| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Granted, I'm no Green Lantern expert, but from what little I DO know "has his personality/background constantly changed and reversed in some drastic hope to make them interesting" sounds just likeNot sure how much of that is sarcasm.Not much at all... Huge Hal fan here ;)
The others have very little going for them, and have their personalities/backgrounds constantly changed and reversed in some drastic hope to make them interesting.
ParralaxHal.It sounds like every comic character that's existed for more than a few years.
He has a point, though. If the other Green Lanterns had been successful, they would still be there.
"Successful" and "interesting" are two different values.
And the counterpoint is, of course, Ms. Marvel Kamala Khan.*rolls eyes*
Why create interesting, unique characters when you can take the easy route and just slap an existing name into another character and say it's "new", huh? It's particularly annoying when they want to paint the new character as a better version of the original...
Stupid gimmicky move... All this does is doom the new character to eventually be replaced by the original or stay forever a "second class" hero, forever under the shadow of its predecessor.
Not really the same thing. Carol Danvers is now Captain Marvel and Kamala Khan is Ms Marvel. She didn't replace Carol Danvers and has very different powers. Basically an entirely new character. Marvel did it right with that character.
That said, replacing existing heroes with the minority of the day sucks and I'm so over it. Are minorities underrepresented in comic books? Of course they are. Address that by making compelling new characters, not by giving popular existing heroes a gender/race change. At least replacing Cap with Sam Wilson makes sense, they're friends and teammates. Replacing Tony Stark with some random teen or making Jane Foster into Thor is just pandering of the worst kind.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That said, replacing existing heroes with the minority of the day sucks and I'm so over it. Are minorities underrepresented in comic books? Of course they are. Address that by making compelling new characters, not by giving popular existing heroes a gender/race change. At least replacing Cap with Sam Wilson makes sense, they're friends and teammates. Replacing Tony Stark with some random teen or making Jane Foster into Thor is just pandering of the worst kind.
To paraphrase from a different thread... 'pandering' is what folks who have been the 'accepted norm' say when a 'different take' is given on a character.
Arguably, Marvel has been 'pandering' to white males for a *long* time, despite their efforts to 'branch out'.
I haven't seen a lot of the Jane Foster Thor run, but the small bit I did see made it amazingly appropriate.
The bit I saw -- someone who might be on a trajectory to Hel is taking the chance they've been given to maybe, just maybe die a warrior's death and get to Valhalla -- that's intense stuff.
And we don't necessarily *know* it's a 'random teen'. Given how Stark's brain works, either he or someone he knows could have set the whole thing up as a test, to see if *anyone in particular* would make the connections.
It's also very similar to x-23 becoming the new wolverine.
I'm not a big fan of that either, but at least X-23 is an already established character in the Marvel Universe so it makes some sense. This replacing Tony Stark with some random teenager business is a total fiasco. Rhodey should be his successor, or Pepper Potts.
And the counterpoint is, of course, Ms. Marvel Kamala Khan.*rolls eyes*
Why create interesting, unique characters when you can take the easy route and just slap an existing name into another character and say it's "new", huh? It's particularly annoying when they want to paint the new character as a better version of the original...
Stupid gimmicky move... All this does is doom the new character to eventually be replaced by the original or stay forever a "second class" hero, forever under the shadow of its predecessor.
Not really the same thing. Carol Danvers is now Captain Marvel and Kamala Khan is Ms Marvel. She didn't replace Carol Danvers and has very different powers. Basically an entirely new character. Marvel did it right with that character.
That said, replacing existing heroes with the minority of the day sucks and I'm so over it. Are minorities underrepresented in comic books? Of course they are. Address that by making compelling new characters, not by giving popular existing heroes a gender/race change. At least replacing Cap with Sam Wilson makes sense, they're friends and teammates. Replacing Tony Stark with some random teen or making Jane Foster into Thor is just pandering of the worst kind.
How the hell is Jane Foster anymore pandering than Sam Wilson? She's a long established supporting character - originally girlfriend and brought back more recently in a less stereotypical role. Goes back long before either Sam Wilson or Rhodey. And the hammer bestowing Thor's powers is also long established. If that's a gimmick it goes way back.
And, more importantly, it's a good story. That's all I really care about, though I do like seeing comic's gender and race imbalance adjusted a bit. If they have to resort to occasional gimmicks to draw attention (and sales) to the new characters, that's fine by me. Better than using the same kind of gimmicks to draw sales to the latest mega...
