Apparently There is an uproar over an incident in a Spiderman comic in which Chameleon passes himself off as Peter Parker and snogs (you dont get to see it) Parker's 'girl friend' out of revenge.
Apparently the way Marvel handled it and the Complaints is really irritating folks.
Snogs or shags?
As someone who has 10 and 7 yr old comic readers, I think Marvel has added alot of useless gratuity.
I don't know the particulars of that book but my boys were all into the dark wolverine and weapon x after the media blitz from X-men origins, and after reading the first one I had to pull the plug
It could have been done without the cheesy sexual references. I'm sure there are sweaty fanboys out there loving every minute, but it's a freakin comic! How does one try and raise a couple little guys with sufficient nerdery if mainstream comics are all going R-rated?
estupido
|
As an adult I look and say, "Well that is how a sicko villian could go about it.", as a father of a 7 yr old I wish for the comics I read when I was a kid. You know the ones, where the hero was a Hero, and the villians didn't all hafta be psycopathic murderers and serial rapist. I mean what the hell is going on when you have people getting dismembered, raped, and murdered in each issue? I have a helluva time finding issues I'll let my kid read. Gives me another reason to wish I still had all my old comics.
|
In my opinion, the whole "flawed superhero" concept has been taken to too many extremes. Yes, it was revolutionary in 1969, but now, it just makes the "hero" seem like a whiny wimp. We need more heroes like Captain America, or even Hellboy, who are morally unambiguous and self-assured. Even in its formative years, Spider-Man read like a teen drama injected with superhero juice, and it does not surprise me in the least that it's been taken to the extreme of "Chameleon f$@!ed my girlfriend - woe is me - I'm going to cut my wrists and then go kick some ass."
The cycle of degradation that Marvel started with the "replacement of Mary-Jane Watson with a water-based clone" series has, in my opinion, been completed with both the Disney takeover and the recent succession of bad writers (Joe Quesada, I'm looking at you). It kind of makes me sad as a sequential arts student that some of the more respected titles are cheapening themselves.
As an adult I look and say, "Well that is how a sicko villian could go about it.", as a father of a 7 yr old I wish for the comics I read when I was a kid. You know the ones, where the hero was a Hero, and the villians didn't all hafta be psycopathic murderers and serial rapist.
lol somehow I think you must be so much older than me then, because the comics I grew up with were already whacked, what with with The Killing Joke, Sue Richards' infidelities and well, let's just say this wasn't the first time someone grabs a hold of MJ (in fact, if I remember right that was the very first thing Venom did back in the 80's), and let's not even get into McFarlane's stories.
Snogs? is that what they call it these days; I could not imagine that sounding good to a girl; hey; how about a little wine, get close and passionate and SNOG the night away. lol
Nice to hear the writers are using the Greek model of offstage incidance; wonder why the uproar; think kids dont know people get raped or other bad things happen; sheesh. No wonder kids of every generation think adults are out of touch.
Just remember: we live in an age of reprints.
I collected the first three Essential Spider-Man volumes. I read them all in their entirety to my little girl, and she loved them so much, she just asked me to start the series over again.
I haven't read any CURRENT issues of any Marvel title in years and years. And from what you're saying in this thread (and others on this site), I'm glad I haven't. Sue Richards was unfaithful?!? I don't even want to know!
Ok I have been a comic reader since I was 4 yrs old and I grew up reading Wonder Woman and The Savage Sword of Conan along with Vampirella, teen titans and a lot of others.
I understand and support a parents right to limit a child’s exposure to material they find offensive(lord knows more parents need to take such an interest)but I happen to agree with the direction the comics are taking in engaging younger readers, NOT CHILDREN!!, in quasi-adult subject matter.
I agree that no child such as a 6-11 yr old needs to see in their comics rape, revenge killings (however noble the hero justifies it) or other questionable content but I think certain stories such as anti drug messages from power pack, teen titans, cloak and dagger, etc. can help kids understand the dangers of that type of behavior better and hopefully ask their parents or older siblings questions. Maybe I've watched way too many freaking after school specials but that is the hope. Having a "hero" such as speedy/red arrow/side-kick to bow boy whatever he calls himself talk to another hero about how he had all this pressure to be this and that and how drugs seemed like the answer but weren’t and all the pain he inflicted to himself and others while addicted may help some kid think twice for that one precious split second to not try drugs.
