| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. The vast, vast majority of those characters were created post 2000. You don't want to know what nonsense fans of John Stewart specifically had to deal with in the 70s. Sam and Miles fans have to deal with less overt racism, but there's still a lot to cut through.
2. If you think Jaime Reyes is an example of treating a predecessor with respect, you didn't go through Ted's death and the hate mail campaign surrounding it. He split the fanbase more so than Sam Wilson, and that's saying something.
3. Please read the Captain America storyline I am referring to with respect to Battlestar. Lots of interesting, if now dated, points made there, and touched on overmuch in Sam Wilson captain America.
Frankly I never heard of any fans of John Stewart dealing with much of anything beyond the basic arguing over who the best human ring slinger is (Which is Kyle Rayner to this guy but w/e) and I definetely heard absolutely no flak about liking him when he was at his most well known (aka during the run of the Justice League animated series)
2. Thing about it is that while Ted's death was a massive kick in the balls to all Blue Beetle fans it wasn't done with the intention of pushing Jaime. He may have been divisive at the start but he swung enough people over by solid writing and continually respecting Ted (and Garret to a lesser extent)'s legacy.
As for the last one, never heard of it and if you want me to read it it's probably best to put a title and issue numbers (or at least the name of the storyline) so I have a vague chance to track it down.
1. Then I'm going to guess you were born after 1980. (Justice League animated series was the second best incarnation of the character, and I was annoyed the architect storyline was dropped in favor of the jarhead one, but that's me being picky.) But there was a lot of racism aimed at the character when we was introduced, and a lot of screaming at dc to bring back the true green lantern. Which sounds very similar to today's complaints aimed at Sam Wilson.
2. Actually, it was. The creators stated that they wanted a new Latino super hero, and they went with blue beetle. He's still quit divisive. Not MY Blue Beetle! Lol!!!
3. I'll look it up soon.
Golly gee wilikers Batman, it's almost like saying comic book fans typically dislike all change but given proper respect for the material and solid writing will come to accept and/or like it. Wonder where I've heard that before...when "respecting the legacy" means "keep the characters as white as possible" there's a problem. The 80s captain america storyline pointed that out in the comic.Where in the name of Jack Kirby's ghost did that come from? I mean, it's not like there's been different skinned legacy characters that are well liked because they treated their predecessors with respect (And were also well written)... (Sam Wilson (Captain America), Jaime Reyes (Blue Beetle), John Stewart (Green Lantern), Miles Morales (Ultimate Spider Man))Like Freehold say, all controversial.
Give it a couple of years and it often dies down and the characters become popular and accepted.
...
But CapFalcon seems to have turned out fairly popular, so it doesn't count as "forced diversity".
didn't read the CBR message boards, huh?
Lots of bigoted nonsense aimed at the character even now, and Sam Wilson has shown nothing but the utmost respect for the character.
2. Haven't heard that. Also haven't heard that people are STILL pining for Ted. I mean, at this point I'd figure the sheer inertia of Jaime sticking with the mantle over however many universal reboots would have seen to that.
Well in part that's because they brought Ted back, he is currently acting as Jamie's mentor.
1. Then I'm going to guess you were born after 1980. (Justice League animated series was the second best incarnation of the character, and I was annoyed the architect storyline was dropped in favor of the jarhead one, but that's me being picky.) But there was a lot of racism aimed at the character when we was introduced, and a lot of screaming at dc to bring back the true green lantern....
1. Yep. 90s kid here. Also I've come to learn that a fair amount of GL fans are obviously deluded since they seem to go under the mistaken claim that Hal Jordan is the best GL (bunch of heathens)
2. Haven't heard that. Also haven't heard that people are STILL pining for Ted. I mean, at this point I'd figure the sheer inertia of Jaime sticking with the mantle over however many universal reboots would have seen to that.
3. No big deal if you don't want to find it, but power to you if you do.
1. Well, they are clearly insane. The only good thing about Hal is that he isn't Kyle.
2. Ted fans are notoriously quiet. They buy everything they can with Ted in it, and ignore Jaime. Lots are booster gold fans and can often be found following booster gold stuff. BLUE AND GOLD!
3. Give me some time.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody in comics fights talks like people in combat. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
1. Well, they are clearly insane. The only good thing about Hal is that he isn't Kyle.
not like either of them could beat down Arkillo bare handed with no ring
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
1. Well, they are clearly insane. The only good thing about Hal is that he isn't Kyle.
make sure your affairs are in order. I'm starting to run out of money in my widows and orphans fund.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry about it, the righteous need not fear the attack of the heretic. The front of the saloon work for you?make sure your affairs are in order. I'm starting to run out of money in my widows and orphans fund.
That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
are you two TRYING to get a city leveling monster to show up? Because every time two heroes start fighting a city leveling monster shows up to force them to put aside their differences and work togehter. Its like the beyonder keeps them in pnematic tube capsules for rapid delivery...
Something that occurs to me is that is has to be harder and harder to come up with original ideas for characters, as a character is intrinsically tied to their abilities, and after so many years of comics someone has had just about every power imaginable.