I consider turning Jane Foster into Thor pandering because unlike Sam Wilson, she was never a super hero. Sam Wilson can step in as Cap because he has a ton of experience as a super hero and worked with Cap for a very long time, so he knows how Cap operates. Jane Foster has no such experience.
.... it's pandering to turn someone who with no superhero experience into a superhero, but it's not pandering to turn someone who already is a superhero into a superhero because they already have experience as a superhero.
Dafuq did I just read?
Think of it as if you were interviewing people for a job. If you were hiring someone to be the new Captain America, wouldn't hiring an existing superhero who was Cap's partner for many years make sense? That's Sam Wilson, him stepping into the Cap role makes sense.
Same with Wolverine, X-23 is an experienced superhero and went through the Weapon X program as well, so "hiring" her to be Wolverine makes sense.
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.
Same with Iron Man. Possibly the most powerful weapon in the world, and it gets handed over to a teenager? Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man? I wouldn't, makes no sense.
That's why I consider the latter two examples pandering and the first two not. The first two make sense in the context of that universe, the latter two don't.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
.... it's pandering to turn someone who with no superhero experience into a superhero, but it's not pandering to turn someone who already is a superhero into a superhero because they already have experience as a superhero.
Dafuq did I just read?
Think of it as if you were interviewing people for a job. If you were hiring someone to be the new Captain America, wouldn't hiring an existing superhero who was Cap's partner for many years make sense? That's Sam Wilson, him stepping into the Cap role makes sense.
Same with Wolverine, X-23 is an experienced superhero and went through the Weapon X program as well, so "hiring" her to be Wolverine makes sense.
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.
Same with Iron Man. Possibly the most powerful weapon in the world, and it gets handed over to a teenager? Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man? I wouldn't, makes no sense.
That's why I consider the latter two examples pandering and the first two not. The first two make sense in the context of that universe, the latter two don't.
-_-
That's one of the stupidest analogies I've read.
Spiderman wasn't a superhero before he was a superhero, the vast majority aren't.
Saying you have to be a superhero in order to inherit the mantle of a previous superhero is absurd, especially since we're talking about, yaknow, SUPERHEROES.
Tony Stark became Iron Man by building a suit (IN A MOUNTAIN WITH SCRAPS) and started doing heroic stuff. Riri becomes Iron (Wo)Man by building a suit (IN A DORM ROOM) and starts doing heroic stuff.
"Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man?"
More likely than most since she probably knows what the f&$# she's doing.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hell, most superheroes stumbled into it one way or the other. Is Peter Parker, nerdy high school wimp, someone you would have selected for the Spider-Man job, way back when?
That's a fairly common trope, the unexpected hero, where a much more on-the-page 'appropriate' hero (such as Boromir) turns out to not be as suited to the role as someone who seems completely out of their depth (such as Frodo) and unlikely in the role of hero. The heart of the character ends up being more relevant to their suitability than any amount of experience or field-competence or blood legacy. Whether or not that's at all relevant to the real world (where we'd rather have the old experienced person doing our heart surgery than a plucky kid with a lot of heart), it's certainly a common enough trope in storytelling, the 'ugly duckling' who turns out to have the hero hidden within.
|
Right now I'd much rather be reading about Miles problems than some one they made up just to fit into a suit.
Tony Stark's successor SHOULD be James Rhodes. End of Story.
Rhodey's been there and done that. He's moved on to his own thing. (And died.) We've already seen that story. At least twice, IIRC.
This is a different story. Maybe it'll be good. Maybe it'll suck.
James Rhodes was never a successor of Iron Man, IMO.
He was simply an employee of Tony Stark who let him wear outdated Iron Man armor.If Tony really considered James a friend, he would have updated the armor.
But Tony only kept the good stuff to himself because, "I am the one and only Iron Man. I will allow no one to become my equal."
Looks like Riri will be Tony's intellectual equal. I hope she surpasses him. I always thought Tony was too arrogant.
|
|
Edit: okay so the post I was responding to was deleted, awakward...
----
So basically for what's being requested as "not-pandering" is to destroy the identity of one tangentially related already existing and established character in order to continue on another one as some sort of parasitic life support instead of keeping both going?
.... it's pandering to turn someone who with no superhero experience into a superhero, but it's not pandering to turn someone who already is a superhero into a superhero because they already have experience as a superhero.
Dafuq did I just read?
Think of it as if you were interviewing people for a job. If you were hiring someone to be the new Captain America, wouldn't hiring an existing superhero who was Cap's partner for many years make sense? That's Sam Wilson, him stepping into the Cap role makes sense.