On a more personal note even as a adult I enjoy comics now and wish the writers of yesterday had the abilty,courage,insight whatever you want to call it to present the heroes of today back then.
I like the young avengers and having two gay heroes that dont make a big deal outta being gay is a positive message for eveyone. They arnt "gay" heores their just two heroes that happen to be gay and in love with each other. I think wiccan and hulkling are long overdue in the comic world as opposed to the rushed and irrelavant feel of making northstar gay, having him die of aids,come back because only his human half died and then having him be the only gay hero in the entire marvelverse.
I am starting to ramble so I will sum up by saying that while I support age restricted content for children the comics of today wont sell if all superman does is leap over tall buildings in a single bound.
Just remember: we live in an age of reprints.
I collected the first three Essential Spider-Man volumes. I read them all in their entirety to my little girl, and she loved them so much, she just asked me to start the series over again.
I haven't read any CURRENT issues of any Marvel title in years and years. And from what you're saying in this thread (and others on this site), I'm glad I haven't. Sue Richards was unfaithful?!? I don't even want to know!
If I remember correctly, Sue has been unfaithful since day one. (I think she fawned over Spiderman at the first meeting ..."He's dreamy." and she went back and forth with Namor over and over over the early years.
I haven;t read any of the recent stuff. I hate the DC/ Marvel anuual "Let's mess up the entire universe massive crossover" thing. Civil War, House of M, Secret Invasion, Final Crisis, ugh! How about we get back to writing good stories?
I think both major publishers have jumped the shark so many times, that its not worth sifting through the books to find the one or two good stories each year...
|
|
Snogs? is that what they call it these days; I could not imagine that sounding good to a girl; hey; how about a little wine, get close and passionate and SNOG the night away. lol
Nice to hear the writers are using the Greek model of offstage incidance; wonder why the uproar; think kids dont know people get raped or other bad things happen; sheesh. No wonder kids of every generation think adults are out of touch.
Snog actually refers to Smoochies...Shag is sex but I thought Shag too mature Rated for this board...Guess I was wrong.
I promise to detail gratuitous sex and violence and let the Post monster do the censor work.
|
|
Ok I have been a comic reader since I was 4 yrs old and I grew up reading Wonder Woman and The Savage Sword of Conan along with Vampirella, teen titans and a lot of others.
I hear Wonder Woman has gone 'Bondage Woman'. That will cut its availability to the kiddies...oi! stay away from my Savage Sword of Conan!
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Wonder Woman was always 'bondage woman' I always thought she made a better 'example' than the Marquis DeSade, Venus in Furs or the Story of O.
So it takes force or threat of force? I'm sure Melanie and Kara Killgrave, and Jessica Jones feel much better about that.
I think DC's Doctor Light is the poster child for the "Let's show how evil we are by raping characters" meme.
I don't know if the non-consentual sex on Dick Grayson caused an outcry.
Edit: Steven, Northstar always was gay and initially was much like Hulkling and Wiccan (and Karolina Dean and Xavin for that matter).
Like Victoria Montessi it never bugged me about who the characters slept with (willingly!) as long as it didn't become their defining chararistic. I was upset when Northstar initially joined the X-men just because it seemed to be a quota 'We need a gay mutant. Well Northstar's in limbo...' which struck me as being against everything Xavier's dream stood for.
All this censorship. Yeah, I get it. Seven years old, shouldn't learn about rape, yadda yadda.
Face it, your kids know so much more today than you ever did at their age. It's the internet, yes, but it's far more than that. It's the news blaring violence into every living room at 7 PM. It's no job opportunities. It's poverty, drugs, crime. It's budget cuts at school. Repressive laws and harsh punishments. It's a world situation where every sane person has a hard time seeing a flicker of hope for the future. It's global climate change. It's callous companies committing mass murder on animals every day. Shallow plastic surgery beauty is prettier than a heartfelt smile. And so on. You know this. Your kids know this.