Don't worry about it, the righteous need not fear the attack of the heretic. The front of the saloon work for you?make sure your affairs are in order. I'm starting to run out of money in my widows and orphans fund.That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
1. Well, they are clearly insane. The only good thing about Hal is that he isn't Kyle.
indeed. I am always parched after these things. Would you prefer cremation or burial? Perhaps you have a young lady you would have me console afterwards? If that is the case and you prefer burial, I will make sure she is not consoled upon your final resting place. Not the first two times, at least.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
are you two TRYING to get a city leveling monster to show up? Because every time two heroes start fighting a city leveling monster shows up to force them to put aside their differences and work togehter. Its like the beyonder keeps them in pnematic tube capsules for rapid delivery...Don't worry about it, the righteous need not fear the attack of the heretic. The front of the saloon work for you?make sure your affairs are in order. I'm starting to run out of money in my widows and orphans fund.
That's it. Pistols at dawn. When you put Hal above Kyle armed conflict is the only answer.
if the monster is a refined gentlebeing, it will wait to battle the victor.
if the monster is a refined gentlebeing, it will wait to battle the victor.Monsters tend to be of barbaric stock unfortunately. Should one interrupt, I hope that you will be willing to postpone matters till after the ruffian is disposed of. After all, you may be a heathen, but I do not believe you a villain.
Assuming I do not dispatch you with unusual alacrity due to ineptness on your part, of course we will reschedule. We are gentlemen, after all. And I will naturally wait until three days after you convalesce to duel once more. It would be boorish to see you from this world with your last memories being those of hospital food.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In short, diversity in comics is not bad for business. Shitty stories and boring characters are bad for business.
The problem is, as mentioned upthread, creators seem too scared to make a minority/lgbt with any flaws or character at all. So all comic fans ever see of 'diversity' are those bland fakers who replaced their heroes. This leads them to the understandable but mistaken conclusion that diversity = bad.
As a 90's kid myself, I am unreasonably obsessed with John Stewart as GL. But they didn't just put a black guy in a green suit and expect people to like him. He had a past, a personality, a relationship with another member of the team (that wasn't just "omg, she's dating a black guy!?!?!?!"). He was a serious foil to the laidback Flash.
They actually put in effort is what I'm saying. That's the key. You will not be rewarded or accepted for being a boring black guy anymore than you will for being a boring white guy. Don't write a token minority. Write a character who happens to be a minority.
|
.....and I was annoyed the architect storyline was dropped in favor of the jarhead one, but that's me being picky.......
Ye gods, we kind of agree on something. Although I've got know problem with him being marine, I very much prefer Jon as architect. I recall they even made a point once of saying how his constructs were so defined and structured, just because of the architectural background.
|
Something that occurs to me is that is has to be harder and harder to come up with original ideas for characters, as a character is intrinsically tied to their abilities, and after so many years of comics someone has had just about every power imaginable.
Certainly true, and probably part of the reason why they went with changing established characters instead of trying to invent new heroes.
Though personally, I might have less problems with that because when I think about a character, their powers are the least interesting aspect as far as I'm concerned.
So ironically, I have much more problems with that they decided to make Peter Parker into an internationally successful businessman than I have with all those other spider characters that inhabit the Marvel Universe. I have much more problems with the way they depicted Storm during CW 2 and IvX than I have with them changing Steve Rogers into a Hydra agent.
And on the other hand, I really like Khamala Khan though I find her powers to be extremely stupid. I love Laura Kinney even if she is used as a replacement character for Logan. I loved the Unworthy Thor storyline, I like what they do with Jane Foster. I love how they pull the stunt of Steve Rogers being a Hydra Agent and still staying the Steve Rogers we already knew (I still count the scene between him and Miles Morales as THE biggest highlight during CW 2).
So in the end, my main criticism isn't that they change up things to keep them fresh, but that they don't allow those things to develop (because the next big event is already looming at the horizon, which may be the real reason why some of it feels so forced).
I can certainly understand if other people have different views on this topic, but here's the thing(and again, no one said anything else so far): If you don't care about Laura Kinney and would prefer to have Logan back, that's perfectly ok. But if you don't like this change because obviously Laura is a woman and therefore never can't be THE Wolverine, than it's not. And if you don't like the storys told by Tom Taylor with Laura as the protagonist, it's still perfectly ok (even when I don't understand how one can't like it^^). But if you don't like the stories told based on the fact that Laura is a woman, then again, it is not.
Generic you, of course.
All this, Hal/Kyle/Jon talk. Everyone knows the greatest Green Lantern ever was G'nort.
In short, diversity in comics is not bad for business. S&%%ty stories and boring characters are bad for business.
The problem is, as mentioned upthread, creators seem too scared to make a minority/lgbt with any flaws or character at all. So all comic fans ever see of 'diversity' are those bland fakers who replaced their heroes. This leads them to the understandable but mistaken conclusion that diversity = bad.
As a 90's kid myself, I am unreasonably obsessed with John Stewart as GL. But they didn't just put a black guy in a green suit and expect people to like him. He had a past, a personality, a relationship with another member of the team (that wasn't just "omg, she's dating a black guy!?!?!?!"). He was a serious foil to the laidback Flash.
