Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 216
  1. #76

    Default

    I haven't read a comic in quite some time, so I'm not here to comment on any specific narrative or story, but the last time I did was Aaron's run on Thor, and while it was entertaining in parts I just noticed that he (and Marvel in general) wants to tell a human story using mythological/magical/superhuman characters. Whereas other writers take on Thor (or any other powerful character) seeking to write a story about Asgardian characters. It's one thing to inject human or humanistic elements in a fantasy adventure story, it's another to treat said characters as basically regular people who happen to have powers. It's how I feel about movie Thor as well. He doesn't seem like a mystical space god with crazy powers, but rather a goofball frat boy who happens to be a powerful alien. I think Aaron mostly built his run off of Matt Fraction's previous work. Fraction sort of turned Thor and Odin into brutish and thuggish boors with deep issues, whereas JMS' Thor was a slightly modernized take on classical Thor. Similar proper speech pattern (not quite Shakespearean), quite powerful and examining the meaning of Asgardian godhood among humans. Only issue I had was bringing Asgard to Earth at the time, though we'll never know how JMS would have concluded his first arc and where he would've taken Thor afterward. Everything after 2007 has made me really appreciate Dan Jurgens' quite excellent run on Thor from 1998-2004 that often gets overlooked.

  2. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveAtThee View Post
    I haven't read a comic in quite some time, so I'm not here to comment on any specific narrative or story, but the last time I did was Aaron's run on Thor, and while it was entertaining in parts I just noticed that he (and Marvel in general) wants to tell a human story using mythological/magical/superhuman characters. Whereas other writers take on Thor (or any other powerful character) seeking to write a story about Asgardian characters. It's one thing to inject human or humanistic elements in a fantasy adventure story, it's another to treat said characters as basically regular people who happen to have powers. It's how I feel about movie Thor as well. He doesn't seem like a mystical space god with crazy powers, but rather a goofball frat boy who happens to be a powerful alien. I think Aaron mostly built his run off of Matt Fraction's previous work. Fraction sort of turned Thor and Odin into brutish and thuggish boors with deep issues, whereas JMS' Thor was a slightly modernized take on classical Thor. Similar proper speech pattern (not quite Shakespearean), quite powerful and examining the meaning of Asgardian godhood among humans. Only issue I had was bringing Asgard to Earth at the time, though we'll never know how JMS would have concluded his first arc and where he would've taken Thor afterward. Everything after 2007 has made me really appreciate Dan Jurgens' quite excellent run on Thor from 1998-2004 that often gets overlooked.
    I have the same issues with the MCU asgardians as well.

    I do agree that Dan Jurgens run is overlooked. Just, ugh, just skip the part with the clone of Thanos.

  3. #78
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    2,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree View Post
    I have the same issues with the MCU asgardians as well.

    I do agree that Dan Jurgens run is overlooked. Just, ugh, just skip the part with the clone of Thanos.
    I agree with the quoted summary and I also loved jurgens run, much underated imo

    The thanks clone thing I liked until it was retconned into a clone, when it was written as real thanks it's a great win for thor

  4. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kilderkin View Post
    I agree with the quoted summary and I also loved jurgens run, much underated imo

    The thanks clone thing I liked until it was retconned into a clone, when it was written as real thanks it's a great win for thor
    After Infinity Gauntlet Thanos was no longer a nihilist villain obsessed with getting macguffins to convince Mistress Death to love him as he learned that he is his own worst enemy and that destruction and macguffins will never impress her, and he became a reclusive farmer and explorer who would occasionally help Adam Warlock and other heroes save the universe. Jurgens ignored Thanos character development and regressed him into his old genocidal self while also making him dumber. I don't have issues with the Thanosi clones since you Can give Thor epic feats without having to mess up the philosophical and morally grey character Thanos became

    If some writer would turn Magneto into a Snidely Whiplash type of villain, the X-MEN fans would throw a issy fit. And rightly so.

  5. #80
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    1,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree View Post

    If some writer would turn Magneto into a Snidely Whiplash type of villain, the X-MEN fans would throw a issy fit. And rightly so.
    Hello, Ultimate Magneto.

  6. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by U.N. Owen View Post
    Hello, Ultimate Magneto.
    Different universe. Different character.

  7. #82
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by U.N. Owen View Post
    Hello, Ultimate Magneto.
    Millar doesn't know how to write any other type of head villain. Look at all of 'Wanted'.

  8. #83
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    1,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree View Post
    Different universe. Different character.
    X-Fans were still pissed that Magneto was a mutant supremacist who ate humans.

  9. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Cool Thatguy View Post
    Millar doesn't know how to write any other type of head villain. Look at all of 'Wanted'.
    Everyone in the Ultimate universe is a douchebag. Except for Spiderman.

  10. #85
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree View Post
    Everyone in the Ultimate universe is a douchebag. Except for Spiderman.
    Not true. At all.

    They are douche bags. Cool douche bags, but douche bags all the same.

    Or they are losers. Completely. Utterly. See: Hank Pym, Black Panther.

    But yeah, not much in the way of depth or contradictions.

