that as much as we can in all our Handbooks, Ultimate or otherwise).
Once they explain it, then yes, I suspect we won't have to ignore the references any more. But it seems the explanation won't be "It happened some time ago". That may have been the original plan Millar intended, but it looks like someone (Millar, the new FF writers, BMB or someone else) went "Hey, I have a really cool way to explain all this, better than that original idea", and they've gone with that instead. Happens a lot in comics.
DIrishB said:
BMB wrote the earlier UFF appearances, pre-UFF #1. But he also wrote the USM issues where Peter meets Johnny Storm for the first time, which contradicted his own earlier UFF stories, and which blew the "UFF #1 is set some time back" theory.
The writers would be that evidence - they did check with them on the points the Handbook writers raised (and in some cases, we checked with the writers directly - we do that as much as we can in all our Handbooks, Ultimate or otherwise).
Once they explain it, then yes, I suspect we won't have to ignore the references any more. But it seems the explanation won't be "It happened some time ago". That may have been the original plan Millar intended, but it looks like someone (Millar, the new FF writers, BMB or someone else) went "Hey, I have a really cool way to explain all this, better than that original idea", and they've gone with that instead. Happens a lot in comics.
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
Hey, we try to be thorough, and even though Gladiator didn't have a lot of space to play with, adding in some background on the historical origins of his god didn't seem too unreasonable a leap.
Nurhachi said:Oh and Stuart! Thanks for mentioning me in the Gladiator bio
Hey, we try to be thorough, and even though Gladiator didn't have a lot of space to play with, adding in some background on the historical origins of his god didn't seem too unreasonable a leap.
Lynx
Well-Known Member
Basically, ignore all mentions to the UFF before UFF #1 until it's properly fixed. Millar and Bendis' original intentions seem to have changed, then.
Also, if this is true, then the USM Game would also have to occur after "Meet Me" and before "Hobgoblin".
I like it! I look foward to the explination of the early UMTU FF.
Also, if this is true, then the USM Game would also have to occur after "Meet Me" and before "Hobgoblin".
I like it! I look foward to the explination of the early UMTU FF.
Last edited:
Re: Ultimate Handbook 2005 USM and UFF
While I am listing things we failed to spot (and before someone else mentions it), I missed the reference to Uncle Ben working in a printing plant, given in UXM; strictly speaking, his exact occupation remains unknown, since we don't know what he did in the plant, but where he worked should have been mentioned.
See, I do acknowledge where mistakes or ommisions occur.
Thanks for catching that - some of the writers (myself included) were working from the trades in some cases, which means we might miss stuff only revealed in those title pages. As a result, confirmation of Electro's first name slipped passed us, and so that is an error in the Handbook.cmdrjanjalani said:
While I am listing things we failed to spot (and before someone else mentions it), I missed the reference to Uncle Ben working in a printing plant, given in UXM; strictly speaking, his exact occupation remains unknown, since we don't know what he did in the plant, but where he worked should have been mentioned.
See, I do acknowledge where mistakes or ommisions occur.
Pandrio
Well-Known Member
:rockon::rockon::rockon: Yay, someone with at least some effect on the Ultimate Marvel Universe is here!!!:rockon::rockon::rockon:
So, yeah, I understand most of the explanations for mistakes in the Handbook and I'm glad it wasn't that Professor Storm's name was Franklin William Storm (Although I could see that being a way of getting around this in the future).
So, yeah, I understand most of the explanations for mistakes in the Handbook and I'm glad it wasn't that Professor Storm's name was Franklin William Storm (Although I could see that being a way of getting around this in the future).
UltimateE said:
Well, we can just ignore the UMTU issues, though I personally prefer not to, and apparently that view is shared by writers and editors (hence much of it being reconfirmed in other Ultimate titles). I don't have the answer as to how the earlier UFF references fit, and deliberately didn't try to find out, as it wasn't something I could have revealed in the Handbook (or here either); that's the job of whichever writer eventually tells the story explaining things. So your last comment is the most accurate of all - the editors know, but don't want to divulge...yet.
Arachnoman said:
Normally we can and do try to be more specific - however with the Ultimate universe, we deliberately tried not to fill in too many of the blanks just yet. Hence not getting too specific on the strength levels. And even when a Handbook or other source does confirm a level for something like strength, you've got to remember that the real level is "whatever the writer or artist thinks fits the story in hand".
Not at all - happy to give feedback and receive feedback, though obviously I've got to watch what I say in case I slip and say too much.icemastertron said:
And thanks to everyone who has welcomed me to the boards - I don't have the time to reply to all of you individually, but it is appreciated.