Same with Wolverine, X-23 is an experienced superhero and went through the Weapon X program as well, so "hiring" her to be Wolverine makes sense.
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.
Same with Iron Man. Possibly the most powerful weapon in the world, and it gets handed over to a teenager? Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man? I wouldn't, makes no sense.
That's why I consider the latter two examples pandering and the first two not. The first two make sense in the context of that universe, the latter two don't.
-_-
That's one of the stupidest analogies I've read.
Spiderman wasn't a superhero before he was a superhero, the vast majority aren't.
Saying you have to be a superhero in order to inherit the mantle of a previous superhero is absurd, especially since we're talking about, yaknow, SUPERHEROES.
Tony Stark became Iron Man by building a suit (IN A MOUNTAIN WITH SCRAPS) and started doing heroic stuff. Riri becomes Iron (Wo)Man by building a suit (IN A DORM ROOM) and starts doing heroic stuff.
"Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man?"
More likely than most since she probably knows what the f$%* she's doing.
It's not stupid, we're talking about completely different things. What you're talking about is an origin story, where something happens to turn a normal person into a superhero; getting bitten by a radioactive spider, being exposed to gamma radiation, etc.
That's entirely different than swapping out an existing hero. When that happens, it should make some sense because presumably those people are being selected to step into a hero's shoes for a reason. Sam Wilson becoming Cap makes sense. X-23 becoming Wolverine makes sense. Both logical choices. Jane Foster as Thor makes no sense. Surely there are many other more kick-ass women that could've taken on that mantle, like Sif maybe?
Rhodey or Pepper taking over as Iron Man would've made sense. The way Marvel chose to go with this doesn't.
|
|
And now the comment is back :3
It's not stupid, we're talking about completely different things.Yep, I'm talking about superheroes and you're talking about job interviews.
You mean like in a ORIGIN STORY?What you're talking about is an origin story, where something happens to turn a normal person into a superhero; getting bitten by a radioactive spider, being exposed to gamma radiation, etc.
That's entirely different than swapping out an existing hero. When that happens, it should make some sense because presumably those people are being selected to step into a hero's shoes for a reason.
Rhodey or Pepper taking over as Iron Man would've made sense. The way Marvel chose to go with this doesn't.
Don't know much about Pepper since I don't read comics that much but you want to continue one at the expense of the other? Why scrap War Machine to put a bandaid on Iron Man when you can have both War Machine and Iron Man?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.
Makes sense for Mjolnir because it's done it twice now.
The first was the original Thor.
I think Tony was passed out and Rhodey had to rise to wear the mantle of a hero he'd never asked to be, THEREBY PROVING HIS TRUE HEROISM!
Thinking about Rhodey as Iron Man, and Heather Hudson as Guardian/Vindicator, I don't mind having a more diverse cast of characters in comics, it just feels gimmicky when the creators choose to introduce a new character instead of working with the huge cast of already existing characters. Watching Tony come to terms with his alcoholism and realize that he wasn't fit to be Iron Man was meaningful to me as a child, as was watching Heather deal with her grief over Mac's death and find meaning in continuing his work; both of those depended on character history far too much to rely on the introduction of a new character.
Not that I've I got a problem with african american female minors as superheroes; for a good portion of the first Mage series, Edsel was the most kickass member of the team.
Edit: Yes, it took me 18 minutes to write that.
Perhaps the ultimate example of the foolishness of the....... it's pandering to turn someone who with no superhero experience into a superhero, but it's not pandering to turn someone who already is a superhero into a superhero because they already have experience as a superhero.
Dafuq did I just read?
Think of it as if you were interviewing people for a job. If you were hiring someone to be the new Captain America, wouldn't hiring an existing superhero who was Cap's partner for many years make sense? That's Sam Wilson, him stepping into the Cap role makes sense.
Same with Wolverine, X-23 is an experienced superhero and went through the Weapon X program as well, so "hiring" her to be Wolverine makes sense.
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.
Same with Iron Man. Possibly the most powerful weapon in the world, and it gets handed over to a teenager? Would you hire a college engineering student to become Iron Man? I wouldn't, makes no sense.
That's why I consider the latter two examples pandering and the first two not. The first two make sense in the context of that universe, the latter two don't.
Except, especially in the Thor case, no one other than the hammer itself, was "hiring" anyone. There was no interview. The hammer chose her, because she was worthy.
