A strange trend in Marvel Comics...and fandom

[Baron of Faltine]

Ok before I start exposing the tread...I am not completely clear about the theme and i don't know if i could really properly put into written word, is just a feeling i got in these recent year.
Once time Marvel comic and its fandom where big on the "human" side of superheroism. Its heroes where not almight for the most part, even the hulk is strong but that is ALL he is, not flight or any extra power of sort, and they were deeply flawed on human level(ohso many!), but also lot of positive human traits, the combined with their frailties make them more heroic and very likeable.
BUt nowadays, don't know what come first, but fandom and marvel comics are often pushing way too much for the most unbeatable, invincible, non human aspect, using the word of a post that inspired me to vent off this feeling i got since a while "god's and monsters" not "puny humans".
And this feel wrong to me. I like the hero badassery, awesomeness and cool attitude, but stoic grim heroes who never fail on any level...are not exactly exciting on long term. I cannot link to them. I'm afraid Marvle comics is becoming like a MCDonald of comics, offering pleasurable instant gratifying trashfood, that on long term leave not much...except the "at least is not Wendy" thougth.
Fandom expecially freak me out, like they are pissed off when the hero show some form of human empathy or frailty! I dont' understand, the mask the hero wear is more important of the hero inside? Really?
Perhaps I'm over reacting and I'm sorry for wasting everybody time if that is the case.
But I really needed to post this.

[charliehustle415]

Ok before I start exposing the tread...I am not completely clear about the theme and i don't know if i could really properly put into written word, is just a feeling i got in these recent year.
Once time Marvel comic and its fandom where big on the "human" side of superheroism. Its heroes where not almight for the most part, even the hulk is strong but that is ALL he is, not flight or any extra power of sort, and they were deeply flawed on human level(ohso many!), but also lot of positive human traits, the combined with their frailties make them more heroic and very likeable.
BUt nowadays, don't know what come first, but fandom and marvel comics are often pushing way too much for the most unbeatable, invincible, non human aspect, using the word of a post that inspired me to vent off this feeling i got since a while "god's and monsters" not "puny humans".
And this feel wrong to me. I like the hero badassery, awesomeness and cool attitude, but stoic grim heroes who never fail on any level...are not exactly exciting on long term. I cannot link to them. I'm afraid Marvle comics is becoming like a MCDonald of comics, offering pleasurable instant gratifying trashfood, that on long term leave not much...except the "at least is not Wendy" thougth.
Fandom expecially freak me out, like they are pissed off when the hero show some form of human empathy or frailty! I dont' understand, the mask the hero wear is more important of the hero inside? Really?
Perhaps I'm over reacting and I'm sorry for wasting everybody time if that is the case.
But I really needed to post this.

That's interesting, because I always believed the opposite. Marvel heroes were "super" heroes while DC heroes are the heroes that fit your description. In Marvel you have Mutants, Inhumans, Gods of every pantheon, Science Accidents, and a cadre of alien species, whereas, in DC you had more "grounded" types of heroes the biggest being Batman.

I'm curious as to what particular stories are you harkening back to?

[Jabare]

That's interesting, because I always believed the opposite. Marvel heroes were "super" heroes while DC heroes are the heroes that fit your description. In Marvel you have Mutants, Inhumans, Gods of every pantheon, Science Accidents, and a cadre of alien species, whereas, in DC you had more "grounded" types of heroes the biggest being Batman.

I'm curious as to what particular stories are you harkening back to?

I agree with this

[gurkle]

Marvel comics used to place a lot of emphasis on the human, non-superpowered world. Their flagship character is Spider-Man and except for the villains, practically his whole supporting cast is regular people: his aunt, his girlfriends, his co-workers. And we followed his civilian, non-superhero life even more than Superman's and much more than Batman's. The Fantastic Four were both a "cosmic" team and a street-level team that was a full part of the life of New York City. The X-Men hung out in a beatnik coffee house, Carol Danvers edited a magazine for Spider-Man's boss, etc.

Today, for a bunch of reasons - the decline of secret identities, the influence of the movies - a lot of the civilian life has fallen away and characters spend most of their time being superheroes. They mostly interact with other superheroes, they date within the superhero community, and they live a life apart from ordinary people. It's not just the comics at all; the last Avengers movie civilians might just as well not have existed and nobody even talked to anybody who wasn't a superhero.

Maybe it's just that unless a character is like Spider-Man with a pre-existing grounding in the ordinary world, everything always circles back to superheroes doing super stuff because that is what people are interested in. But I wouldn't mind seeing more work go into building up a civilian supporting cast for some of the heroes, especially the mutants, most of whom haven't had a civilian job in their lives (Scott was a radio announcer for like one issue in the '60s; why can't he go back to that?).

[Anthony W]

The Marvel Universe became the DC universe circa 1983 so gradually that I didn't even notice it.

[Prof. Warren]

That's interesting, because I always believed the opposite. Marvel heroes were "super" heroes while DC heroes are the heroes that fit your description. In Marvel you have Mutants, Inhumans, Gods of every pantheon, Science Accidents, and a cadre of alien species, whereas, in DC you had more "grounded" types of heroes the biggest being Batman.

