Jubilee as a Vampire has had her best character work in literal decades
her scene with captain america is awesome.
This was after several stories where Logan gets possessed/brain washed and kills a bunch of dudes (including Northstar) and when fixed everyone was ok with it.
The hypocritical nature of the writing rubbed me the wrong way considering how much I love Cyclops.
that is cyclops' defense but the issue is that people didn't really believe him. he obviously had the phoenix force but whether or not it was hypocritical the response to his defense was "no, I think you actually at the moment really did want to kill him, you were in control, and he was in your way"
And the thing is, cyclops starts from a point of "it's not my fault, I was possessed." He shows no remorse. He takes it for granted that people will accept that. But they do not.
Cyclops, like I've talked about before, doesn't act like other heroes. He acts like Namor - he acts like a king. And that's super interesting and I think in line with his character.
wolverine and the x-men was specifically about them as heroes.
and wolverine's journey to being the moral center of the x-men has been something growing for years and years. His whole entire deal is that he is the clint eastwood type who spits a big game and has a checkered past but in general always does the right thing.
I have enjoyed what they've done for Wolverine working to be a better person, that is until he decided he had no problem stabbing anyone who looked at him wrong yet was the golden hero of the X-Men, yet Scott kills Xavier while hopped up on Phoenix possession and the entire Marvel universe wants his head and acts as if he's Doctor Doom/Magneto.
This was after several stories where Logan gets possessed/brain washed and kills a bunch of dudes (including Northstar) and when fixed everyone was ok with it.
The hypocritical nature of the writing rubbed me the wrong way considering how much I love Cyclops.
Yeah, the way it was handled was poor, but this isn't exactly the way it went down.
Logan was always fine with the Black Op's murder dudes thing. Specifically, HE was fine with it. And the people he got with him in X-Force were fine with it.
It's when Scott decided to start militarizing the rest of the mutant population, including training the kids for war, that casued the X-Men to split in the first place.
Wolverine thought that the kids should have a choice in the matter, that they didn't have to go down his path.
Scott believed(and was right) that the choice was already made for them, by the world at large, and they should best prepare them for that.
He is of a mind that you should just make a new character instead of reinventing old ones
l honestly think that there's plenty of scope for both, but that characters with entirely new heroic identities have not received the support that characters with legacy identities have received, and that's a shame. Also that it's a shame that existing characters have to be sidelined to an extent to support replacements, although that would probably be true to support brand new characters too (the Gravity problem)
I think legacy characters can definitely work and be great, but you need to have a solid reason for bringing them in aside from shaking things up. I think Miles works well though.
+4
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
I partially agree/disagree with him. Changing characters is fine if it makes sense and not done just for the publicity.
Falcon becoming Captain America makes perfect sense. They have been best friends forever, and it just makes story and character sense to have Falcon take over when Steve can't do it any longer.
Female Thor seemed to be more publicity maneuver than anything. With that said, I've warmed up to the idea once they revealed who it was behind the hammer. I'm actually quite interested as to what direction they take it.
Also, the new Ms. Marvel and Miles are both awesome and are new creations.
Also Stan Lee is a 90something year old dude who thinks he created most of Thor's mythology, like mjolnir, so I'm not sure I really care too much about his opinions on creating characters nowadays, personally
I think that the idea that if you are taking the superheroic identity that was made popular on the face of a straight white male and stick it on a non-straight, non-white, non-male (or part thereof) in order to make that successful actually probably says some stuff that isn't great about superheroic identities and people who aren't straight white males.
Yeah, I think the real sticking point of that is that comics are OLD now.
There are so many sucesses, that it makes taking risks on new characters that much harder.
So if you're taking less risks on new characters, that means that you are going to get less chances for new, truly original characters to catch on.
You can't just throw a bunch of new characters in their own books on the board anymore and see what sticks. There just isn't enough room in the comics market on a whole.
And they sure as heck aren't going to replace existing, consistent selling books and characters that have been doing so for the past 20-30 odd years. That's going to be what you're printing, unless you somehow don't need money to exist.
