"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
There are way too many comic fans complaining that Marvel sold out to the dreaded Social Justice Warriors and that's why their comics are terrible now.
Basically people are awful.
Idiots have been saying this kind of shit for years, and I give Marvel a lot of credit for not caring about it one bit.
I doubt that they'll change their entire editorial direction on behalf of some pepe the frog assholes.
Do things need to be less complicated, and more new reader friendly? I think so. But I don't think their answer is going to be "lets shove all of our legacy heroes over here and forget about them".
+3
Options
FakefauxCóiste BodharDriving John McCain to meet some Iraqis who'd very much like to make his acquaintanceRegistered Userregular
"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
Miles has 1 ongoing series and is on the Champions
Peter has 2, is on the Avengers, just starred in his own event and is canonically the most popular super hero in the current Marvel U since Deadpool fell out of favor
"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
That's not being pessimistic. That's the exact message they just sent. It may not be what they intended to say, but it's what they said.
There are way too many comic fans complaining that Marvel sold out to the dreaded Social Justice Warriors and that's why their comics are terrible now.
Basically people are awful.
Idiots have been saying this kind of shit for years, and I give Marvel a lot of credit for not caring about it one bit.
I doubt that they'll change their entire editorial direction on behalf of some pepe the frog assholes.
Do things need to be less complicated, and more new reader friendly? I think so. But I don't think their answer is going to be "lets shove all of our legacy heroes over here and forget about them".
I don't think that will be their intentional answer but launching, for example, STEVE ROGERS IS BACK AS NON-NAZI CAPTAIN AMERICA alongside SAM WILSON IS FALCON AGAIN
Which series do you think will be a success
Taking away the titles from the legacy heroes cuts the legs out from under them and basically hangs them out to dry
"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
Miles has 1 ongoing series and is on the Champions
Peter has 2, is on the Avengers, just starred in his own event and is canonically the most popular super hero in the current Marvel U since Deadpool fell out of favor
Bendis also likes to write more grounded stories though. Slott likes to go all big and comic book-y.
Wait what's the second Peter solo book?
I'M NOT FINISHED WITH YOU!!!
0
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
Marvel would rather take half measures every time unfortunately.
"The minorities still get to keep their heroes. They just have to be different heroes than the whites. Still just as good though. You know a sort of separate but equal thing."
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
Miles has 1 ongoing series and is on the Champions
Peter has 2, is on the Avengers, just starred in his own event and is canonically the most popular super hero in the current Marvel U since Deadpool fell out of favor
Bendis also likes to write more grounded stories though. Slott likes to go all big and comic book-y.
Wait what's the second Peter solo book?
Spider-Man/Deadpool
And Bendis is currently writing Guardians of the Galaxy and wrote The Avengers for almost a decade. "He likes grounded stories" is not a valid defense here dogg
Sincere question here please god don't misinterpret.
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
Ceno on
+1
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
Sincere question here please god don't misinterpret.
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
Well that's an argument people like to use for being upset when Marvel replaces an established (white) hero with someone else.
Sincere question here please god don't misinterpret.
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
When new characters have new identities, they don't sell enough books to keep the characters around. See Blank's post above--people are more inclined to buy a book with Captain America on it, regardless of who that Captain America is, than they are anything involving Sam Wilson by another name. And Steve and Pete both have enough existing name recognition to get attention outside of their titles.
The legacy of the names are the only reason so many of these newer characters are succeeding at all.
+3
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
Sincere question here please god don't misinterpret.
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
Honestly I would prefer new characters to start with new identities 90% of the time. It's just I have zero faith in the current comic industry in having the patience required in cultivating the audience to support new characters.
Sincere question here please god don't misinterpret.
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
I don't think it is bad but I think having a minority character take over a mantle is a potentially very powerful message
Like if Miles Morales was Arach-Kid he would just be yet another Spider-themed hero who is buddies with Spider-Man
But he is Spider-Man and because of that he has gotten more attention than he ever would have without the title and is starring in a dang movie in a couple of years
If a new character is awesome enough to find an audience without the legacy and really connect then that's great and I am very happy when it happens, but it is incredibly hard to make a lasting impact in the comics world of you don't come with a name people recognize already
Here's a sobering thought; does Marvel even need people to buy comics anymore?
Marvel Comics, the company, does, yes.
Marvel Entertainment, maybe not.
But that's also kind of a pointless question since no one needs to buy or make comics
I meant needs to in a business sense.
I'M NOT FINISHED WITH YOU!!!