  11. #86
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    2,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainMar-Vell92 of the Kree View Post
    After Infinity Gauntlet Thanos was no longer a nihilist villain obsessed with getting macguffins to convince Mistress Death to love him as he learned that he is his own worst enemy and that destruction and macguffins will never impress her, and he became a reclusive farmer and explorer who would occasionally help Adam Warlock and other heroes save the universe. Jurgens ignored Thanos character development and regressed him into his old genocidal self while also making him dumber. I don't have issues with the Thanosi clones since you Can give Thor epic feats without having to mess up the philosophical and morally grey character Thanos became

    If some writer would turn Magneto into a Snidely Whiplash type of villain, the X-MEN fans would throw a issy fit. And rightly so.
    In all honesty I never had any faith thanos would stay that way after the infinity series, but at least he was coniving in the thor story, recently I think he's too much of a one trick pony

  12. #87
    The Professional Marvell2100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    All Along The Watchtower
    Posts
    9,303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveAtThee View Post
    I haven't read a comic in quite some time, so I'm not here to comment on any specific narrative or story, but the last time I did was Aaron's run on Thor, and while it was entertaining in parts I just noticed that he (and Marvel in general) wants to tell a human story using mythological/magical/superhuman characters. Whereas other writers take on Thor (or any other powerful character) seeking to write a story about Asgardian characters. It's one thing to inject human or humanistic elements in a fantasy adventure story, it's another to treat said characters as basically regular people who happen to have powers. It's how I feel about movie Thor as well. He doesn't seem like a mystical space god with crazy powers, but rather a goofball frat boy who happens to be a powerful alien. I think Aaron mostly built his run off of Matt Fraction's previous work. Fraction sort of turned Thor and Odin into brutish and thuggish boors with deep issues, whereas JMS' Thor was a slightly modernized take on classical Thor. Similar proper speech pattern (not quite Shakespearean), quite powerful and examining the meaning of Asgardian godhood among humans. Only issue I had was bringing Asgard to Earth at the time, though we'll never know how JMS would have concluded his first arc and where he would've taken Thor afterward. Everything after 2007 has made me really appreciate Dan Jurgens' quite excellent run on Thor from 1998-2004 that often gets overlooked.
    You're right. Jurgens run on Thor was pretty good.

  13. #88
    Mighty Member Anthony W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by linda2000 View Post
    People are saying Wiccan is the breakout star from Young Avengers and... God, I wish lol. Kate Bishop it's the real one.
    Wolverine is a breakout star. Deadpool is a breakout star. Kate Bishop is just a character that popular writers like for reasons that escape me. How did this character become the Young Avenger to get all these comic appearances, when she has the least interesting origin, look and skills? Yeah, I know Hawkeye uses a bow and arrow as well but the character is a master at it and was trained by Cap in hand to hand combat over a number of years.

    Kate Bishop is Roy Harper, but not the Red Arrow or Arsenal version of Roy. Kate Bishop is Roy back when he was Speedy right before the horrible downfall.

    Yeah, I said it.
    Last edited by Anthony W; 12-28-2018 at 11:58 PM.
    "The Marvel EIC Chair has a certain curse that goes along with it: it tends to drive people insane, and ultimately, out of the business altogether. It is the notorious last stop for many staffers, as once you've sat in The Big Chair, your pariah status is usually locked in." Christopher Priest

  14. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kilderkin View Post
    In all honesty I never had any faith thanos would stay that way after the infinity series, but at least he was coniving in the thor story, recently I think he's too much of a one trick pony
    Ron Marz, Peter David and Keith Giffen were pretty faithful to Starlin's post-Gauntlet Thanos though.

  15. #90
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    I think the characterisation of Odin and Thor goes beyond "a fair bit annoying" to actually really weakening a fair bit of what run should be about: "What does it mean to be worthy"?

    Okay Aaron has come up with a defendable answer...if you're a drunken selfish guy (like His Thor is portrayed quite often in run), or a drunken coward (Odin) you're unworthy, but if you're noble, brave, and totally skilled (like Jane instantly becomes when she lifts the hammer) then you're worthy.

    Sure it's a defendable answer. But it relies on writing on three characters in a way not really seen before, and in many ways an unsatisfying answer...it's easy to imagine writers like Alan Moore or John Ostrander coming up with much more profound thoughts on same topic ("what is worthy").
    I don't think you are being fair here. There seem to be a whole heap of associated characteristics that people often quote as representive of Aaron's Thor that can not truely be substantiated by the actual text.

    Drunkard is the most obvious and easy to refute. He is portrayed as being drunk once and only once by Aaron and in the context of a long night in a tavern getting frustrated by his inability to work out who the new Thor is and having an identity crisis over his role. Personally I belive anyone that calls someone a drunkard just because they drank themselves into a stupor on a single occasion is being somewhat prejudiced over alcohol.

    He is never shown to be cowardly. Not in a single panel. He is occasionally shown to be doubting his ability but that is fundamental to the story being told. The self doubt is key to his inability to call on his storm powers consistently. This is actually in the text in Thor's own words, so not open to interpretation. So nothing to do with Mjölnir excepting the obvious that unworthiness leads to self doubt and that reflectively doubt over the worthiness of gods leads to unworthiness.

    As to comparisons to Jane as Thor, I honestly belive Aaron goes out of his way not to do this. It is not the story he was telling. Yes there are occasional references to people considering Jane as the 'Best Thor' etc. Importantly we never get any direct comparisons in deed or competition, and Jane herself expresses the opposite sentiment, that Thor Odinson is THE Thor.

    The run is far more subtle than just being about worthiness, even though that is the central theme. The story is also about what kind of god should be worthy of worship. This is where Aaron sometimes gets criticised for being an atheist. Anyone that understands theology at any level other than Sunday school knows that the questions and answers surrounding the anthropomorphic nature of deities, are not simply a question of faith. Aaron doesn't make this a simple question either. He is not advocating atheist beliefs, he is advocating reflection and examination of what we belive in. Something that some religious people find challenging despite millennia of debate within their own religions suggesting this is a valid thing to question.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 12-29-2018 at 07:13 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
  •