That's why there's such a big push for creator owned properties, since character idea's can't really get reps in the big two market.
Also Stan Lee is a 90something year old dude who thinks he created most of Thor's mythology, like mjolnir, so I'm not sure I really care too much about his opinions on creating characters nowadays, personally
Stan Lee changed the game back in the 60s and I respect that his creative skills basically allowed modern superhero comics to exist
that said
the game was not great, in the 60s
the idea he made to raise the bar was "make superheroes actually more like people, then they will be popular"
@Maddoc going back to what you were saying in the last thread about these Marvel announcements feeling weirdly scattered and random, it's probably important to remember that most of these books were not announced so much as leaked.
The announcements before these always came with a bunch of preview/concept art, the creators explaining thier pitch for the book, a mission statements etc.
Most of these books we don't know anything besides a title, a cover, a creative team (and sometimes not even a complete one) and maybe a little blurb.
@Maddoc going back to what you were saying in the last thread about these Marvel announcements feeling weirdly scattered and random, it's probably important to remember that most of these books were not announced so much as leaked.
The announcements before these always came with a bunch of preview/concept art, the creators explaining thier pitch for the book, a mission statements etc.
Most of these books we don't know anything besides a title, a cover, a creative team (and sometimes not even a complete one) and maybe a little blurb.
That's not really the fault of the leak. The leak is from a previews magazine that comes out tomorrow. Like, if it hadn't leaked out Monday or today, we'd still be in the same boat on Wednesday when it official came out.
@Maddoc going back to what you were saying in the last thread about these Marvel announcements feeling weirdly scattered and random, it's probably important to remember that most of these books were not announced so much as leaked.
The announcements before these always came with a bunch of preview/concept art, the creators explaining thier pitch for the book, a mission statements etc.
Most of these books we don't know anything besides a title, a cover, a creative team (and sometimes not even a complete one) and maybe a little blurb.
That's not really the fault of the leak. The leak is from a previews magazine that comes out tomorrow. Like, if it hadn't leaked out Monday or today, we'd still be in the same boat on Wednesday when it official came out.
Previews is directed at retailers, I mean yes all this stuff would have come out anyway but it's still not the same as an official announcement.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
He is of a mind that you should just make a new character instead of reinventing old ones
So... exactly what Marvel has been doing, then?
Yeah I'm confused is this not pretty much exactly what is happening with Miles and Thor
he was asked his opinion on it in an interview
Yeah I read the thing rainfall linked (and interview that was linked within that article) I get that Stan Lee didn't put out an op ed or whatever
I just don't agree with his thinking is all, specifically I think that the changes like bringing miles in or having a woman be thor do not count as replacing or reinventing existing characters because those established characters are still around and having stories told (as far as i know, I've been out of the comics threads for a while)
But it isn't really a big deal, Stan Lee can think whatever and all he said was that he wants the things he helped make to stay like they were when he made them and that isn't so bad
@Maddoc going back to what you were saying in the last thread about these Marvel announcements feeling weirdly scattered and random, it's probably important to remember that most of these books were not announced so much as leaked.
The announcements before these always came with a bunch of preview/concept art, the creators explaining thier pitch for the book, a mission statements etc.
Most of these books we don't know anything besides a title, a cover, a creative team (and sometimes not even a complete one) and maybe a little blurb.
That's not really the fault of the leak. The leak is from a previews magazine that comes out tomorrow. Like, if it hadn't leaked out Monday or today, we'd still be in the same boat on Wednesday when it official came out.
Previews is directed at retailers, I mean yes all this stuff would have come out anyway but it's still not the same as an official announcement.
Nah, it was specifically called a magazine and has a big "FREE" on the cover and was mentioned by Marvel as being where their major reveal would happen.. It was totally intended for public consumption.
The one thing I have been thinking of in terms of all the reinventing of characters is how do you revert back when you decide to without getting bad publicity? I mean, they've certainly reaped the rewards of diversity - CNN front page stories for at least Thor, Spidey and Cap - but what next?