When there is a dangerous situation, there are two strategies: Learn how to deal with it, or pretend it doesn't exist. Only the first of these lets you survive the danger.
Another fact you need to accept, to understand: Every work of fiction that ever struck a chord with anyone did so because it reflected a situation the reader could identify with. This means that if a child sees a bleak, hopeless world around him, the comic he wants to read again probably shows another bleak, equally hopeless world.
And yes, it's okay for you not to like me saying it. Suck it up.
As a parent, one has every right to monitor and even censor what their child observes. However, this is hardly the first time touchy subjects have come up in a comic book storyline. Just as my mother(overly) was, you have to keep an eye on what your kid watches, reads, ingests, and enjoys. Parents have the right to say no, and to a certain amount of public outcry if they feel things have gone too far. That said, they should not be able to censor what others enjoy, create, or publish for an audience that was not meant for their children- or expose their children to something just for the sake of protest(not that I'm saying that's what happened here). I just heard about this now, so I am going to have to do some reasearch and find out just how far things went in the comic, but if things were rather graphic, then I support any parent who wishes to restrict access to that particular book for their child.
If you, as a parent, take the time to share in what your kids do, they will come to you whenever something strikes them as odd. That is the best protection you'll get, as regarding what your kids see, right there. If you don't do this, but rely on censorship and forbidding information for your kids, they certainly won't be stupid enough to tell you if they find something strange. Instead, they'll find other avenues to discuss what they found or have to deal with, leaving you out of their lives.
Parents today tend to do this, then complain that there is too much sex and violence in what kids read. Way to go!
According to writer Fred Van Lente:
"My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn’t quite the same thing."
I think Mr. Van Lente needs to do some community service at a women's rape councelling center. Maybe that'll get it through his f*ck*ng head.
Edit: Steven, Northstar always was gay and initially was much like Hulkling and Wiccan (and Karolina Dean and Xavin for that matter).
Sigh. Why they have to break up Karolina and Xavin anyway?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Sigh. Why they have to break up Karolina and Xavin anyway?
I know. Especially with the writing potential for using shapeshifters as a main character. I mean look at Nightcrawlers intended origin.
I know. Especially with the writing potential for using shapeshifters as a main character. I mean look at Nightcrawlers intended origin.
Yeah, I remember that. But only fringe characters or supporting cast can get anywhere remotely near "Teh Ghey."
According to writer Fred Van Lente
"My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn’t quite the same thing."
Has this man never heard of Rohypnol? Or at least a legal dictionary?
Main Entry: rape
Function: noun
: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconsciousness, or deception —see also STATUTORY RAPE
Emphasis mine.
Ok I have been a comic reader since I was 4 yrs old and I grew up reading Wonder Woman and The Savage Sword of Conan along with Vampirella, teen titans and a lot of others.
Ooooh Savage Sword of Conan, another comic of my childhood... =D
And gah! So Wonder Woman was created by a -psychologist-!? And it was all ON PURPOSE!? O_O
According to writer Fred Van Lente
"My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn’t quite the same thing."
I think a lot of people will be disagreeing with his definition of rape. And I'm one of them.
|
|
I understand and can enjoy story lines geared more towards adult subject matter. I stand by my statement that I miss the heroes of my youth, the writers of today continue to push the envelope with each passing year. The villians become more depraved, the heroes more violent and less deserving of the title, at least IMO. This isn't about censorship to me, it's about what the hell is wrong when we as a society demand slaughter and sex to be entertained? Violence and sexual inuendo have always been a pert of comics as long as I can remember... but don't we all remember when Wolverine was "Hardcore", now his old antics seem downright "Mr Rogers" compared to todays writings. They market heavily towards kids, don't give me this crap about it being for teens and young adults, go down the freaking toy isle and take a look, then write stories for adults. I'm rambling I know, but no I don't think I should sit down with my 7 yr old and discuss rape, anyone who tries to tell me different can kiss my Irish butt.
