PSA about 4* Thor

13

Comments

  • DayvDayv Posts: 4,449 Chairperson of the Boards
    People complain that the legacy characters get replaced, usually temporarily, with new versions, and certain people complain more when they feel those characters might be part of a social agenda.

    But you know what happens when new, potentially more diverse characters are released and they're not part of an existing legacy? More than 9 times out of 10, they fail due to lack of sales. Did anyone read The Order? That was a great superhero team from Marvel that really exemplified what could be done with fresh new characters in the main Marvel universe (and supporting appearances from Tony Stark and Pepper Potts), and it barely lasted a year.

    And hey, maybe some of the character changes and introductions have a social agenda for greater diversity in representation? So what? Are the stories any good? Great, read them if so! If you honestly refuse to buy a great story because the writer is trying to increase the appearance of women or minorities or anything other than straight white men in the world of comics, well, I hope you shop in a different store from me. Among other things, I don't want you impacting their purchasing decisions.
  • MawtfulMawtful Posts: 1,646 Chairperson of the Boards
    I've been reading the comic as it's released.

    I think it's worth noting that, actually, the "Goddess of Thunder" is not the same as Thor. The entire first issue is dedicated to making it very clear that he-Thor is elsewhere, and she-Thor is a unique entity in the universe. So locking 2/3* Thor out of teams with 4* Thor goes against the canon that Marvel has presented.
  • DayvDayv Posts: 4,449 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mawtful wrote:
    I've been reading the comic as it's released.

    I think it's worth noting that, actually, the "Goddess of Thunder" is not the same as Thor. The entire first issue is dedicated to making it very clear that he-Thor is elsewhere, and she-Thor is a unique entity in the universe. So locking 2/3* Thor out of teams with 4* Thor goes against the canon that Marvel has presented.
    Well, Mjolnir still can't be in two places at once.

    Either of them should be able to be paired up with Beta Ray Bill wielding Stormbreaker, though, or I'd be mad. Assuming they ever add BRB, which would be awesome.

    edit: Beta, not Beat. Silly autocorrect.
  • EddiemonEddiemon Posts: 1,470 Chairperson of the Boards
    Square wrote:
    As for Quesada being EIC, yeah he is. But there's a difference between the editor saying, "Make Thor a woman because we need women!" and them saying okay when an idea is thrown at them. One is an agenda, and one is organic. Do you think Quesada said yes, or that he demanded it happen? Because those are very different things.

    Why is there a difference? If Joe Q only approves changes to characters which are 'diverse' and politically correct, or Joe Q mandates it, the end result is the same and it is still an agenda.
    I think people being upset about comics diversity and temporary storylines is what gives fanboys a bad name. Comics fanboys are kicking and screaming their way into the 21st century.

    The amusing thing about the comic 'fanboys' is that they are the ones who actually pay for comics and keep the industry running. And as been pointed out repeatedly by progressives here, the reason the fanboys icons need to be changed is because trying to launch new diverse characters doesn't work because the same 'fanboys' won't buy them. And the progressives won't buy them either because they aren't into comics.

    I'm sure there is some irony in there. In order to save it you have to destroy it.
  • EddiemonEddiemon Posts: 1,470 Chairperson of the Boards
    Square wrote:
    Straight white guys see conspiracies everywhere.

    I like how you opened with the ad hominem, followed it with a deliberate innacuracy.
    Keep in mind, these changes happened over 10 years, under different editors.

    Miles Morales, the first change was 3 years ago, not 10. Everything else has happened subsequently. Ultimate Nick Fury being different to regular Nick was never an issue, ultimate was meant to be different views, and wasn't a replacement. But then white Nick Fury had to have a black son in 616 who happened to jump over every career officer in Shield just to replace him... different story entirely.

    ...Then I removed all your justifications for why every single change didn't count because you didn't want it to. But mainly because of the next paragraph...
    In the last 20 years, Marvel and DC have successfully launched two new superhero properties that I can think of: Deadpool (though part of the X-Men world) and Guardians of the Galaxy (which was still an existing title, and existing characters, so it's arguably old). It's very hard to make popular new characters. Really hard. If comic companies want to increase diversity (and they definitely do), existing series/known names are one way to do it. White people will have to be happy with the fact that 80% of comic characters are still straight white people, and more men than women, even though white guys are just 30% of the American population.