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
He is of a mind that you should just make a new character instead of reinventing old ones
So... exactly what Marvel has been doing, then?
In general? Not listening to him and making some really needed changes to the line-ups.
It's not super clear in the original interview, but my interpretation is that he doesn't have a problem with a new person taking up an old superhero mantle, ala Miles Morales and Kamala Khan, it was more addressing the "why not just make Peter Parker a black kid?" argument that was popular during the new Spider-man casting speculation.
The one thing I have been thinking of in terms of all the reinventing of characters is how do you revert back when you decide to without getting bad publicity? I mean, they've certainly reaped the rewards of diversity - CNN front page stories for at least Thor, Spidey and Cap - but what next?
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
Gonna use Thor as an example, and spoiler it because spoilers
Jane will likely die, eventually, yeah. And then the Odinson will become worthy again and return as Thor.
That is the point where you introduce a new character, that is already diverse, instead of just recycling an older character. Bringing in Angela, for instance, is a way to help do that.
Also holy crap I now want a book that is Steve, Bucky, Sam, and Ms America Chavez. Team America.
The one thing I have been thinking of in terms of all the reinventing of characters is how do you revert back when you decide to without getting bad publicity? I mean, they've certainly reaped the rewards of diversity - CNN front page stories for at least Thor, Spidey and Cap - but what next?
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
Amazing Spider-Man is already running besides Miles' Spider-Man, so if he tanks, they'll just cancel the book and let ASM run like it was before.
The new Thor
Has cancer for the forseeable future; so they have a potential story out for that already in place, whether she gets too sick to continue, dies from her sickness, or goes out in a blaze of glory knowing her time is limited anyway
Captain America is just a title, and one that's swapped hands many times before.
He is of a mind that you should just make a new character instead of reinventing old ones
This works when the average comic reader is turning over every 5 years or so, but not so much when the same readers stick around for decades and demand change.
The one thing I have been thinking of in terms of all the reinventing of characters is how do you revert back when you decide to without getting bad publicity? I mean, they've certainly reaped the rewards of diversity - CNN front page stories for at least Thor, Spidey and Cap - but what next?
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
Have them do something else.
Part of the problem is that a number of the top name character have had decades of time in their mantles to build history and fanbases and popularity during times where it seems unlikely that many PoC or female characters could get either good writing or good publicity. So now you have the mantle that's imbued with all this history and notability, and you can separate that from the face of that character who has also had this notability and history. Now, they've done that before, with Cap have his mantle passed and it was also a newsworthy story, so we know that the mantle can be removed from the character and the character can continue to be themselves.
So, you have groups that have been under served in the past and have been unable to get the popularity that the white male heroes have because the past is generally awful. So if you pass them the mantle, you allow them the popularity of that mantle without having to figure out how to get a character the popularity they really need to succeed.
That character who was the face of that mantle is still themselves and still able to continue on doing what they've always been doing, but now you have a character who would not have gotten nearly that much recognition still being themselves and still doing what they always did, but now with a leg up on the fan base, notability, and popularity.
If Marvel put out a "Steve Rodgers" book tomorrow, people would still read it whether he was Cap or not. The same cannot be said for other characters.
This plays out in the numbers as well as well known characters sell better than new ones.
He is of a mind that you should just make a new character instead of reinventing old ones
So... exactly what Marvel has been doing, then?
In general? Not listening to him and making some really needed changes to the line-ups.
It's not super clear in the original interview, but my interpretation is that he doesn't have a problem with a new person taking up an old superhero mantle, ala Miles Morales and Kamala Khan, it was more addressing the "why not just make Peter Parker a black kid?" argument that was popular during the new Spider-man casting speculation.
The one thing I have been thinking of in terms of all the reinventing of characters is how do you revert back when you decide to without getting bad publicity? I mean, they've certainly reaped the rewards of diversity - CNN front page stories for at least Thor, Spidey and Cap - but what next?