According to writer Fred Van Lente
"My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn’t quite the same thing."
If consent is gained by deception, then it's not consent, thus, by definition, it's rape. In all honesty, this makes me want to punch Lente. Good thing I'll probably never meet the guy.
As for you people calling for the "morally unambiguous" heros of "yesteryear" or whatever, I just want to bring up that honestly, we don't need perfection to judge ourselves against, and it is our "heroes" that we judge ourselves on, at least on a cultural scale. Not EVERYONE judges themselves against the heroes, but then again, not EVERY girl judges herself based on the "perfect" standard of beauty that the media has set, but more then enough find themselves depressed and destroying themselves because they don't measure up.
I think we need to keep heroes with flaws, because we all have flaws. What makes them heroes isn't that they don't question themselves, or that they never screw up. What makes them heroes is that they do their best, and they right themselves as best they can.
It's why I can't stand the Captain, and why I love Spidey.
Now that censorship thing, screw that.
1) Comics aren't JUST for kids, and the adult readers definitely appreciate adult content and mature subject matter. It's the kind of stuff we deal with in our lives, it's the kind of stuff that matters to us, and when used right, makes for a darn good story. Sure, you see plenty of comic related toys in the toy aisle of a store, but if you look closely, it actually, at least these days, toys that tie into the MOVIES. I don't see many children reading comics these days, they just watch the movies and the cartoons. Have you noticed that most of the "toys" that are directly tied to comics these days are the really expensive display toys that adults and teens get to decorate their rooms and never remove it from the packaging?
2) It is NOT up to the media, or anyone else, to shelter your kids from the "bad things." That's up to the parent. If you're that worried about what your kid reads in a comic, then read it yourself. Besides, (and I'm saying this as NOT a parent, so my perspective is different at this point in my life then it may be a few years down the road if/when I have my own little one) these things exist in the world, and to shelter your child from it is to doom them to ignorance. Think a 7 year old doesn't need to know about rape? Ever heard of a pedophile? What do you think a pedophile does to kids? Play patty-cake? You can talk to your kids about these things in a way that they can understand, and will learn from, instead of just keeping them in the dark and hoping that the situation will never come up for them.
That's just my perspective and my two cents.
I understand and can enjoy story lines geared more towards adult subject matter. I stand by my statement that I miss the heroes of my youth, the writers of today continue to push the envelope with each passing year. The villians become more depraved, the heroes more violent and less deserving of the title, at least IMO. This isn't about censorship to me, it's about what the hell is wrong when we as a society demand slaughter and sex to be entertained? Violence and sexual inuendo have always been a pert of comics as long as I can remember... but don't we all remember when Wolverine was "Hardcore", now his old antics seem downright "Mr Rogers" compared to todays writings. They market heavily towards kids, don't give me this crap about it being for teens and young adults, go down the freaking toy isle and take a look, then write stories for adults. I'm rambling I know, but no I don't think I should sit down with my 7 yr old and discuss rape, anyone who tries to tell me different can kiss my Irish butt.
Take heart from Mac Boyce's earlier post. Marvel- and indeed, almost all of the mainstream comic book companies- are taking pains to separate their youth line from their more graphic line. This is nothing new- I would not have read Preacher or Sandman as a 7 year old, for example, nor would I suggest it to my little nephew today. In both cases, I would have picked up an issue of Superman, or nowadays, Tiny Titans.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Moorluck,
I remember where Wolverine stared down the one guy in the Dark Phoenix saga. That's also why I liked Wolverine. Logan was a killing machine, but he didn't need to gut everything that moved when he could stare them down. He also was afraid of his berserker rages, knowing they gave him an edge, but was afraid of not coming back.
|
|
According to writer Fred Van Lente
"My understanding of the definition of rape is that it requires force or the threat of force, so no. Using deception to trick someone into granting consent isn’t quite the same thing."
Obviously not up on that whole coersion by confusion, pharmacology, or psychological manipulation thingy...huh!
