Page 176 of 216 FirstFirst ... 76126166172173174175176177178179180186 ... LastLast
Results 2,626 to 2,640 of 3234
  1. #2626
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Again, I just don't really see much different aside from some status quo changes. I guess there's always the possibility that Thor will lose his name again, which is disconcerting.

    As a character it feels like he's taken several steps back and is only now starting to rise back up again.
    Well in general you dispute the major structural issues that Thor has always had as a character and as a book whenever I raise them, so we are probably never going to see eye to eye on why Aaron did some highly necessary and fundamental things to put Thor back on track.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  2. #2627
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    115,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Well in general you dispute the major structural issues that Thor has always had as a character and as a book whenever I raise them, so we are probably never going to see eye to eye on why Aaron did some highly necessary and fundamental things to put Thor back on track.
    I mean, aside from when he got canceled the franchise has seemed to be fairly steady, at least as far as comic book franchises go.

  3. #2628
    Death of Time Cronus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    1,375

    Default

    I just hope Cates doesn't see the crappola that Aaron was dishing out as the gospel truth for Thor.

    I suppose we'll find out how much of a fan Cates really is.
    "Sir, does this mean that Ann Margret's not coming?"
    ----------------------
    "One of the maddening but beautiful things about comics is that you have to give characters a sense of change without changing them so much that they violate the essence of who they are." ~ Ann Nocenti, Chris Claremont's X-Men.

  4. #2629
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Well in general you dispute the major structural issues that Thor has always had as a character and as a book whenever I raise them, so we are probably never going to see eye to eye on why Aaron did some highly necessary and fundamental things to put Thor back on track.
    What do you see as the 5 main specific changes to Thor brought about as a result of the run?

  5. #2630
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I mean, aside from when he got canceled the franchise has seemed to be fairly steady, at least as far as comic book franchises go.
    Quite often Thor’s higher profile has been to the detriment of his core character. The biggest problem has always been the tendency to turn him into a flawless Superman analogy and make him less human. He hasn’t been this relatable in decades.

    You personally may not think that relatability and humanity is that important. Others may rail against it and claim a more relatable or human Thor is weakened or not what they like.

    One only has to read this thread to hear the complaints and the automatic derision such ideas attract. Marvel on the other hand do think that is important. So do I.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 10-08-2019 at 12:50 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  6. #2631
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    What do you see as the 5 main specific changes to Thor brought about as a result of the run?
    Relatability
    Fleshed out realms
    A wider cast of characters
    Nuanced motivations of the cast
    Better positioned to tackle real world issues
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  7. #2632
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Relatability
    Fleshed out realms
    A wider cast of characters
    Nuanced motivations of the cast
    Better positioned to tackle real world issues
    The relatability is an interesting one...I suppose stressing his tendency to over eat and drink chimes with some of us, and showing him struggle continuously might make some of empathise more with him. PersonallyI’m really not convinced that they are great changes for this specific character...but actually I can easily see why I may well be in minority there.

    On others...I think those were already areas where Thor canon was very strong. Great that Aaron could build on existing strengths, but I don’t see them as massive change..if he’d not done it, I still think new writer would have a very good set-up.

    I actually think the main “problem” with Thor is one Marvel will never address. It’s the way the Marvel human heroes are portrayed, they are effectively written as gods, so there is really no difference between Thor abilities, fears, and attitudes and countless human characters.

    Any real point of difference is lost...and arguably he ends up looking a bit ordinary when compared say to Reed or Franklin Richards.

  8. #2633
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Relatability
    Fleshed out realms
    A wider cast of characters
    Nuanced motivations of the cast
    Better positioned to tackle real world issues
    Heh, have you read Dario?

  9. #2634
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    I actually think the main “problem” with Thor is one Marvel will never address. It’s the way the Marvel human heroes are portrayed, they are effectively written as gods, so there is really no difference between Thor abilities, fears, and attitudes and countless human characters.

    Any real point of difference is lost...and arguably he ends up looking a bit ordinary when compared say to Reed or Franklin Richards.
    The difference is his mythological context. He should be roughly akin to a human superhero because they were his roots as a character and that is where the sweet spot is for Marvel in general. The whole point of superheroes is they are inspirational and aspirational. Readers are supposed to identify with them. If a human superhero is written too much like a god then they will be intrinsically less interesting, and the same will hold true for any character. I would dispute that many of them are. Franklin is an anomaly and you know it, but he isn’t a highly successful solo character like Thor, and he is rarely written like a god unless the story calls for it. Usually he is a kid or teen with the corresponding human issues that challenge him.