0
Options
masterofmetroidHave you ever looked at a worldand seen it as a kind of challenge?Registered Userregular
Legacy characters have been a thing in comics for a long time
Marvel uses them less than DC but they have existed (Captain Marvel has been quite a few different people for example)
The reticence not to put the new guys forward is what's troubling, it's not that the keeping the old guys around is bad (That's also nothing new)
The unspoken corollary here is there seems to be a marked increase in being gunshy around when they gave the mantles to minority characters, which could be a coincidence but most shitty establishment practices are "coincidences" so i kind of don't give a shit
Was it really as recent as Civil War 2 when people turned against the comics line, or was this gaining ground for a while?
The Hydra Cap reveal last May was the tipping point.
I'M NOT FINISHED WITH YOU!!!
+2
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
I had issues with them flaunting their diversity cred ages back when every non-white hero was still written by a white dude. But I think the larger turn has been pretty in parallel with turning Steve into a Hydra agent and Civil War 2.
Was it really as recent as Civil War 2 when people turned against the comics line, or was this gaining ground for a while?
CW2 was the big turning point but there was fatigue setting in beforehand
Everything from Marvel Now through Secret Wars felt like a creative renaissance for the company (for the most part) but after the post SW relaunch failed to live up to its perceived potential and they lost a fair bit of their top writers (Gillen, Fraction, Remender, etc.) the shine started to wear off
Also Perlmutter donating heavily to Trump soured a good lot of folks too.
Oh also worth noting
At the ComicsPro event they assured retailers that while Secret Empire is political it will be "bipartisan"
Hey guys when people are not into your Evil Hydra Runs America event because it seems too much like the current administration maybe you shouldn't be trying to appease fans of it
Also Perlmutter donating heavily to Trump soured a good lot of folks too.
But it's not like the writers have been pro-Trump.
Sure, same as Chik-Fil-A cooks that weren't against gay marriage as well. It's messy. But when the owner of the company makes decisions like that, it turns a lot of people off.
I had issues with them flaunting their diversity cred ages back when every non-white hero was still written by a white dude. But I think the larger turn has been pretty in parallel with turning Steve into a Hydra agent and Civil War 2.
On the other hand, to say something nice
I actually think in recent months, Marvel has been doing well about putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to creators
David Walker and Sanford Greene working on Power Man & Iron Fist/Luke Cage, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Brian Stelfreeze, and Roxanne Gay working on Black Panther, Chelsea Cain writing Mockingbird, Kelly Thompson writing Hawkeye
+3
Options
FakefauxCóiste BodharDriving John McCain to meet some Iraqis who'd very much like to make his acquaintanceRegistered Userregular
I can't speak for others, but personally I checked out on the big events a long time ago. I came back for Secret Wars, but that was an exception. For the most part, they never live up to the hype.
These days the only Marvel comic I buy is Dr. Strange, and that's mainly because I just want them to keep making Dr. Strange comics. Aaron's run hasn't really thrilled me.
+1
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
I had issues with them flaunting their diversity cred ages back when every non-white hero was still written by a white dude. But I think the larger turn has been pretty in parallel with turning Steve into a Hydra agent and Civil War 2.
On the other hand, to say something nice
I actually think in recent months, Marvel has been doing well about putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to creators
David Walker and Sanford Greene working on Power Man & Iron Fist/Luke Cage, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Brian Stelfreeze, and Roxanne Gay working on Black Panther, Chelsea Cain writing Mockingbird, Kelly Thompson writing Hawkeye
Oh yeah. Credit where credit is due, they have been getting better on that front. It was the backpatting a couple years back that seemed, well unearned.
Posts
Eh, that seems overly pessimistic. And I never really got the complaint that Miles is playing second fiddle to Peter considering Miles was a focal point in Civil War 2.
Idiots have been saying this kind of shit for years, and I give Marvel a lot of credit for not caring about it one bit.
I doubt that they'll change their entire editorial direction on behalf of some pepe the frog assholes.
Do things need to be less complicated, and more new reader friendly? I think so. But I don't think their answer is going to be "lets shove all of our legacy heroes over here and forget about them".
Still hoping that for Infinity War Star Lord finally gets the helmet and double-breasted jacket.
Peter has 2, is on the Avengers, just starred in his own event and is canonically the most popular super hero in the current Marvel U since Deadpool fell out of favor
That's not being pessimistic. That's the exact message they just sent. It may not be what they intended to say, but it's what they said.