Rape
Rape is the offence of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman without her consent, either -
(i) by by force or fear of bodily harm;
(ii) by fraud [no real consent - rather submission due to the belief a medical operation is occuring];
(iii)by personation of her husband[1];
(iv) when she is asleep or unconcious, or so imbecile[2] as to be unable to understand the nature of the act, or so young as to be incapable of understanding its nature.
[1]-In an age where sexual relations occur outside marriage, rape would extend to passing oneself off as anyone the victim is likely to have sex with willingly.
"But I thought you were your twin brother Bart!"
"You didnt Ask and I didnt care!"- qualifies.
[2]-This would extend to include mental/physical incapacitation by pharmacopia and/or alcohol.
|
|
2) It is NOT up to the media, or anyone else, to shelter your kids from the "bad things." That's up to the parent. If you're that worried about what your kid reads in a comic, then read it yourself. Besides, (and I'm saying this as NOT a parent, so my perspective is different at this point in my life then it may be a few years down the road if/when I have my own little one) these things exist in the world, and to shelter your child from it is to doom them to ignorance. Think a 7 year old doesn't need to know about rape? Ever heard of a pedophile? What do you think a pedophile does to kids? Play patty-cake? You can talk to your kids about these things in a way that they can understand, and will learn from, instead of just keeping them in the dark and hoping that the situation will never come up for them.
You seem to have hit the nail on the head, or at least very close.
When I was a kid, my parents didn't do so well on the whole "talking to their only son" thing very well. I was really naive and sheltered until about the age of fourteen, at which point I was slapped in the face with a few big pieces or sopping wet reality. Taking this in mind has shaped my personal viewpoint on the whole thing:
The job of a parent is not to shelter, but to direct. Take your ten-year-old to see Inglourious Basterds (to reference another discussion), just make sure to discuss it with him afterwards. Tell him that yeah, the Nazis were really bad guys, but so were the mentally damaged Tarantino-spawn that were sent to hunt them down, and that kind of violence is NOT alright (cue hypocrisy on the part of Shiny). If you shelter a child, all you're doing is setting the kid up for a bigger dose of damage later on.
|
|
My main beef with the whole "ZOMG RAPE IN SPIDERMAN!!1one" deal is not the actual "ZOMG RAPE" part, per se, but the fact that it's in the Spider-man comic. Graphic subjects like rape, murder, etc, are better handled by comic series with a more serious bent (Hellboy, Sandman, Hellblazer, Spawn...). It just doesn't fit into a comic like Spider-man, not because it's graphic, but because it's unnecessary. Spidey's whole shtick is about being emo, having identity crises, and coming up with snappy one-liners in the heat of battle. You don't need quote-unquote mature themes in this type of story.
My main beef with the whole "ZOMG RAPE IN SPIDERMAN!!1one" deal is not the actual "ZOMG RAPE" part, per se, but the fact that it's in the Spider-man comic. Graphic subjects like rape, murder, etc, are better handled by comic series with a more serious bent (Hellboy, Sandman, Hellblazer, Spawn...). It just doesn't fit into a comic like Spider-man, not because it's graphic, but because it's unnecessary. Spidey's whole shtick is about being emo, having identity crises, and coming up with snappy one-liners in the heat of battle. You don't need quote-unquote mature themes in this type of story.
I'll have to disagree with you here. I completely get where your coming from, and I'm not saying your wrong, but for me, Spiderman was the only comic that ever really clicked with me, and thus the only comic I ever read. Granted I haven't read one in YEARS, but personally, I'm kinda glad it's "growing up" with me.
Really, the difference is just in the reason that you or I read that particular comic.
The job of a parent is not to shelter, but to direct. Take your ten-year-old to see Inglourious Basterds (to reference another discussion), just make sure to discuss it with him afterwards. Tell him that yeah, the Nazis were really bad guys, but so were the mentally damaged Tarantino-spawn that were sent to hunt them down, and that kind of violence is NOT alright (cue hypocrisy on the part of Shiny). If you shelter a child, all you're doing is setting the kid up for a bigger dose of damage later on.