    Now don’t get me wrong. I have nothing whatsoever against Thor spending long arcs focusing on the mythological side of his character. He can go battle gods and otherworld denizens to his heart’s content, but underlying that has to be a core humanity that allows a young reader to identify with him. And, perhaps more controversially it is no longer OK to have him be an unchallenged example of the negative sides of masculinity. Thor needs to be modern, relevant and relatable to new readers.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  10. #2635
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    The difference is his mythological context. He should be roughly akin to a human superhero because they were his roots as a character and that is where the sweet spot is for Marvel in general. The whole point of superheroes is they are inspirational and aspirational. Readers are supposed to identify with them.
    Well, I agree with you there. My issue with the way that Thor has been portrayed in recent years is that I find little in his behaviour that is really inspirational or aspirational, and rather than acting in the way the reader wishes he or she would act in similar circumstances (necessary to perform the function of a wish-fulfilment inspirational hero) he has behaved stupidly, incompetently, sometimes selfishly. If you want the reader to identify with a hero, you put the hero in a situation that gets the reader's sympathy (victim of injustice is a good one - see both Peter Parker and Spiderman's treatment at the hands of J. Jonah Jameson, who is a terrific foil for our hero, being an authority figure that is powerful and unfair, but is also ridiculous, amusing, and at times pathetic and weak), then you have the hero carry out the reader's wish-fulfilment fantasy by beating the bad-guy/overcoming the odds/doing the impossible, or whatever.

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    If a human superhero is written too much like a god then they will be intrinsically less interesting, and the same will hold true for any character. I would dispute that many of them are. Franklin is an anomaly and you know it, but he isn’t a highly successful solo character like Thor, and he is rarely written like a god unless the story calls for it. Usually he is a kid or teen with the corresponding human issues that challenge him.

    Now don’t get me wrong. I have nothing whatsoever against Thor spending long arcs focusing on the mythological side of his character. He can go battle gods and otherworld denizens to his heart’s content, but underlying that has to be a core humanity that allows a young reader to identify with him. And, perhaps more controversially it is no longer OK to have him be an unchallenged example of the negative sides of masculinity. Thor needs to be modern, relevant and relatable to new readers.
    I would argue that classic Thor was not an example of toxic masculinity, but Aaron's Thor has definitely been painted that way. This has been one of the issues many fans have had with Aaron's depiction of the character.

  11. #2636
    Astonishing Member Overhazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    Well, I agree with you there. My issue with the way that Thor has been portrayed in recent years is that I find little in his behaviour that is really inspirational or aspirational, and rather than acting in the way the reader wishes he or she would act in similar circumstances (necessary to perform the function of a wish-fulfilment inspirational hero) he has behaved stupidly, incompetently, sometimes selfishly. If you want the reader to identify with a hero, you put the hero in a situation that gets the reader's sympathy (victim of injustice is a good one - see both Peter Parker and Spiderman's treatment at the hands of J. Jonah Jameson, who is a terrific foil for our hero, being an authority figure that is powerful and unfair, but is also ridiculous, amusing, and at times pathetic and weak), then you have the hero carry out the reader's wish-fulfilment fantasy by beating the bad-guy/overcoming the odds/doing the impossible, or whatever.


    I would argue that classic Thor was not an example of toxic masculinity, but Aaron's Thor has definitely been painted that way. This has been one of the issues many fans have had with Aaron's depiction of the character.
    I haven't read a lot of classic Thor, some of JMS, some Jurgens, and some Simonson, and those versions never struck me as toxic masculinity either. I've read a lot about the subject, and to me Toxic Masculinity is a series of harmful behaviors that men do to prove that they are men, it's deeply rooted in insecurity and a need for external validation, Aaron's Thor is crazy insecure, because he wants to prove himself to the hammer and by extension his father. It's normal, human, and relatable to have insecurities, but Aaron's Thor is ruled by his insecurities. He never overcomes them or learns to live with them, he only feels like himself again when the hammer deems him worthy. Aaron's Thor ends up valuing external validation more internal validation, which is probably the opposite of what Aaron wanted to do.
    Last edited by Overhazard; 10-08-2019 at 07:43 AM.

  12. #2637

    Default

    Just my own two cents but the whole obsession with humanizing an actual fictional god I think harms the character because the pendulum of "relatability" has swung too far in one direction, to the point where Thor reads and sounds like just another guy. It isn't exclusive with Thor either as it has happened with other very powerful characters. The storytelling for fictional superheroes with superhuman abilities is almost too humanistic, I feel. If I wanted to read about normal human issues, I'd read non-fiction (which I do). Superhero storytelling should be escapism and fantasy. I can't speak for every child but I know as kids my friends and relatives and I enjoyed superheroes in large part because of their fantastic abilities or origins. Then the hook hits home when said superhero fights for the regular guy against the villain.