    So I'm a conspiracy nut, none of the changes count, but Marvel had to do it anyway because it was the right thing to do. You're arguing against yourself. And your racism is showing.

    Marvel has a universe that they tie things into, so everything is part of everything else.

    X-Factor has an X in it, but Peter David's work was far from anything prior.
    X-Force also has an X in it, but wasn't part of anything before.
    DnA's Annihilation series create a whole universe of non human stuff.
    Young Avengers had a black captain american, a gay human/alien relationship and two new female characters. (inc Kate Bishop who is fantastic in Hawkeye)
    Avengers ARena had a whole raft of new interesting characters outside the 'white and male' requirements.
    X-men added Armour and Danger, non white-male characters. Abigail Brand turned up, equal in rank to Fury.

    These are all 'organic', in that none of them is a cut and replace operation for PR purposes. They are all great additions and make for more diverse storytelling and give more options.
    I think it's time to share our toys a little more. Just a little.
    [/quote][/quote]

    Why? I pay for my comics. I buy what I like, you buy what you like. That is if you even buy comics.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    Eddiemon wrote:
    Square wrote:
    Straight white guys see conspiracies everywhere.

    I like how you opened with the ad hominem, followed it with a deliberate innacuracy.
    Glad you like it, because it's true.
    Keep in mind, these changes happened over 10 years, under different editors.

    Miles Morales, the first change was 3 years ago, not 10. Everything else has happened subsequently. Ultimate Nick Fury being different to regular Nick was never an issue, ultimate was meant to be different views, and wasn't a replacement. But then white Nick Fury had to have a black son in 616 who happened to jump over every career officer in Shield just to replace him... different story entirely.
    Ultimate Nick Fury came out 10 years ago, therefore, those changes happened over 10 years.
    ...Then I removed all your justifications for why every single change didn't count because you didn't want it to. But mainly because of the next paragraph...
    In the last 20 years, Marvel and DC have successfully launched two new superhero properties that I can think of: Deadpool (though part of the X-Men world) and Guardians of the Galaxy (which was still an existing title, and existing characters, so it's arguably old). It's very hard to make popular new characters. Really hard. If comic companies want to increase diversity (and they definitely do), existing series/known names are one way to do it. White people will have to be happy with the fact that 80% of comic characters are still straight white people, and more men than women, even though white guys are just 30% of the American population.

    So I'm a conspiracy nut, none of the changes count, but Marvel had to do it anyway because it was the right thing to do. You're arguing against yourself. And your racism is showing.
    Yup, people complaining about racial changes are not racist, people accepting of changes are racists icon_rolleyes.gif I haven't said they have to do anything. But if they want to lean in the direction of balance, that is a way to do it. As in, the EIC doesn't say something like, "No way is Nick Fury black!" Instead, he says, "Okay, give it a try."
    Marvel has a universe that they tie things into, so everything is part of everything else.

    <Snip>
    These are all 'organic', in that none of them is a cut and replace operation for PR purposes. They are all great additions and make for more diverse storytelling and give more options.
    Sure, and so is Captain America's partner of 40 years taking over for him. Seriously, it's not one or the other. You can do all of that.
    I think it's time to share our toys a little more. Just a little.

    Why? I pay for my comics. I buy what I like, you buy what you like. That is if you even buy comics.
    That's not all there is to it. It's fans crying out, "That's not my Captain America!" They want to whine the company into reversing things, rather than let it play out. By all means, vote with your dollar.

    If I even buy comics? Wanna compare longboxes? Geez, another fanboy pissing match. Do you think the stuff I talked about in this thread was based on a Wikipedia post? Enjoy your white Captain America and Man Thor, they'll be back for you soon enough. Then how will Marvel push their social agenda?!!! Oh!
  • Can we get this thread locked? It's kind of degenerated at this point.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    Ben Grimm wrote:
    Can we get this thread locked? It's kind of degenerated at this point.
    Would it be acceptable in a new thread? In which case, could off-topic content be moved?
  • MoralMoral Posts: 512
    The real problem seems to be diversity hasn't provided sustainable sales in the standalone titles. All the core characters that have their own comics (that run over a decade) are white male. Minority characters have not sustained the sales to keep their books going.