I have to respectfully disagree. I think that it's bad to overshelter kids and treat them like they're incapable of understanding. However, you also have to take into account where the kid is developmentally speaking and not give them more than they can process. I have a six year old. Right now he understands good guys and bad guys. Moral grey areas are still out of his depth. In the case of a ten year old, I still probably wouldn't take them to see Inglorious Basterds. I would however likely do what my dad did. He always picked movies for me when I was growing up that pushed the envelope but in ways that didn't glorify pointless violence. He once rented The Mission for me for a slumber party. Awesome movie, btw. The point is that it's a fine line, one that's easy to screw up, and the whole requires a big dose of compassion and honesty.
If I remember correctly, it was off-stage, not graphic in any way. Hey, there goes most of the Parental Indignation of Doom (tm), doesn't it?
If a seven year old reads that, most likely, he or she won't grasp it. Kids are good that way - they pick up on the things they are ready to deal with.
Oh, and "unnecessary"... that is the one word that has most often been used when someone is trying to push for censorship on a grand scale. Fact is: It's not up to you. It's up to the writer of the story, and you don't get to influence that one way or another.
Finally: Spider-Man is a comic about a guy who (until recently) was married, who tries to get a job to work and constantly failing, who has trouble with his media image, who lost a child, who has had quite a few friends murdered... and yet feels a sense of responsibility to the world. Yes, I know, it's also about cool villains, but seriously, there must be comics that a seven year old can relate better to.
I have to respectfully disagree. I think that it's bad to overshelter kids and treat them like they're incapable of understanding. However, you also have to take into account where the kid is developmentally speaking and not give them more than they can process. I have a six year old. Right now he understands good guys and bad guys. Moral grey areas are still out of his depth. In the case of a ten year old, I still probably wouldn't take them to see Inglorious Basterds. I would however likely do what my dad did. He always picked movies for me when I was growing up that pushed the envelope but in ways that didn't glorify pointless violence. He once rented The Mission for me for a slumber party. Awesome movie, btw. The point is that it's a fine line, one that's easy to screw up, and the whole requires a big dose of compassion and honesty.The job of a parent is not to shelter, but to direct. Take your ten-year-old to see Inglourious Basterds (to reference another discussion), just make sure to discuss it with him afterwards. Tell him that yeah, the Nazis were really bad guys, but so were the mentally damaged Tarantino-spawn that were sent to hunt them down, and that kind of violence is NOT alright (cue hypocrisy on the part of Shiny). If you shelter a child, all you're doing is setting the kid up for a bigger dose of damage later on.
So you agree with his point, but not his specific example, or maybe just not the level that he would take it to?
Understandable, and I kinda agree, though I think kids understand more then most of us adults give them credit for.
So you agree with his point, but not his specific example, or maybe just not the level that he would take it to?
Understandable, and I kinda agree, though I think kids understand more then most of us adults give them credit for.
Yep, you hit the nail on the head there. And yes, kids understand a lot more than people think. And the worst thing you can ever do is talk down to them. But sometimes you do have to give them stuff in small chunks. Hell, sometimes I still have to give me stuff in small chunks. :) The human mind can only take so much trauma before shutting down. And a lot of stuff that an adult wouldn't think of as traumatic is life-altering for a kid.
|
|
If I remember correctly, it was off-stage, not graphic in any way. Hey, there goes most of the Parental Indignation of Doom (tm), doesn't it?
OK, cool. By the way people were hyping it up, I had the impression it was otherwise.
If a seven year old reads that, most likely, he or she won't grasp it. Kids are good that way - they pick up on the things they are ready to deal with.
Oh, and "unnecessary"... that is the one word that has most often been used when someone is trying to push for censorship on a grand scale. Fact is: It's not up to you. It's up to the writer of the story, and you don't get to influence that one way or another.
Very good to hear, especially nowadays. I'm just starting in on a BFA in sequential art, and I definitely feel that it's all about the story. My previous comments about graphic scenes in Spider-man being "unnecessary" were meant as the scenes being superfluous and tacked on for shock value, rather than to advance the story.