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
Gonna use Thor as an example, and spoiler it because spoilers
Jane will likely die, eventually, yeah. And then the Odinson will become worthy again and return as Thor.
That is the point where you introduce a new character, that is already diverse, instead of just recycling an older character. Bringing in Angela, for instance, is a way to help do that.
Also holy crap I now want a book that is Steve, Bucky, Sam, and Ms America Chavez. Team America.
fuck yeah
I just realized that if Jane does die of her disease she goes to Angela's realm. I think they've already set the safety net for that character.
Posts
her scene with captain america is awesome.
that is cyclops' defense but the issue is that people didn't really believe him. he obviously had the phoenix force but whether or not it was hypocritical the response to his defense was "no, I think you actually at the moment really did want to kill him, you were in control, and he was in your way"
And the thing is, cyclops starts from a point of "it's not my fault, I was possessed." He shows no remorse. He takes it for granted that people will accept that. But they do not.
Cyclops, like I've talked about before, doesn't act like other heroes. He acts like Namor - he acts like a king. And that's super interesting and I think in line with his character.
Yeah, the way it was handled was poor, but this isn't exactly the way it went down.
Logan was always fine with the Black Op's murder dudes thing. Specifically, HE was fine with it. And the people he got with him in X-Force were fine with it.
It's when Scott decided to start militarizing the rest of the mutant population, including training the kids for war, that casued the X-Men to split in the first place.
Wolverine thought that the kids should have a choice in the matter, that they didn't have to go down his path.
Scott believed(and was right) that the choice was already made for them, by the world at large, and they should best prepare them for that.
That was the original Schism.
Let us not speak of AvX.
So... exactly what Marvel has been doing, then?
I agree in general, yeah.
l honestly think that there's plenty of scope for both, but that characters with entirely new heroic identities have not received the support that characters with legacy identities have received, and that's a shame. Also that it's a shame that existing characters have to be sidelined to an extent to support replacements, although that would probably be true to support brand new characters too (the Gravity problem)
Falcon becoming Captain America makes perfect sense. They have been best friends forever, and it just makes story and character sense to have Falcon take over when Steve can't do it any longer.
Female Thor seemed to be more publicity maneuver than anything. With that said, I've warmed up to the idea once they revealed who it was behind the hammer. I'm actually quite interested as to what direction they take it.
Also, the new Ms. Marvel and Miles are both awesome and are new creations.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
the only really successful example of this working I can think of in the past decade or two is Ms. Marvel and she has a tie to Carol with the name
and that's after they have tried it with all sorts of other new heroes. Anyone remember Gravity?
I do! I liked Gravity
Yeah I'm confused is this not pretty much exactly what is happening with Miles and Thor
But he showed up in a handful of places after his miniseries and hasn't been seen in yeeeeaaaars
he was asked his opinion about the marvel spider-man contract in an interview
instead of miles being spider-man miles is Super Miles
he died! it was a heroes death
But yeah I definitely agree
There are so many sucesses, that it makes taking risks on new characters that much harder.
So if you're taking less risks on new characters, that means that you are going to get less chances for new, truly original characters to catch on.
You can't just throw a bunch of new characters in their own books on the board anymore and see what sticks. There just isn't enough room in the comics market on a whole.
And they sure as heck aren't going to replace existing, consistent selling books and characters that have been doing so for the past 20-30 odd years. That's going to be what you're printing, unless you somehow don't need money to exist.
That's why there's such a big push for creator owned properties, since character idea's can't really get reps in the big two market.
Stan Lee changed the game back in the 60s and I respect that his creative skills basically allowed modern superhero comics to exist
that said
the game was not great, in the 60s
the idea he made to raise the bar was "make superheroes actually more like people, then they will be popular"
not exactly tough competition, really
The announcements before these always came with a bunch of preview/concept art, the creators explaining thier pitch for the book, a mission statements etc.
Most of these books we don't know anything besides a title, a cover, a creative team (and sometimes not even a complete one) and maybe a little blurb.