We don't know yet the details of how Riri takes over the armor, so it's hard to say to much.Sometimes as well, a good story revolves around an inexperienced person taking up the burden. Even if that isn't someone you'd hire for the job.
Hell, most superheroes stumbled into it one way or the other. Is Peter Parker, nerdy high school wimp, someone you would have selected for the Spider-Man job, way back when? Or Miles, more recently, though I don't know the full story there.
That's a different argument altogether. As I mentioned before, that's an origin story and it makes no sense because it's a product of its time. Back then, none of these stories had to make any sense. Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, Cap, Hulk, none of those origins are plausible.
Someone new stepping into an established hero's shoes should make sense though, because that person is being chosen to take over, and in most cases, that decision to choose a specific individual is made by the original hero or someone who knew him/her well. Steve Rogers wanted Sam Wilson to take over. Not sure about how X-23 became wolverine, but many of the X-Men would've agreed with that choice, as would Logan himself.
Tony Stark choosing a college kid to take over for him makes no sense.
Now, if you were choosing someone to become Thor, and inherit all the considerable power that Thor has, would you really choose a doctor with no previous superhero experience or combat training? Makes no sense.Makes sense for Mjolnir because it's done it twice now.
The first was the original Thor.
Marvel has done alot of weird stuff with Thor's identify overt the years. For a long time, they seemed to forget Donald Blake even existed and Thor didn't have a human alter-ego.
Different line of thought...
If you're Tony Stark, a pivotal figure in not *one* but two 'Civil Wars' between supers, and you want to 'make things right', but you don't want to be *obvious* about it, you're NOT going to bring someone up as an 'understudy', you're NOT going to 'hook them up with everything', you're definitely NOT going to make it easy, either .
So seeing all the prospects out there, just give a slight and mostly-legitimate nudge and suddenly *poof* a star is born.
In addition, the 'last' understudy he had (afaik) was Peter Parker, who while having done some nifty things of his own since that was also someone who *betrayed him*.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, I've been very negative about this, mostly because Iron Man has always been one of my favorite characters. However, I just read an interview with Bendis that has made me see this in a new light.
I didn't know this, but apparently Bendis has two adopted daughters, one is of Egyptian descent and one is African-American. It's quite understandable that he would want appropriate comic book role models for his kids; Ms Marvel being a Muslim American teen, and now Iron Man being a teenage African-American girl.
That's actually very touching.
Except, especially in the Thor case, no one other than the hammer itself, was "hiring" anyone. There was no interview. The hammer chose her, because she was worthy.
I really like how she's a darn better pilot/driver/whatever of Mjolnir once thrown. When Odinson inevitably gets the hammer back, she should give him lessons on it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He was in firefly which is Whedon which makes everything he is involved in bad even if it's only slightly. Pretty sure freehold would cut off his hand if Whedon accidentally touched it.Fort Save: 1d20 + 5 ⇒ (3) + 5 = 8 hurlsAre you telling me that you don't like Nathan Fillon; or the notion that Hal Jordan might be improved as a character by good voice acting?
well...I don't know if I would cut my hand off...I certainly wouldn't be using it for a while. Probably send it to bed without dinner.
Can't wait for the new Iron Woman/Spiderman team up where they compete to see which one is most angst ridden.
A 15 year old girl(her colour makes no difference to me)...seriously?
I'm sure she'll be bringing a great deal of gravitas and introspection to every decision...not.
seems to work well for kamala khan...
Granted, I'm no Green Lantern expert, but from what little I DO know "has his personality/background constantly changed and reversed in some drastic hope to make them interesting" sounds just likeNot sure how much of that is sarcasm.Not much at all... Huge Hal fan here ;)
The others have very little going for them, and have their personalities/backgrounds constantly changed and reversed in some drastic hope to make them interesting.
ParralaxHal.It sounds like every comic character that's existed for more than a few years.
He has a point, though. If the other Green Lanterns had been successful, they would still be there.
if hal was actually interesting, there wouldn't be any other green lanterns.
Seeing some of the pictures for RiRi's suit and how... fragile... it has been, I suspect that there will be a lot of engineering and design work cut out for her in the future...