Finally: Spider-Man is a comic about a guy who (until recently) was married, who tries to get a job to work and constantly failing, who has trouble with his media image, who lost a child, who has had quite a few friends murdered... and yet feels a sense of responsibility to the world. Yes, I know, it's also about cool villains, but seriously, there must be comics that a seven year old can relate better to.
Like Captain America. Well... the *old* Captain America.
Like Captain America. Well... the *old* Captain America.Why does Captain America get such short shrift from people nowadays? I actually read the title in the 70s, and it was largely preoccupied with two things: Racism (through his partnership with the Falcon, largely), and some fairly serious commentary on things like Vietnam, 'patriotism' being something that isn't contained in a bumpersticker, etc. Then in the 80's it was practically subversive in it's ongoing critique of Reaganism. It wasn't the kind of mindless apple-pie-fest that a title like Superman was, yet it seems to have this undeserved reputation.
Before that, hell, he was trapped in an iceberg since WWII, and he wasn't like that in the 60's as far as I know, either, so is it just that people assume the character was this way because of the name?
Eh, I got that impression when I glanced through a few issues. Not really a fair chance, but do people give all media a fair chance most of the time? I suspect not really.
|
|
What I meant by the *old* Captain America is both the Captain America of the 1930s - 1950s (he took on Adolf Hitler before the U.S. even entered the war) and the late 1990s-2000s pre-death Captain America. This Captain America stood for all of the things Superman stated that he stood for: truth, justice, and the American way. He took on both globe-threatening human threats (re: Hitler) and homegrown ones. For years, he was the moral compass of the Avengers.
And then, in a heart-wrenching yet moronic storyline, he was assassinated by a brainwashed ally. Enter Captain America II.
The mantle of Captain America was taken on by Bucky, the Winter Soldier (a former brainwashed Soviet agent and former sidekick of the Captain). I believe that this choice was made by Marvel due to Bucky's *edgier*, more volatile nature. The "new" Captain America no longer uses his shield alone to defend others; he carries a Colt .45 and a Rambo-esque combat knife. His uniform is black from the waist down, and he F+*!ING KILLS PEOPLE. Personally, I believe that, whether intentionally or not, the writers at Marvel crafted a Captain America of the new United States, an America in which big government rules, and the only rules are shoot first, ask questions later.
The human mind can only take so much trauma before shutting down. And a lot of stuff that an adult wouldn't think of as traumatic is life-altering for a kid.Just for curiosity's sake, what sorts of things were you thinking of?
Finding out Santa Claus is made up.
I hate to admit it, but that tore me up when I found out.
|
If I remember correctly, Sue has been unfaithful since day one. (I think she fawned over Spiderman at the first meeting ..."He's dreamy." and she went back and forth with Namor over and over over the early years.
Does it count as 'unfaithful' to notice that other people are hot? 'Cause that seems like a fairly stalker-y standard to hold someone to... "OMG! Sue noticed that Spider-man is more buff than I am. That harlot!"
On the other hand, even if Sue has slept with someone other than Reed in her life, it's too little too late. She should have divorced his butt after he sent super-villain 'cape-killers' to arrest her, Johnny and Ben, kidnapped their kids, made a clone of Thor that murdered a fellow Avenger and sent SHIELD agents to fire explosive missiles into apartment buildings full of civilians in an attempt to 'arrest' the Runaways and Young Avengers.
Reed's finally catching up with Von Doom on the 'insane control-freak' meter. (Although Von Doom just pushed ahead by doing the most out-of-character thing ever, callously destroying Latveria, which he's been demonstrably willing to *die* to protect in the past.)
But you know the Marvel Universe is in trouble when the 'official' Avengers consist of the Green Goblin-pretending-to-be-Iron Man, Moonstone-pretending-to-be-Ms Marvel, Bullseye-pretending-to-be-Hawkeye and *Venom*-(yanno, that dude who used to *eat people?*)pretending-to-be-Spider Man. Oh, and there's some nobody pretending to be Wolverine, because, insanely, the real Wolverine wasn't psycho enough for this team...