Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 161
  1. #136
    Extraordinary Member JudicatorPrime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    The Cosmic Shores of the Pacific
    Posts
    5,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gurz View Post
    Because no writer [sic] and artist want to give their good $$$$$ ideas to marvel or dc to capitalise on and use as they wish for infinite years to make crap tone of money. No the writer [sic] and artists want to do that themselves... lol
    A creator with sufficient industry clout could negotiate a deal where they receive royalties, I imagine. But you're right that most aren't in a position to do that. So they do the next best thing, which is build up a name for themselves using Marvel's and/or DC's existing content until they have a sufficient fan following to do their own thing. Most writers and artists aren't really all that successful going it alone, but one good graphic novel with your own story and creations can make you quite successful, especially if Hollywood picks it up and churns out movie adaptations based on your book/graphic novel.

    All that said, if the choice was mine, I'd create an original character for Marvel in a heartbeat. But that's the fan in me talking, not the businessman.

  2. #137
    Mighty Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Force de Phenix View Post
    They did, but no new X-Men character will EVER be above the 90's X-Men (Wolverine, Storm, Jean, Cyclops, etc.) It would be a fool's errand to try to push them out of the way with any new mutant. That's why Hickman's books doesn't introduce any new, worthwhile ones. He knows better.
    That's not really fair since Wolverine, Storm, Jean, and Cyclops have all been around for over 40 years, and the public at large arguably didn't care that much for Jean and Cyclops until Chris Claremont's writing came along. Does a new character have to be immediately above them in order to be worthwhile?

    I mean, that's like saying:

    "The New Mutants isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "Generation X isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "The New X-Men isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "The Lights isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    Just how high does the acceptance bar have to be set before one is ready to accept new mutant characters Marvel decides to introduce?


  3. #138
    Mighty Member dkrook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    1,272

    Default

    Blue Marvel...! Here we are with a character who is still really a blank slate, and left behind by the creator so needless to say there's tons of potential for him. He is always kept on the sidelines, or on the outer perimeter of things that are mainstream. When was the last time he played a role as the point man for a crossover event? Ever see him do feat worthy things working with the top tiered heroes lately? Has any writer given him active membership in the Avengers? Even if current writers don't want to give up their own created characters, cool don't they have enough skill the reimage old, obsolete ones, and give them a fresh start.
    Last edited by dkrook; 12-24-2019 at 06:46 PM.

  4. #139
    Incredible Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Electricmastro View Post
    That's not really fair since Wolverine, Storm, Jean, and Cyclops have all been around for over 40 years, and the public at large arguably didn't care that much for Jean and Cyclops until Chris Claremont's writing came along. Does a new character have to be immediately above them in order to be worthwhile?

    I mean, that's like saying:

    "The New Mutants isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "Generation X isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "The New X-Men isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    "The Lights isn't worthwhile, because they haven't gotten the attention and great writing Wolverine has gotten."

    Just how high does the acceptance bar have to be set before one is ready to accept new mutant characters Marvel decides to introduce?

    We're talking about iconic characters. Not characters in general. A lot of people think many characters aren't worthwhile. Also, a lot of people hate Hope because they think she's a poor man's Jean Grey. Jean is what iconic represents. I can't think of many other newer mutants who could be at her level and they had years to try (i.e. Hope)

  5. #140
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skullkid View Post
    Why do they need to be pushed out though?
    There's no reason they can't make a new character and promote them without coming at the expense of someone else.
    Marvel the exact sort of thing people didn't like about ANAD, and characters like Iron Heart and Jane Foster.
    EDUCATED comic book fans KNEW Tony & Thor was coming back. Because they always do.

    What you saw was trolls who HATED seeing POC do more than be in the background.
    Trolls who don't READ comics or know comics.
    Riri NEVER called herself Ironman but DOOM did. Folks don't want to talk about that.

    As for this-
    Where is this logic coming from that you need to get rid of older characters when you introduce new ones?
    That is a MANAGEMENT issue. It at times comes from viewing one as a THREAT to another.

    It's why you saw 2 former Batgirl gets ERASED when Babs took over in New 52.
    It's why you saw Wally West vanish and then for time come back as a racist stereotype in Flash.
    It's why John Stewart has been a MESS since New 52 started.

    It is also FORCING a writer to use folks. The downside to it is some writers are not skilled in that.
    Its how you get Johns Cyborg in Justice League.
    Duke Thomas in Tom King's Batman-where he was only one one panel or not there at all.
    An under-performing Hal Jordan & TGLC book-because a LOT of folks did not want to read about Hal. Because it came at the expense of others.
    It's Storm's story since 2000 and it's Black Panther's issue in how own dang book.