    While Lee and Kirby did have Superman in mind when creating Thor, the intent was for him to be an answer to Superman and something different. Instead of an alien he's a mythological god come to life with magical powers who resides in a mystical realm. At the end of the day no matter how much mead Thor drinks he's a being who's virtually immortal with powers that can change the world he can only be so relatable to the reader without losing much of what makes him special (Asgardian heritage, legacy, natural powers, etc.).

  13. #2638
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    115,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Quite often Thor’s higher profile has been to the detriment of his core character. The biggest problem has always been the tendency to turn him into a flawless Superman analogy and make him less human. He hasn’t been this relatable in decades.

    You personally may not think that relatability and humanity is that important. Others may rail against it and claim a more relatable or human Thor is weakened or not what they like.

    One only has to read this thread to hear the complaints and the automatic derision such ideas attract. Marvel on the other hand do think that is important. So do I.
    I think Thor is very human. I also think Thor is very noble, strong, and is a divine being who is human in-spite of that, but I feel Aaron has taken too many notches at his integrity in the process of making him more "relatable."

    But I personally prefer gods be gods and not act too human that that aspect gets lost, although I also don't like Thor as comedy relief or as a parody of himself, which seems fairly popular so what do I know...
    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Relatability
    He definitely writes very human gods. Maybe too human.
    Fleshed out realms
    I will agree he definitely prominently displayed all the Realms, but at the same time I question whether we learned anything new about them that we didn't know before, at least for most of them.

    Visually I'm not expecting anymore consistency then there already had been.
    A wider cast of characters
    Has he though? I don't think he's really added many characters that will last outside his run.

    Roz Solomon I don't expect to appear again anytime soon unless someone is really mining Thor continuity.

    Thor's 10 Realms companions seem destined to fall into limbo.

    Dario Agger isn't the best new antagonist in my opinion, ditto the Queen of Cinders (Surtur or bust).

    Isn't that kinda it? If anything I just wish Aaron had done more with Thor's traditional supporting cast. Other then derailing and trying to replace Volstagg, he barely did anything with Sif, The other Warrior's Three, or Brunnhilde up until the last leg of his run before he killed her off.
    Nuanced motivations of the cast
    I dunno. I didn't find his Odin very nuanced. Thor sometimes. Jane...well, Jane was kind of very straightforward. Loki was Loki.
    Better positioned to tackle real world issues
    I personally don't find that to be a big priority when it comes to Thor comics, but I guess I can understand the appeal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    I would argue that classic Thor was not an example of toxic masculinity, but Aaron's Thor has definitely been painted that way. This has been one of the issues many fans have had with Aaron's depiction of the character.
    Yeah, I don't think toxic masculinity has been an issue with the franchise before it became one of the defining aspects of Jane's tenure as Thor. But that was to serve her narrative more then anything else.

    But when I look at shirtless Thor complaining to Jane for keeping being Thor from him as punishment for his "dalliances" or how Aaron wrote Odin, I don't really see the characters but just writing the characters to give Jane obstacles to overcome as a feminist power fantasy Superhero (which conceptually I have no issue with).

  14. #2639
    Death of Time Cronus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    1,375

    Default

    ....

    I dont see Thors status as a "god" problematic in terms of relatability. Plenty of moments in Thors continuity that involved drama...hurt feelings, tears...all tangible moments for readers. If anything, Thors drastic change in character under Aaron, is what has contributed to some fans being turned off by the character.

    Thor was originally Marvel's Superman analog, at least that was Stans intent. But that in and of itself shouldn't raise an automatic, "I dont get this character". In fact, it's one reason fans like the character. There is plenty of room for Cates to explore Thor as a character without changing fundamental aspects of what makes Thor Thor.
    Last edited by Cronus; 10-08-2019 at 06:03 PM.
    "Sir, does this mean that Ann Margret's not coming?"
    ----------------------
    "One of the maddening but beautiful things about comics is that you have to give characters a sense of change without changing them so much that they violate the essence of who they are." ~ Ann Nocenti, Chris Claremont's X-Men.

  15. #2640
    Astonishing Member DurararaFTW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,471

    Default

    Thor should be a walking myth, a thousands year old figure of legend that came here from a very different kind of place and culture. Thor should be relatable to a point. But still less so then Superman. Superman has had a normal human upbringing as far as that was possible, and human parents who are still alive because he has lived for human lifespan, thus far. None of this is the case for Thor. Midgard is Thor's protectorate, it is not his home.

Posting Permissions

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