By all means, keep the legacy characters a part of the universe
But if Miles Morales is Spider-Man, he should be Spider-Man
Peter Parker can just be Peter Parker and Steve Rogers can just be Steve Rogers
I think a good example of how they're doing this is with Hawkeye
Kate is the headlining character of Hawkeye, but Clint is around doing his own thing, a not-Hawkeye thing
Which series do you think will be a success
Taking away the titles from the legacy heroes cuts the legs out from under them and basically hangs them out to dry
Bendis also likes to write more grounded stories though. Slott likes to go all big and comic book-y.
Wait what's the second Peter solo book?
And Bendis is currently writing Guardians of the Galaxy and wrote The Avengers for almost a decade. "He likes grounded stories" is not a valid defense here dogg
Maybe they want to still get republicans to read their stuff
Do people consider it bad to want new characters to have new identities? To have their own name/powerset/costume/whatever that isn't intrinsically tied to an existing one? To be honest, I've never looked at any of Marvel's superheroes as having a "mantle" that is passed from one to another. I've always just viewed it as Captain America = Steve Rogers, Peter Parker = Spider-Man, etc.
That just makes me think someone in the office said, "Well we better have these books starring white folks so Republicans read it"
And then I remembered what world I was in and got very sad.
Well that's an argument people like to use for being upset when Marvel replaces an established (white) hero with someone else.
Not saying you believe that of course.
When new characters have new identities, they don't sell enough books to keep the characters around. See Blank's post above--people are more inclined to buy a book with Captain America on it, regardless of who that Captain America is, than they are anything involving Sam Wilson by another name. And Steve and Pete both have enough existing name recognition to get attention outside of their titles.
The legacy of the names are the only reason so many of these newer characters are succeeding at all.
Honestly I would prefer new characters to start with new identities 90% of the time. It's just I have zero faith in the current comic industry in having the patience required in cultivating the audience to support new characters.
Like if Miles Morales was Arach-Kid he would just be yet another Spider-themed hero who is buddies with Spider-Man
But he is Spider-Man and because of that he has gotten more attention than he ever would have without the title and is starring in a dang movie in a couple of years
If a new character is awesome enough to find an audience without the legacy and really connect then that's great and I am very happy when it happens, but it is incredibly hard to make a lasting impact in the comics world of you don't come with a name people recognize already
Kamala Khan has almost nothing in common with the usual "Ms. Marvel," it's more or less a completely new character that is using an abandoned name
It's like that new Prey game, they just used it cause it was already a thing
Nope. Which is why a lot of this back to basics stuff is especially disappointing.
Marvel Entertainment, maybe not.
But that's also kind of a pointless question since no one needs to buy or make comics
I meant needs to in a business sense.
Marvel uses them less than DC but they have existed (Captain Marvel has been quite a few different people for example)
The reticence not to put the new guys forward is what's troubling, it's not that the keeping the old guys around is bad (That's also nothing new)
The unspoken corollary here is there seems to be a marked increase in being gunshy around when they gave the mantles to minority characters, which could be a coincidence but most shitty establishment practices are "coincidences" so i kind of don't give a shit
The post-battleworld relaunch was where things started going south, I believe.
The Hydra Cap reveal last May was the tipping point.
Everything from Marvel Now through Secret Wars felt like a creative renaissance for the company (for the most part) but after the post SW relaunch failed to live up to its perceived potential and they lost a fair bit of their top writers (Gillen, Fraction, Remender, etc.) the shine started to wear off
CW2 compounded a lot of issues but the line just hasn't been as fresh as when Hickman's plot was driving everything.
But it's not like the writers have been pro-Trump.
At the ComicsPro event they assured retailers that while Secret Empire is political it will be "bipartisan"
Hey guys when people are not into your Evil Hydra Runs America event because it seems too much like the current administration maybe you shouldn't be trying to appease fans of it
This is my major complaint.
Sure, same as Chik-Fil-A cooks that weren't against gay marriage as well. It's messy. But when the owner of the company makes decisions like that, it turns a lot of people off.
Like
Regardless of Al Ewing being rad as all hell, buying an Ewing book is supporting Perlmutter and some folks refuse to do so
On the other hand, to say something nice
I actually think in recent months, Marvel has been doing well about putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to creators
David Walker and Sanford Greene working on Power Man & Iron Fist/Luke Cage, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Brian Stelfreeze, and Roxanne Gay working on Black Panther, Chelsea Cain writing Mockingbird, Kelly Thompson writing Hawkeye
These days the only Marvel comic I buy is Dr. Strange, and that's mainly because I just want them to keep making Dr. Strange comics. Aaron's run hasn't really thrilled me.
Oh yeah. Credit where credit is due, they have been getting better on that front. It was the backpatting a couple years back that seemed, well unearned.