    Marvel seems to be reaching out to expand their fan base who would hopefully allow sustained runs of minority centered books. If an author has a story to tell from a different perspective then changing things up, short term, is the only way to reach a significant audience.

    It's one thing to say Marvel could create minority characters. They just haven't been able to market a long term, successful product doing that in the past.
  • DayvDayv Posts: 4,449 Chairperson of the Boards
    Ben Grimm wrote:
    Can we get this thread locked? It's kind of degenerated at this point.
    I think it's probably running out of steam, so I'm leaving it be for now.
  • KataiKatai Age Unconfirmed Posts: 278 Mover and Shaker
    This all sounds like a bunch of people complaining about comics they don't even read. People keep pretending this sort of stuff is new when it's more of the same.

    I mean, Loki has been female throughout Dark Reign, for pete's sakes. I'm actually surprised we don't have an alt-Loki in his female body (which technically belonged to Sif, but that's beside the point).

    People got really angry about Sam Wilson being Captain America, despite him not being the first black Captain America. Isaiah Bradley owns that title. Let's not forget that Clint Barton, Bucky Barnes, and Frank Castle have all been Captain America as well. Heck, even Carol Danvers and Cyclops were Captain Americas in alternate universes...

    Of course people got angry when Carol took up the Captain Marvel moniker, despite no one really knowing who the hell Captain Marvel is (I think many people still think of Shazam, if anything)

    And of course Marvel is trying to appeal to female readers. They make up 46% of the readership, and Marvel is FINALLY getting their act together to capitalize on that.
  • There is something I don't understand, so perhaps I can get a reasonable answer.

    If I am misreading things, please feel free to correct me.

    I am reading that changes to established characters (Black Cap, Female Thor, Hispanic Spider-Man) are created for a diverse fan base.

    I am reading that when new superhero characters that are non white/male were created, it was hard to market. Therefore the only way to get those stories out is to change established characters.

    But if none of the diverse fan base supports new multicultural characters, what part of the diverse fan base wants old characters "becoming" multicultural? If having female/(whatever race) characters is so desired, then where are the purchases proving it? Is it because a new character with these traits don't make enough of a statement? Aren't as newsworthy? No animosity meant, I truly want opinions.

    If it matters, I am a Hispanic male.
  • MoralMoral Posts: 512
    I believe the technique is to put in a replacement with a compelling enough story that the character can spin off to their own book when the original returns. NCIS and CSI are perfect examples of how it is done in television. Can Falcon get enough readers to care about him that a relaunched Falcon series can sustain itself?

    My impression of older tries with female leads was that the stories didn't appeal to the fanbase. Or the artwork looked like the animated version of a Maxim photoshoot.

    If 46% of the fanbase is now women, Marvel has an opportunity.
  • wymtimewymtime Posts: 3,470 Chairperson of the Boards
    There is something I don't understand, so perhaps I can get a reasonable answer.

    If I am misreading things, please feel free to correct me.

    I am reading that changes to established characters (Black Cap, Female Thor, Hispanic Spider-Man) are created for a diverse fan base.

    I am reading that when new superhero characters that are non white/male were created, it was hard to market. Therefore the only way to get those stories out is to change established characters.

    But if none of the diverse fan base supports new multicultural characters, what part of the diverse fan base wants old characters "becoming" multicultural? If having female/(whatever race) characters is so desired, then where are the purchases proving it? Is it because a new character with these traits don't make enough of a statement? Aren't as newsworthy? No animosity meant, I truly want opinions.

    If it matters, I am a Hispanic male.

    Wonderful discussion to be had and great topic paintsville.
    I would say this, when a new Hero is created it has a less than 50% chance at making the main stream. When a minority Hero is created, it has even less chance of making the main stream becuase it is already targeting a smaller audiance. Even if the one minority group loves the new character and buys the comics what does the majority due, and what about the other minorities? The rest of the population has to jump on board to make the character stick.

