I see where you're coming from as far as trusting someone like Waid. I don't think I've really disliked anything he's done but I haven't really loved anything recently either. I think I'm at a place where I'd rather give someone a shot who might be amazing but I also might not like than reading someone I know will be ok. I'll take a chance at amazing over a certainty of fine. Waid, Jurgens, Abnett, Lobdell, Tomasi, Robinson, David... they've all had their time and I think they're just blocking other writers from getting opportunities at this point.
But I've really liked Aaron's run so I don't have the same concern for a writer continuing his version/storylines. Maybe you're at a place where you value stability and a "first, do no harm" kind of vibe. I can understand that. But I'm curious why you think a newer writer would be more likely to continue Aaron's interpretation? I'd think the fresh voices are ready to make a mark and tell their own stories rather than a continuation? Or you're saying one of the old guard would be more likely to return Odinson to an older status quo?
I'll definitely second this. His "Abbot" is really good too, check it out if you get a chance. He's a very different writer (and from what little I know, person) than Aaron so it would be cool to go in another direction than where we've been for a while now. And "different than Aaron" would definitely make some regular posters here happy at least so it has that going for it, which is nice.
Me, personally, I genuinely love Waid's work. I think he would be really fun and cool on Thor .
Basically I think newer writers would probably continue what Aaron's doing because that's been the predominant "voice" on Thor for the past few years and is what probably quite a few people have been exposed to. Might be a newer writer is more concerned with building off of that then would be interested in Thor's previous history or what he was like before Aaron.But I've really liked Aaron's run so I don't have the same concern for a writer continuing his version/storylines. Maybe you're at a place where you value stability and a "first, do no harm" kind of vibe. I can understand that. But I'm curious why you think a newer writer would be more likely to continue Aaron's interpretation? I'd think the fresh voices are ready to make a mark and tell their own stories rather than a continuation? Or you're saying one of the old guard would be more likely to return Odinson to an older status quo?
But it probably depends on the writer.
In a very well written story that made a valid and excellent point which matched the wider event’s theme of corruption through manipulation of information. This somehow became misinterpreted by Thor fans despite not being particularly controversial.
Waid’s strength IMO is this kind of short and pointed story, but as often is the case amongst fandom, strengths are turned into things to criticise.
The ToA stories are an important influence towards how Thor came to be written, but in general they are not considered canonical. Later retellings contradict that material and more recent flashback material is carving out a new backstory.
I agree however that they are very good. Indeed the fact that they were such fun and so popular was what provoked the change in direction for Thor comics towards a more adventurous and fantastic style.
For more context this article is an interesting read.
http://sequart.org/magazine/30252/ho...ed-everything/
ToA also heavily influenced Kirby’s New Gods.
https://www.cbr.com/comic-book-legends-revealed-444/
Last edited by JKtheMac; 05-29-2019 at 03:02 AM.
Cull you son of a Bor, I cannot believe you made me love you!
shoudn't they announce a new writer already???
let's bring back Dan Jurgens.
I don’t see how it is misusing a character to have them lied to and act against their nature. It is pretty much a staple of early Thor that he would be lied to, manipulated or seduced. Surely a character who is manipulated into doing something wrong by being lied to and told it is the correct thing to do is an interesting story?