They actually put in effort is what I'm saying. That's the key. You will not be rewarded or accepted for being a boring black guy anymore than you will for being a boring white guy. Don't write a token minority. Write a character who happens to be a minority.
except they did stick a black guy in a suit and expect him to be green lantern.
Does no-one know the man's origin story? Is everyone here born after 1983?
All this, Hal/Kyle/Jon talk. Everyone knows the greatest Green Lantern ever was G'nort.
his ringy dingy did it's thingie, after all.
And its Kilowog, poozers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly their writer and artists behavior over social media didn't do them any favors either. If you're known to be associated with a company, and behave poorly in public, its going to have an effect on that company, that's just the world we live in now. If your company provides a nonessential luxury item, lining up behind people escalating a controversy by engaging in an unprofessional fashion is a very risky position for a company to take. Not risky as in an internet fight might start, but risky as in sales drop, stock drops, shareholders put the ceo over the fire who then issues ultimatums to the people escalating the controversy.
And you can split hairs over whether they behaved poorly, or what the exact behavior of escalation is, but at the end of the day, their sales went down, likely for a combination of many reasons for which goading a controversy over social media and blogs is undoubtedly a contributing factor if not a main one.
Honestly their writer and artists behavior over social media didn't do them any favors either. If you're known to be associated with a company, and behave poorly in public, its going to have an effect on that company, that's just the world we live in now. If your company provides a nonessential luxury item, lining up behind people escalating a controversy by engaging in an unprofessional fashion is a very risky position for a company to take. Not risky as in an internet fight might start, but risky as in sales drop, stock drops, shareholders put the ceo over the fire who then issues ultimatums to the people escalating the controversy.
And you can split hairs over whether they behaved poorly, or what the exact behavior of escalation is, but at the end of the day, their sales went down, likely for a combination of many reasons for which goading a controversy over social media and blogs is undoubtedly a contributing factor if not a main one.
on the other hand writers on social media are subject to a hell of a lot of abuse.
Take Judd Winick for example. I don't generally like his writing. I think he is bad at writing women in general and is prone to obnoxious soapboxing.
but I have never met the man personally so I don't have anything to say about him beyond that.
however some of the stuff I've seen people write about him is out right horrible. These are very vicuous personal attacks, the likes of which make me cringe. If I was the target of that kind of abuse I've no doubt I would blow up on line and feel absolutely justified in doing so.
Gail Simmon is another writer (one who's work I gerenally really enjoy) who I've seen recieve a ton of abuse from people online.
and the list goes on.
is it any wonder that some writers and artists want to hit back
Honestly their writer and artists behavior over social media didn't do them any favors either. If you're known to be associated with a company, and behave poorly in public, its going to have an effect on that company, that's just the world we live in now. If your company provides a nonessential luxury item, lining up behind people escalating a controversy by engaging in an unprofessional fashion is a very risky position for a company to take. Not risky as in an internet fight might start, but risky as in sales drop, stock drops, shareholders put the ceo over the fire who then issues ultimatums to the people escalating the controversy.
And you can split hairs over whether they behaved poorly, or what the exact behavior of escalation is, but at the end of the day, their sales went down, likely for a combination of many reasons for which goading a controversy over social media and blogs is undoubtedly a contributing factor if not a main one.
on the other hand writers on social media are subject to a hell of a lot of abuse.
Take Judd Winick for example. I don't generally like his writing. I think he is bad at writing women in general and is prone to obnoxious soapboxing.
but I have never met the man personally so I don't have anything to say about him beyond that.
however some of the stuff I've seen people write about him is out right horrible. These are very vicuous personal attacks, the likes of which make me cringe. If I was the target of that kind of abuse I've no doubt I would blow up on line and feel absolutely justified in doing so.
Gail Simmon is another writer (one who's work I gerenally really enjoy) who I've seen recieve a ton of abuse from people online.
and the list goes on.
is it any wonder that some writers and artists want to hit back
I completely acknowledge the emotional impulses while standing by the stark reality of the consequences. *DELIBERATELY AND HUGELY EXAGGERATED COMPARISION ALERT* In the same way we might understand the emotional impulses of someone coming home to a partner cheating on them and shooting their partner and the person while understanding that significant punishment is coming for the act. *END DELIBERATELY AND HUGELY EXAGGERATED COMPARISON* You're dealing with human nature and human impulse reaction to a thing deemed negative. To what level does marvel as a company have the responsibility of attempting to change human behavior on a global scale, reaching into cultures likely wildly foreign to the people running the company? What level of damage to their own self interest and ability to remain solvent as a company is morally required?
I completely acknowledge the emotional impulses while standing by the stark reality of the consequences. *DELIBERATELY AND HUGELY EXAGGERATED COMPARISION ALERT* In the same...
Well to a certain extent we can look at what happened in Marvel this last week. Artist Ardian Syaf inserted some rferances into his artwork that apparently tied to passages in the Quran. Now his reasons for doing this and the interpritation many have taken from would seem to differ, but the end result is that many are upset over it. Marvel has fired him and he himself has said his Career is over.
Where dose the line draw; Intent or percieved intent