    So let's take a look at the alternative with bringing putting a minority into a established main stream role specificly Captain America. First marvel has choosen a hero who is by all accounts mortal. So instead of creating an alternate story they just kill off the existing Captain America for an origins story. They are then able to elevate a minority Hero to take his place. So now you have an avid fan base willing already absorbed into a character and the character now just happens to be a minority. The new Captain America can even be very similar to the old one with some small tweeks to personality and BAM main stream minority Hero.

    Same thing can be said for the new Female Thor. Whomever can lift Mjölnir will have the power of Thor. So why can't a female be the right person to weild the hammer? This alows Marvel to create a very strong female character, that does not have to start from the ground up.

    Think of a company who wants to show more diversity in its senior leadership. The have to recruite, hire and groom someone to take that role. Here is the difference in comics. If they want to show more diversity at the top instead of creating, building, and getting the fans behind a minority character they just change someone at the top and make themselves diverse.

    My final though is that I think Marvel fees it has failed too many times to build the type of diversity they want by building a new character from the bottom so they decided to change at the top instead.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    I am reading that changes to established characters (Black Cap, Female Thor, Hispanic Spider-Man) are created for a diverse fan base.
    Not exactly. The black/Hispanic Spider-Man was created by a writer who wanted a person of colour for Spider-Man, not a diverse fan base. The Thor and Captain America stories are a short run that will return to normal in short order, and will make no long term difference in the character or the readership.
  • LidolasLidolas Posts: 500
    What I don't get is the view that Marvel re-creating heroes, "Female Thor" "Black Spider-Man" or "Muslim Ms. Marvel", is for those specific demographics. I'm a white male, I'll read any of those stories. Comic writers and publishers are trying to get more readers in general, regardless of race, gender, religion, etc. Changing up known, well-established heroes in anyway creates an interest. I think if they go to replace Wolverine now that he's dead, with similar powers or different, they could go with another white male, and I'd be as interested as I would be as if it was a 1/2 kree 1/2 skrull monster. Just make it a good story, and I'm in.
  • Square wrote:
    I am reading that changes to established characters (Black Cap, Female Thor, Hispanic Spider-Man) are created for a diverse fan base.
    Not exactly. The black/Hispanic Spider-Man was created by a writer who wanted a person of colour for Spider-Man, not a diverse fan base. The Thor and Captain America stories are a short run that will return to normal in short order, and will make no long term difference in the character or the readership.

    That sucks to hear, I actually enjoy BoobThor
  • whitecat31whitecat31 Posts: 570 Critical Contributor
    Marvel owns the rights to Thor. icon_e_biggrin.gif
    Disney owns the rights to Marvel. icon_cool.gif
    Thor is the direct descent of a God King. icon_razz.gif
    Thor is now a Disney Princess. icon_idea.gif
  • _RiO__RiO_ Age Unconfirmed Posts: 1,047 Chairperson of the Boards
    whitecat31 wrote:
    Marvel owns the rights to Thor. icon_e_biggrin.gif
    Disney owns the rights to Marvel. icon_cool.gif
    Thor is the direct descent of a God King. icon_razz.gif
    Thor is now a Disney Princess. icon_idea.gif

    We don't know if the female that took up Mjolnir is actually of royal descent.
    We know Thor Odinson, a.k.a. the original Thor, is. But he's hardly a princess. icon_e_wink.gif
    DayvBang wrote:
    Well, Mjolnir still can't be in two places at once.

    Either of them should be able to be paired up with Beta Ray Bill wielding Stormbreaker, though, or I'd be mad. Assuming they ever add BRB, which would be awesome.

    Thor, found unworthy, is now using Thorr's Mjolnir; the one from his evil multiverse alternate with the altered incantation that grants power to those unworthy.
    So yeah; you can have atleast two instances of Mjolnir flying around.

    (Oh; and it would be criminal if Beta Ray Bill were not added to the game, now that recent characters have gone cosmic...)
  • lokiagentofhotnesslokiagentofhotness Age Unconfirmed Posts: 192 Tile Toppler
    _RiO_ wrote:
    We don't know if the female that took up Mjolnir is actually of royal descent.
    We know Thor Odinson, a.k.a. the original Thor, is. But he's hardly a princess. icon_e_wink.gif

    You're wrong. Thor Odinson is totally a Disney Princess.

    Have you seen his hair?
Sign In or Register to comment.