    Finally it means one less BOOK in the market.
    Instead of doing an ANNOUNCED not STEALTH mini with say Rayshuan Lucas-we make him Cap America Sam Wilson's partner over Falcon.

  6. #141
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8,696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Force de Phenix View Post
    We're talking about iconic characters. Not characters in general. A lot of people think many characters aren't worthwhile. Also, a lot of people hate Hope because they think she's a poor man's Jean Grey. Jean is what iconic represents. I can't think of many other newer mutants who could be at her level and they had years to try (i.e. Hope)
    People thought that about Black Panther, Carol Danvers & Aquaman.

    They have done better than some so-called Iconic folks.

    Call me when we get this Jean Grey solo movie that makes a billion, wins 3 Oscars and a trade that dominates sales (for a time).

  7. #142
    Be Seeing You…
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    To me, "new iconic" is like "modern classic"... a contradiction in terms.

    Do you want to see a character become iconic? Be prepared to wait.

    It's not going to happen overnight…

  8. #143
    Mighty Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    People thought that about Black Panther, Carol Danvers & Aquaman.
    Yep, I may be thinking too simply, but I think that if you want the wider public to care about your character, then write the character in such a way that they'll care.

  9. #144
    Incredible Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    People thought that about Black Panther, Carol Danvers & Aquaman.

    They have done better than some so-called Iconic folks.

    Call me when we get this Jean Grey solo movie that makes a billion, wins 3 Oscars and a trade that dominates sales (for a time).
    Don't put me in the same basket as those people. Also, moviegoers are not the same as comicbook fanboys. And movies are very different from comics in many ways, like comic is a niche culture that is targeted towards nostalgia hence the Legacy era, and movies are targeted towards everyone who can buy a ticket so the studios can make money.

    The same people that went to a corner store with a comic book rack, are not people who read entertainment primarily online, or who can give a hoot about comics.

    Anyway, I think terms like "iconic" characters hinders growth and space for changes.

  10. #145
    Mighty Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    People thought that about Black Panther, Carol Danvers & Aquaman.
    And had a level of success and achievements even before those movies came along. I may be thinking too simply, but I think that if you want the wider public to care about your character, then write the character in such a way that they'll care.

  11. #146
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    EDUCATED comic book fans KNEW Tony & Thor was coming back. Because they always do.

    What you saw was trolls who HATED seeing POC do more than be in the background.
    Trolls who don't READ comics or know comics.
    Riri NEVER called herself Ironman but DOOM did. Folks don't want to talk about that.
    Oh will people grow up and stop using racism as an excuse?
    This is getting old and demonstrating that you need to make excuses instead of facing the legitimate reasons for why people wouldn't like them.
    Did we always know Thor was getting his hammer back? Yes but that doesn't change the fact during Jane Foster's time as Thor he was changed into a sad sack that pretty much everyone disrespected, who gave up his name, or how Riri took over the main Iron Man title after pretty much coming out of nowhere, did really nothing to earn it, proved to be an unlikeable character in the book itself and wouldn't gain any real likable traits until being put in champions.
    And many people thought Doom calling himself Iron Man was stupid too but at the very least Doom didn't take over the main title, and had a presence in the Iron Man run preceding his tenure, it was still badly handled but slightly less than Riri

  12. #147
    Astonishing Member Raye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    4,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skullkid View Post
    You're trying to frame this as a contradiction but it isn't.
    Wanting new characters around doesn't mean people want the older characters gone.
    This is true, but it's one of those things where you can't quite have it both ways, not entirely, anyway. If the old characters are still around and in prominent roles, then it is much harder for new characters to get a look, because people can only buy or have time to read so many comic books in a month, and if given a limited number of books a month due to budget or time, they'll usually pick the tried and true favorite they've been following for years. There are exceptions, like Kamala, or Jessica Jones, where, while they don't sell tons, they can sell enough to justify sustaining a book for them, (which gives them a chance to go on to become 'iconic' but that requires a lot of time and sustained interest) but it's pretty rare, and usually requires tapping into a new audience, which is hard to do. So it's not that surprising to me that sometimes the old guard gets sidelined (temporarily most of the time, and most people know this will be the case, or at least they should by now) in order to give a newer character more of chance to shine, because that's just what has been proven to work, given limited shelf space and buying power of the customer.