On the *plus* side, though, it looks like she got away from the 'bullseye' reactor arrangement, which is a plus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree its pandering and mostly lazy to not make a unique character and taking the chance to build amazing characters with these characteristics. Prime example outside of comics: Mr. Sulu. In the new movies they're going to have the character come out as gay, clearly reference to George Takei and all about appeasement. Cause even Mr. Takei himself said it's disappointing because that is not how the character was conceived. He wishes the people behind it had instead made a new, interesting character naturally gay and have him be with the group center stage to not just feel like his sexuality was just slapped on or swapped out "just because". That's my approach of it, like George I'd would be way more into the idea of these characters coming out with their own unique personas rather than needing to be reinvented versions of exisiting characters.
I see some folks are kinda defensive about this, but you need to understand this isn't myself(or others I would hope, hating the idea on the idea of a female hero being on par with this "white males" thats all the rage to hate on right now. This is requesting that this girl that Tony is discovering, be allowed to have her own growth, her own character and not just be "Lady Iron Man" but be here OWN character that makes you go, "f%&# yeah! We need a movie about her!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sulu is your example?! Sulu, who couldn't be gay on Star Trek even if Roddenberry and/or Takei wanted him to, because they had to fight like hell to even get a single brief interracial kiss on the screen?
Tony Stark ain't going to killed off. He'll still be around. He'll still be in the movies as long as Disney/Marvel can afford Downey Jr. He'll still be Iron Man in all the back issues, and in all your memories.
The young Ms. Williams is likely going by the Iron Man moniker not because of inclusivity or "pandering", but because it's very difficult in this market to launch a new comic title with a new lead that will sell books. Iron Man is an established brand, and Marvel/Disney will be using it to help move issues. If she is received well and sells well, it's a safe bet she'll get an Iron Woman book of her own, or at least co-lead in a team book... which means the Powers-that-Be will find a reason to put Stark back in the armor and back in an Iron Man book with a new #1. And if Riri Williams doesn't sell books... the Powers-that-Be will find a reason to put Stark back in the armor and back in an Iron Man book with a new #1.
Edit: HA HA! I ninja'd thejeff!
In terms of Thor Odinson's 'new' hammer, it's the one from the Ultimate Universe. Not sure he's worthy to lift THAT yet, but who knows.
Also the "Blake" construct became his own person. Plus there were other times when Thor had a human host.
Each time, it was because the HOST was some how more worthy than the god.
Something to chew on.
All I know is this:
All New Marvel 2.0 has fewer titles I like than All New, All Different.
Sulu is your example?! Sulu, who couldn't be gay on Star Trek even if Roddenberry and/or Takei wanted him to, because they had to fight like hell to even get a single brief interracial kiss on the screen?
Takei mentioned that, that in those times they were already struggling staying on air. That doesn't change the fact that the character has been made and even the actor who is a huge supporter for gay rights would rather see a new character be made than his old one changed when the concept is what it is. The point is, Riri shouldn't have to be a Iron Man just to sell or make people happy, she should be her own thing and thats what all should want from her, to not need a mans hand me down role set for her and to live her own empowered identity(or in this case super powered).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hammer just likes her better. It sits up and does tricks. :)Except, especially in the Thor case, no one other than the hammer itself, was "hiring" anyone. There was no interview. The hammer chose her, because she was worthy.I really like how she's a darn better pilot/driver/whatever of Mjolnir once thrown. When Odinson inevitably gets the hammer back, she should give him lessons on it.
Jane Foster is probably the most worthy of the hammer bearers to date. She has an sense of the humanity needed to keep a Thor grounded in the destined role of the hammer wielder... Protector of Midgard. She also understands the inherent price of magic in refusing Asgardian healing. She also is paying the ultimate price as each time she transforms into Thor, she is undoing the cancer treatments in her body. Ultimately, her role WILL kill her. Maybe that's why the hammer puts out more for her than it has for any other wielder... even Steve Rogers and the Odinson himself.
That's probably why, yes Drahlina.
Course it helps she's had a long history with both the hammer AND heroes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pet theory
Riri is actually Tony's illegitimate daughter
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pet theory
Riri is actually Tony's illegitimate daughter
Cloned illegally from a combination of his and Rhodey's DNA, but given a female chromosome to stabilize that mixture?
Cloned illegally from a combination of his and Rhodey's DNA, but given a female chromosome to stabilize that mixture?Pet theory
Riri is actually Tony's illegitimate daughter
Rhodney seems to logical a choice. Maybe Nick Fury? Or his secret daughter?
EDIT: Bonus points if she was raised in alternate universe.
........... when you can have both War Machine and Iron Man?Diddent they just kill war machine?*shrugs*
Everyone was mentioning Rhodey so I figured he was still alive or something.
Unfortunately no.