Wikipedia says he got ressurected after that. He apparently showed up as recently as Fear Itself.
That's not really the fault of the leak. The leak is from a previews magazine that comes out tomorrow. Like, if it hadn't leaked out Monday or today, we'd still be in the same boat on Wednesday when it official came out.
Yeah if I recall correctly the FF w/ Black Panther series brought him back, then he was in that Young Allies mini, then... that's all I got.
Previews is directed at retailers, I mean yes all this stuff would have come out anyway but it's still not the same as an official announcement.
Yeah I read the thing rainfall linked (and interview that was linked within that article) I get that Stan Lee didn't put out an op ed or whatever
I just don't agree with his thinking is all, specifically I think that the changes like bringing miles in or having a woman be thor do not count as replacing or reinventing existing characters because those established characters are still around and having stories told (as far as i know, I've been out of the comics threads for a while)
But it isn't really a big deal, Stan Lee can think whatever and all he said was that he wants the things he helped make to stay like they were when he made them and that isn't so bad
Nah, it was specifically called a magazine and has a big "FREE" on the cover and was mentioned by Marvel as being where their major reveal would happen.. It was totally intended for public consumption.
EDIT:
http://www.newsarama.com/24711-marvel-to-reveal-all-new-all-different-titles-in-free-magazine-july-1.html
In general? Not listening to him and making some really needed changes to the line-ups.
There's a point where Thor's readership drops or they simply want that sales spike in a "Peter Parker Returns!" headline. But in doing so, they lose way more than normal when a character returns from the dead. Obviously they can try to cover it by putting the female Thor on a team somewhere or giving Miles some other monthly series, but it won't hide the fact they are going back to the normal, white, male versions. Ms. Marvel is probably the only one where you don't really have that inevitability.
It's not super clear in the original interview, but my interpretation is that he doesn't have a problem with a new person taking up an old superhero mantle, ala Miles Morales and Kamala Khan, it was more addressing the "why not just make Peter Parker a black kid?" argument that was popular during the new Spider-man casting speculation.
So it's perfect.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEfTUqT7pc4
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Steam
Such a fucking huge missed opportunity.
Gonna use Thor as an example, and spoiler it because spoilers
That is the point where you introduce a new character, that is already diverse, instead of just recycling an older character. Bringing in Angela, for instance, is a way to help do that.
Also holy crap I now want a book that is Steve, Bucky, Sam, and Ms America Chavez. Team America.
Amazing Spider-Man is already running besides Miles' Spider-Man, so if he tanks, they'll just cancel the book and let ASM run like it was before.
The new Thor
Captain America is just a title, and one that's swapped hands many times before.
Literally shiny.
This works when the average comic reader is turning over every 5 years or so, but not so much when the same readers stick around for decades and demand change.
Have them do something else.
Part of the problem is that a number of the top name character have had decades of time in their mantles to build history and fanbases and popularity during times where it seems unlikely that many PoC or female characters could get either good writing or good publicity. So now you have the mantle that's imbued with all this history and notability, and you can separate that from the face of that character who has also had this notability and history. Now, they've done that before, with Cap have his mantle passed and it was also a newsworthy story, so we know that the mantle can be removed from the character and the character can continue to be themselves.
So, you have groups that have been under served in the past and have been unable to get the popularity that the white male heroes have because the past is generally awful. So if you pass them the mantle, you allow them the popularity of that mantle without having to figure out how to get a character the popularity they really need to succeed.
That character who was the face of that mantle is still themselves and still able to continue on doing what they've always been doing, but now you have a character who would not have gotten nearly that much recognition still being themselves and still doing what they always did, but now with a leg up on the fan base, notability, and popularity.
If Marvel put out a "Steve Rodgers" book tomorrow, people would still read it whether he was Cap or not. The same cannot be said for other characters.
This plays out in the numbers as well as well known characters sell better than new ones.
Makes sense.
Also, I don't think it got posted last thread.