    I'm not saying it HAS to be that way every time, clearly some characters that were created and introduced without sidelining the big guns has worked as well, I know. But there is more than one way to tell a story, and I can understand the thinking there, given the difficulties new characters face. I also don't think the idea of a character being sidelined for whatever reason has to be forbidden, because sometimes a character's absence kinda IS the story, they may not be the main character but their absence is still a part of the story, and it still says something about them. It's still about them, in a way, even if they are not appearing on panel. Superior Spider-Man for instance was still very much about Peter even if Ock was the main character, same with Thor. And I don't have a problem with it being used sometimes, and if the story is good enough, (I don't think Thor, Iron Man, Cap, etc, were sidelined solely to give lesser known characters a push, there was more to the stories than that, but it was an aspect) I mean, I get it. And it's worked for some characters like Robbie Reyes, Mile Morales, (he was Peter's replacement in the Ultimate universe even if they now co-exist in the main universe) etc. where stepping into a predecessor's role and using their name helped elevate their status enough that they could get a look from some fans of the old characters. Mantles get passed because it works, if it didn't work, or if it was easier in today's market to get a new character with no ties at all to an older character to catch on, they wouldn't do it as much.
    Last edited by Raye; 12-25-2019 at 12:36 AM.

  13. #148
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    7,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skullkid View Post
    Oh will people grow up and stop using racism as an excuse?
    Sad to say, it's not always an excuse and ignoring the problem has only proven to make things worse.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  14. #149
    Incredible Member Force de Phenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skullkid View Post
    Oh will people grow up and stop using racism as an excuse?
    This is getting old and demonstrating that you need to make excuses instead of facing the legitimate reasons for why people wouldn't like them.
    Did we always know Thor was getting his hammer back? Yes but that doesn't change the fact during Jane Foster's time as Thor he was changed into a sad sack that pretty much everyone disrespected, who gave up his name, or how Riri took over the main Iron Man title after pretty much coming out of nowhere, did really nothing to earn it, proved to be an unlikeable character in the book itself and wouldn't gain any real likable traits until being put in champions.
    And many people thought Doom calling himself Iron Man was stupid too but at the very least Doom didn't take over the main title, and had a presence in the Iron Man run preceding his tenure, it was still badly handled but slightly less than Riri
    I don't know if you use social media, but there were a lot of misogyny, homophobia, racism, and other bigotry out there. It was so bad that any true criticism was lost in the crowd.

    People has their own biases before even giving characters a chance, and we can't ignore that factor in this debate.

  15. #150
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkrook View Post
    Blue Marvel...! Here we are with a character who is still really a blank slate, and left behind by the creator so needless to say there's tons of potential for him.
    He is always kept on the sidelines, or on the outer perimeter of things that are mainstream.When was the last time he played a role as the point man for a crossover event?
    Here some folks who compares him to john stewart who has been around much longer.
    Quote Originally Posted by lemonpeace
    To me, Blue is a mix of Superman, John Stewart, and Reed Richards. I find him to be a highly interesting character that I strongly desire to see utilized more and fleshed out. Alas, nobody at Marvel will even attempt to touch him with a 10ft pole, probably because his immense powerset and intellect may be too daunting of a task to portray for the writers.
    I'd actually say John is in better condition than Blue is right now, since John has been more consistently utilized in various things comics + outside media. Like I said on this thread regarding our boy John and on Blue's thread, all that can change with a successful movie. It's a faint hope to hold onto (maybe less for John), but it's all we've got.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmic Emerald 23 View Post
    I can't say John is necessarily in better condition than Blue Marvel, sure John has more consistently utilized but how pivotal has he been to those appearances in recent years? how well written and fleshed out has he been? John gets used more consistently used because he's been around the block longer but, in the current comic/superhero storytelling landscape, I believe Blue Marvel gets handled with better care when he's put on-page. Blue Marvel's origin is contemporarily relevant and he is rarely relegated to being background or a cheerleader, or a sidekick if he's in the panel he's usually doing something that points to his strengths as a character. I just don't think John gets written as consistently compelling or with as much care comparatively
    Anyway in his own books,his team books and certain other books and certain other things he not been keep on the sidelines or on the outer perimeter of things mainstream so don't use that word always because that's not true.

    Blue Marvel...! Here we are with a character who is still really a blank slate
    I disagree.
    Let's keep things in perspective.
    Blue marvel has had great character development so i would not say he is a blank slate.
    He has had more character development then most g.i joe characters for example and has been shown more then most g.i joes in comics and he has been shown then most who are from the 1980's.
    He has been shown more often in first 10 years then the first 10 years of john stewart,blade and brother voodoo for example.

    Keep in mind he is superman type character in marvel a well and most of those type of characters for the first 10 years have not been shown as much.
    Blue marvel and sentry are the exceptions.
    Blue marvel has been shown more and had more development in his first 10 years then hyperion and gladiator if you compare him to certain other superman types in marvel.
    The only one shown the most in thier first 10 years is sentry and look what happen to him later or most of the 2010's.
    Blue marvel will be shown more down road and with more feats so just be patient or patient enough.
    Last edited by mace11; 12-25-2019 at 05:03 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •