Thor Odinson, God of Thunder Appreciation 2019

[Wall-Crawler]

There seems to be a confussion that success/good sales equals a great story, it does not. Dan Slott stayed on Spider-Man for a decade, sold very well, all while fans were begging for years to take him out of the book, Tom King's Batman is selling really well, he's been in the book for a long time despite fans saying they don't like the story he is telling.

All the Transformers movies have made a ton of money, they are still bs.

So sure, Aaron's run is selling well and that's why he's been kept in the book, doesn't mean the book is good nor that the fans are enjoying his book, I mean ffs go look at any forum where fans can express their opinion, the vast majority does not like what's been done to the Thor character, but somehow critics actually love it. And like I have said many times, the answer is very easy, Aaron is indeed telling a good story, just not a good THOR story.

Even then, Aaron's Thor sales are actually exaggerated, they are not even in the Top 30 and sells just about the same as previous runs had been doing, Aaron simply gained more publicity because of the identity swap.

Both Jurgens and JMS sales were better than Aaron's if I'm not mistaken.

[JackDaw]

There seems to be a confussion that success/good sales equals a great story, it does not. Dan Slott stayed on Spider-Man for a decade, sold very well, all while fans were begging for years to take him out of the book, Tom King's Batman is selling really well, he's been in the book for a long time despite fans saying they don't like the story he is telling.

All the Transformers movies have made a ton of money, they are still bs.

So sure, Aaron's run is selling well and that's why he's been kept in the book, doesn't mean the book is good nor that the fans are enjoying his book, I mean ffs go look at any forum where fans can express their opinion, the vast majority does not like what's been done to the Thor character, but somehow critics actually love it. And like I have said many times, the answer is very easy, Aaron is indeed telling a good story, just not a good THOR story.

Even then, Aaron's Thor sales are actually exaggerated, they are not even in the Top 30 and sells just about the same as previous runs had been doing, Aaron simply gained more publicity because of the identity swap.

Both Jurgens and JMS sales were better than Aaron's if I'm not mistaken.

I accept completely..of course..that good sales does not = good story.

And for some brands...Spider-man, Batman for instance..I accept that reasonable sales continue even if story not being enjoyed.

But I don’t see Thor as one of those guaranteed good sellers. Do you??

I think on Thor good sales does indicate a large number of readers are really enjoying the story. And while enjoyment (like sales) does not equate to “quality”...in mainstream comics it (enjoyment) is pretty much the most important thing.

The Aaron run certainly isn’t to my taste (I read about 50 issues and disliked the characterisation of the main characters and found it a bit boring)...but I do fully accept Aaron delivering good sales on this particular series shows he must be doing something right.

[JKtheMac]

I accept completely..of course..that good sales does not = good story.

And for some brands...Spider-man, Batman for instance..I accept that reasonable sales continue even if story not being enjoyed.

But I don’t see Thor as one of those guaranteed good sellers. Do you??

I think on Thor good sales does indicate a large number of readers are really enjoying the story. And while enjoyment (like sales) does not equate to “quality”...in mainstream comics it (enjoyment) is pretty much the most important thing.

The Aaron run certainly isn’t to my taste (I read about 50 issues and disliked the characterisation of the main characters and found it a bit boring)...but I do fully accept Aaron delivering good sales on this particular series shows he must be doing something right.

Absolutely agree. Way back when his run moved into its second volume I remember pointing out that one of the alternatives is no Thor comic at all, because Thor is not a guaranteed seller and not that long ago we had a big gap without any Thor comics apart from some distinctly ordinary mini series produced to hopefully placate fans who demanded one. He wasn’t even in mainstream continuity. Just ignored.

Some of those mini-series were entirely nonsensical in their approach, rewriting canon entirely in an attempt to find a way to make him successful. Some were even good if not very canonical. Fans tend to forget the bad ones. Imagine if First Thunder had been a success and lasted for the good part of a decade. This very nearly happened with The Mighty Avenger. It was a very sad time to be a Thor fan.

The most important thing for Marvel is that Thor sells, otherwise he can easily just be used in the Avengers, and if he was no longer in the movies the temptation might be to drop him again. Just kill him off and hardly ever mention him just like last time.

Instead we have had a very successful story that has both sold well and been critically lauded. My voice here is one of only a few who stand up for the run. Elsewhere, in the critical community that is the other way around. The main reason I talk about Aaron’s run is because I think it is great. I could just state that over and over every chance I get and chip in with positive comments every time someone said something negative. In other words I could do exactly what many who don’t like it do. Instead I try to explain why I like it and why the critics are so positive about it. Why it has been such a success and why so many critics say it is one of the best Thor runs ever. Some even say it is the best run ever which even I don’t agree with.

The controversy comes when we actually end up in debate.

If for example someone says “Aaron clearly hates Thor” then it is something that can be demonstrated to be false.

If they say “he doesn’t understand Odin, Mangog, Cul, Freyja, Jane etc.” it is possible to point at the characterisations he is basing his on. Why he does understand them but not in the same way.

If they say “he isn’t canonical” it is possible to point out where he is drawing on canon, where canon isn’t as clear cut as is being claimed and where canon has always been unclear. Also, why it is entirely ok to change canon if the editors allow it.

My main problem is the way that some comic book fans tend to attack writers as being bad writers just because they don’t tell the stories in the way that they personally would like. This pushes beyond mere opinion into a personal attack of individuals. We see it in all social media and it is something I stand against. But I pick my battles on that one. I try and stick with properties I know well because I know from experience that as soon as you point out why the writer isn’t in the wrong you get challenged to justify it and you end up in a very deep debate about canon. That can be a good thing, because I love the canon. It can be a bad thing because it throws up a barrier to new or less well read readers.

[GodThor]

changing canon is never ok.

at least the one which drastically changes stuff.

[JKtheMac]

changing canon is never ok.

at least the one which drastically changes stuff.

It has always happened. It will always happen. If you don’t like that then comics may not be for you anymore. Static canon was a phenomenon of a brief window of the history of comics. It is possible that was the era you grew up with or were introduced to. It just isn’t possible to maintain a static canon and tell stories for new readers. New readers want things that speak to them and their world, not a world they weren’t even born in.

It may not be obvious but Aaron’s approach is the compromise position. The extreme is Thor: The Mighty Avenger. Where canon is just rewritten without reference to the past. Characters are not even the same people as they were before. Different histories, different assumptions, different canon.

[voidox]

lol, JK making the same points here as in the War of the Realms thread, people respond to said points and break his argument apart just like I did there, yet he keeps repeating the same ****~

The first act of the actual war was the space attack that Jane countered.

nope, first act of the war was when Malekith massacred the light elves, hell, he had the civil war before that while making his dark council, also part of the war if you think about it... stop picking and choosing stuff that suits your argument... again and again you refuse to acknowledge this.

But sure, let's take your view that the start was the announcement, Jane was not the only or even the first one to "counter" it, you ignore iron man, dr. strange and other characters being there that day dealing with it.

Then Jane goes to the council realm meeting with Volstag and BOTH were calling for action.

She then takes up the mantle of the war when Asgard and half the Realms had no interest in fighting

yes, cause she was the only one who did that eh... let's ignore any other character also doing the same things to suit ur argument.

After ‘There must always be a Thor’ it was her main motivation

yus, just how the war was the main motivation for so many other characters as well, like say Volstag, Freyja, so on.

Every story told in her run was in some way related to the war. Either directly or indirectly

ya, and just like her SO MANY OTHER CHARACTERS were also dealing with the war directly or indirectly, it was not just jane... and she was never more than responding to things Malekith did.

and replace jane as thor with ANY CHARACTER, nothing changes.... Jane was in no way special or vital to this war, she was just the main character of the book that had a war going on affecting the realms, so of course her story would involve said war and we would see the war from her perspective.

Jane as Thor was the key protagonist in the story of the war and in a standard adventure tale that means she will be there at the end trying to finish it.

cept jane is no longer Thor and she was never the "key protagonist", was one of the protagonists of the war of the realms~

With the war coming to Midgard now, Thor is now the protagonist directly fighting the war (not just responding to stuff like jane), so in standard adventure tale that means he will be there at the end trying to finish it.
__________________________________________________ _________

Yeah, how is this Jane's war? The built up during her time as Thor, but what did she do to shape it? Thematically, where does she even fit, even with the hammer?

yup, Jane has done nothing to shape this war or events in any real way... all she did was respond to various **** Malekith was doing like so many other characters were. Yet somehow JK keeps saying this is "jane's war" :/

It's Jane's war? Really! I strongly disagree with that take, weren't the seeds of the War of the Realm planted before the whole unworthy drama and Jane picking up the hammer? This is most assuredly Thor Odinson's and Asgard's war, not Jane's. Hell, Malekith as hardly given Jane any special thought whatsoever, just another person to be eliminated along with others. This should come down to Thor vs Malekith in the end, but knowing Aaron Jane will save the day.

yup, Thor originally went to deal with Malekith when Malekith escaped and started his civil war/dark council. and ya, I don't remember Malekith ever singling out Jane or giving her special thought. Hell, Aaron himself has never made the war of the realms about jane alone even if we know he's going to force **** so she gets to end it, god the all-mother and "asgard is mine" -_-

great points, I also brought up similar arguments in the War of the Realms thread that JK went on to ignore and not respond to... he keeps saying this is "jane's war" with the same single talking point without having anything else to back it up, and when someone counters or breaks apart his argument, he just runs away to repeat the same wrong ****~

[JKtheMac]

lol, JK making the same points here as in the War of the Realms thread, people respond to said points and break his argument apart just like I did there, yet he keeps repeating the same ****~

Really? You 'broke my argument apart'? Why respond here as well? You argued, I will give you that much.

Look at the cover of the books that contained the War. It was Jane on the cover. She was the key protagonist in that story. That's the whole of my point in a nutshell. I am not going to argue about a plain as your nose fact.
I really shouldn't have clicked view post.

[voidox]

Really? You 'broke my argument apart'? Why respond here as well? You argued, I will give you that much.

saw you making the same wrong points here as you did there, so I thought to respond

and ya, I'd say I broke your argument since you can't respond to a single point I made in either thread, ranging from about the start of the war, jane's involvement, other characters, war status right now and on and on~

Look at the cover of the books that contained the War. It was Jane on the cover. She was the key protagonist in that story. That's the whole of my point in a nutshell. I am not going to argue about a plain as your nose fact.

LOL SHE WAS ON THE COVER = key protagonist of the entire war!

oh man, the main character of the book is on the cover, that's your new point that this is "jane's war" and the "key protagonist"?????

I already said jane was one of the protagonists when she was thor, of course she'd be on the cover of her book that is about her story in reacting to Malekith's war on all realms, wtf u on about -_-

all of us responded and pointed out how this is NOT "jane's war" using various different points, proof, panels, other characters, facts of the war timeline, jane's involvement and so on... and your response is... she was on the cover?

[JKtheMac]

and ya, I'd say I broke your argument since you can't respond to a single point I made in either thread

Take the hint. It takes two people to have an argument. I know you don't agree with me, but I am not going to argue. It is sufficient to make my point clear and I have done that. You made your points very clear in the other thread. The discussion was closed there.

[Panic]

Absolutely agree. Way back when his run moved into its second volume I remember pointing out that one of the alternatives is no Thor comic at all, because Thor is not a guaranteed seller and not that long ago we had a big gap without any Thor comics apart from some distinctly ordinary mini series produced to hopefully placate fans who demanded one. He wasn’t even in mainstream continuity. Just ignored.

Some of those mini-series were entirely nonsensical in their approach, rewriting canon entirely in an attempt to find a way to make him successful. Some were even good if not very canonical. Fans tend to forget the bad ones. Imagine if First Thunder had been a success and lasted for the good part of a decade. This very nearly happened with The Mighty Avenger. It was a very sad time to be a Thor fan.

Though I did not read Thor: The Mighty Avenger myself, I remember it being quite well regarded as a fun all-ages book. I certainly had no problems with an out-of-continuity series, and a good-natured one at that. Stating "It was a very sad time to be a Thor fan" is you presenting your opinion as fact, which is something you complain about others doing despite your own deliberate use of "authoritative voice". People saying "I think" or "I feel" rather than dressing points of view up as objective facts would make the thread run more smoothly, imo.

The most important thing for Marvel is that Thor sells, otherwise he can easily just be used in the Avengers, and if he was no longer in the movies the temptation might be to drop him again. Just kill him off and hardly ever mention him just like last time.

Instead we have had a very successful story that has both sold well and been critically lauded.

You are presenting a false dichotomy - it's Aaron's way or oblivion. You've dressed Aaron up as Thor's saviour, but for many here what he has done to Thor Odinson is very damaging, perhaps the most damaging set of storylines to Thor's character and status that I've seen. Success for the title at any price is certainly not something I'm going to cheer for.

My voice here is one of only a few who stand up for the run. Elsewhere, in the critical community that is the other way around. The main reason I talk about Aaron’s run is because I think it is great. I could just state that over and over every chance I get and chip in with positive comments every time someone said something negative. In other words I could do exactly what many who don’t like it do. Instead I try to explain why I like it and why the critics are so positive about it.

But you don't simply say why you like the run - if you did that you wouldn't get such push-back in the thread. You frequently present yourself as an expert, your opinion as fact, and differing opinions as wrong or uneducated. You frequently spin aspects of Aaron's plots to suit your own arguments, sometimes radically reinterpreting what is on the page to deflect criticism, often offering no concrete evidence to back up your claim. You often use an "Emperor's New Clothes" style argument where you suggest that your opponents are too stupid or shallow in their reading to see the truth. You continue to try and place yourself in a position of intellectual authority rather than being one voice amongst equals. You lecture from on high instead of simply chatting; that's always going to inflame things, imo.

Why it has been such a success and why so many critics say it is one of the best Thor runs ever. Some even say it is the best run ever which even I don’t agree with.

The controversy comes when we actually end up in debate.

If for example someone says “Aaron clearly hates Thor” then it is something that can be demonstrated to be false.

If they say “he doesn’t understand Odin, Mangog, Cul, Freyja, Jane etc.” it is possible to point at the characterisations he is basing his on. Why he does understand them but not in the same way.

If they say “he isn’t canonical” it is possible to point out where he is drawing on canon, where canon isn’t as clear cut as is being claimed and where canon has always been unclear. Also, why it is entirely ok to change canon if the editors allow it.

My main problem is the way that some comic book fans tend to attack writers as being bad writers just because they don’t tell the stories in the way that they personally would like. This pushes beyond mere opinion into a personal attack of individuals. We see it in all social media and it is something I stand against. But I pick my battles on that one. I try and stick with properties I know well because I know from experience that as soon as you point out why the writer isn’t in the wrong you get challenged to justify it and you end up in a very deep debate about canon. That can be a good thing, because I love the canon. It can be a bad thing because it throws up a barrier to new or less well read readers.

The bad writing complaint crops up again and again - I tend not to use it because whether a story works or not for the audience in this genre is very subjective. You are not only taking into account general writing structure, but also how it fits into a universe of stories written by different authors, playing with characters the writer didn't create and has no real claim of ownership of. Some of Aaron's story I find very weak, and his attitude to many characters I find condescending, but he knows how to write an epic story and he knows the importance of getting the right artist for the job and getting them to stay (something that seems a lost art at Marvel these days), so I'd never say he was bad or can't write; he's another Bendis - talented, great with characters he likes and respects, poison to those he doesn't. And yes, I don't think he's a fan of Thor Odinson, and I think think that shows.

[JKtheMac]

Though I did not read Thor: The Mighty Avenger myself, I remember it being quite well regarded as a fun all-ages book. I certainly had no problems with an out-of-continuity series, and a good-natured one at that. Stating "It was a very sad time to be a Thor fan" is you presenting your opinion as fact, which is something you complain about others doing despite your own deliberate use of "authoritative voice". People saying "I think" or "I feel" rather than dressing points of view up as objective facts would make the thread run more smoothly, imo.

No you mistake my inference. I found it a sad time to be a Thor fan when Thor was out of continuity. I am sure most of us did, but I wasn't speaking for anyone else. I wasn't aware anyone was so sensitive about that here. Also I wasn't saying anything negative about that book aside from it not being in continuity.

You are presenting a false dichotomy - it's Aaron's way or oblivion. You've dressed Aaron up as Thor's saviour, but for many here what he has done to Thor Odinson is very damaging, perhaps the most damaging set of storylines to Thor's character and status that I've seen. Success for the title at any price is certainly not something I'm going to cheer for.

Well you know I don't consider it damaging for starters. Personally I believe Aaron has improved Thor. I was simply saying that they could have cancelled it if they wanted. If you go back to the post I was responding to and the post they themselves were responding to the context might help. They still could cancel it. They did it before. You don't need to cheer for it either way.

But you don't simply say why you like the run - if you did that you wouldn't get such push-back in the thread. You frequently present yourself as an expert, your opinion as fact, and differing opinions as wrong or uneducated. You frequently spin aspects of Aaron's plots to suit your own arguments, sometimes radically reinterpreting what is on the page to deflect criticism, often offering no concrete evidence to back up your claim. You often use an "Emperor's New Clothes" style argument where you suggest that your opponents are too stupid or shallow in their reading to see the truth. You continue to try and place yourself in a position of intellectual authority rather than being one voice amongst equals. You lecture from on high instead of simply chatting; that's always going to inflame things, imo.

That is the way you often paint me. I find the assertion quite mean spirited. I would never say anything like this about another poster, quite apart from it technically being against the forum's rules. I don't recognise it at all. I most certainly don't seek to suggest that anyone is too stupid or shallow.

[Wall-Crawler]

That is the way you often paint me. I find the assertion quite mean spirited. I would never say anything like this about another poster, quite apart from it technically being against the forum's rules. I don't recognise it at all. I most certainly don't seek to suggest that anyone is too stupid or shallow.

It's not the way he paints you, it's the way you paint yourself, there is absolutely nothing wrong with defending Aaron's run and the way you view it, but it's your approach towards others the problem, which I admit has sometimes irked me and made me reply in such passive/aggressive ways to you.

This is not an isolated instance, Panic is not the only one who has made this comment about you and how you speak to others on the forums, so perhaps maybe you should take a look at the way you interact with others and see where your behavior might be interpreted that way, because like I said, it's not just him who thinks that way, you've been called out for that behavior by many users.

[JKtheMac]

It's not the way he paints you, it's the way you paint yourself, there is absolutely nothing wrong with defending Aaron's run and the way you view it, but it's your approach towards others the problem, which I admit has sometimes irked me and made me reply in such passive/aggressive ways to you.

This is not an isolated instance, Panic is not the only one who has made this comment about you and how you speak to others on the forums, so perhaps maybe you should take a look at the way you interact with others and see where your behavior might be interpreted that way, because like I said, it's not just him who thinks that way, you've been called out for that behavior by many users.

And I have warranted this intervention how exactly?

[Frontier]

I think on Thor good sales does indicate a large number of readers are really enjoying the story. And while enjoyment (like sales) does not equate to “quality”...in mainstream comics it (enjoyment) is pretty much the most important thing.

The Aaron run certainly isn’t to my taste (I read about 50 issues and disliked the characterisation of the main characters and found it a bit boring)...but I do fully accept Aaron delivering good sales on this particular series shows he must be doing something right.

It'll be interesting to see what sales are like once Aaron leaves and a new writer takes over.

We've seen with Al Ewing that even a more niche Marvel writer can become a sales success with the right major A-list title, so I wonder if something to that effect might happen instead of them giving Thor to a "name" writer (although frankly most of those in their stable already seem pretty busy).

Though I did not read Thor: The Mighty Avenger myself, I remember it being quite well regarded as a fun all-ages book. I certainly had no problems with an out-of-continuity series, and a good-natured one at that. Stating "It was a very sad time to be a Thor fan" is you presenting your opinion as fact, which is something you complain about others doing despite your own deliberate use of "authoritative voice". People saying "I think" or "I feel" rather than dressing points of view up as objective facts would make the thread run more smoothly, imo.

That mini actually made me really like Thor and Jane's relationship, and I wish it had continued.

Now I really hope we hardly ever see Thor and Valkyrie Jane in the same issue together.

No you mistake my inference. I found it a sad time to be a Thor fan when Thor was out of continuity. I am sure most of us did, but I wasn't speaking for anyone else. I wasn't aware anyone was so sensitive about that here. Also I wasn't saying anything negative about that book aside from it not being in continuity.

So your issue with it was that it was the only Thor book on the stands at the time was an out-of-continuity title?

Well you know I don't consider it damaging for starters. Personally I believe Aaron has improved Thor. I was simply saying that they could have cancelled it if they wanted. If you go back to the post I was responding to and the post they themselves were responding to the context might help. They still could cancel it. They did it before. You don't need to cheer for it either way.

I will concede that Aaron has drastically improved Thor's prominence and sales with his tenure.

I personally don't think he's improved Thor as a character (unless we're talking about Jane Foster) or his mythos.

[JKtheMac]

So your issue with it was that it was the only Thor book on the stands at the time was an out-of-continuity title?

My concern at the time was it could have become the new Thor. For a while it was very popular and if they had chosen that route they would have ditched the past entirely. It was a touch and go time for Thor.

I personally don't think he's improved Thor as a character (unless we're talking about Jane Foster) or his mythos.

From my perspective there were a number of issues that needed tidying up and sorting out to bring Thor back into the mainstream of the MU and I believe many of those issues have been addressed or are being addressed by Aaron. I believe he will leave Thor in a much more healthy place than he found it. He found it in a bit of a mess.