All opinion aside, I have to say this really is not even a remotely arguable position if you're talking about the differences between Marvel and DC.

DC characters are far more iconic and elevated than Marvel's heroes. And by "elevated", I mean they have the stature of the heroes of legends, rather than that of ordinary people. They're Olympian figures whereas Marvel heroes, even their Gods, have feet of clay.

Even an ostensibly street level hero like Batman is really so beyond being normal that he has zero in common with ordinary people. For one, he's a billionaire. But more importantly, he's dedicated himself so intensely to his crusade and to embodying an ideal that he is essentially removed from society.

You have some "regular", non-powered heroes in the DC pantheon, like Green Arrow and Wildcat and others but by their proximity to Gods and legendary figures that rarefied air clings to them too.

In contrast, Marvel heroes are deeply flawed, plagued by personal problems and frequently find themselves struggling in both their civilian and heroic identities.

Most famously, there's Spider-Man who seldom can catch a break as Peter Parker or Spider-Man.

But you also have the tormented Bruce Banner, Tony Stark with his addiction problems, Matt Murdock with his series of tragedies and his Catholic guilt hanging over all of it, the X-Men, who always find themselves fighting for their right to exist and are always fearful of whether or not they have a future, Steve Rogers, a man out of time who is continually struggling to identify his place in a modern world and to reconcile his personal beliefs with those of the country he represents.

I could go on, but suffice it to say, the difference between Marvel and DC has always been that DC's heroes are larger than life while Marvel's are more flawed and ordinary.

[Prof. Warren]

Ok before I start exposing the tread...I am not completely clear about the theme and i don't know if i could really properly put into written word, is just a feeling i got in these recent year.
Once time Marvel comic and its fandom where big on the "human" side of superheroism. Its heroes where not almight for the most part, even the hulk is strong but that is ALL he is, not flight or any extra power of sort, and they were deeply flawed on human level(ohso many!), but also lot of positive human traits, the combined with their frailties make them more heroic and very likeable.
BUt nowadays, don't know what come first, but fandom and marvel comics are often pushing way too much for the most unbeatable, invincible, non human aspect, using the word of a post that inspired me to vent off this feeling i got since a while "god's and monsters" not "puny humans".
And this feel wrong to me. I like the hero badassery, awesomeness and cool attitude, but stoic grim heroes who never fail on any level...are not exactly exciting on long term. I cannot link to them. I'm afraid Marvle comics is becoming like a MCDonald of comics, offering pleasurable instant gratifying trashfood, that on long term leave not much...except the "at least is not Wendy" thougth.
Fandom expecially freak me out, like they are pissed off when the hero show some form of human empathy or frailty! I dont' understand, the mask the hero wear is more important of the hero inside? Really?
Perhaps I'm over reacting and I'm sorry for wasting everybody time if that is the case.
But I really needed to post this.

Well, you're talking about two things here.

One, a changing attitude among fandom and two, how comics themselves have or haven't changed.

As for the first, I do think there's a segment of modern fandom that reacts badly to seeing characters that make mistakes, seem weak or embody flawed personality traits.

I think this comes from the rise of the video game generation. I think there's a segment of the audience that just wants to indulge in power fantasies and complex characterizations only get in the way of that sense of gratification they crave in seeing a hero win and triumph, in a clear fashion, without episodes of doubt or angst.

As for the second point, I think Marvel heroes are still more flawed than they are uncomplicated ass kickers but there is less of an emphasis on their personal lives than there used to be and I think that's largely due to a smaller page count in modern comics. That extra page or two that used to be devoted to developing subplots or showing the hero interacting with their supporting cast, is now gone and the remaining pages writers and artists have to work with are, by necessity, spent on moving the larger story forward and the kinds of smaller moments that comics used to have room for are the first to get cut. It's an unfortunate casualty of the changing reality of publishing.

The Marvel Universe became the DC universe circa 1983 so gradually that I didn't even notice it.

I would guess that you yourself don't even know what you mean by that and could not even begin to explain it or give examples to illustrate your point.

[charliehustle415]

All opinion aside, I have to say this really is not even a remotely arguable position if you're talking about the differences between Marvel and DC.

DC characters are far more iconic and elevated than Marvel's heroes. And by "elevated", I mean they have the stature of the heroes of legends, rather than that of ordinary people. They're Olympian figures whereas Marvel heroes, even their Gods, have feet of clay.

Even an ostensibly street level hero like Batman is really so beyond being normal that he has zero in common with ordinary people. For one, he's a billionaire. But more importantly, he's dedicated himself so intensely to his crusade and to embodying an ideal that he is essentially removed from society.

You have some "regular", non-powered heroes in the DC pantheon, like Green Arrow and Wildcat and others but by their proximity to Gods and legendary figures that rarefied air clings to them too.

In contrast, Marvel heroes are deeply flawed, plagued by personal problems and frequently find themselves struggling in both their civilian and heroic identities.

Most famously, there's Spider-Man who seldom can catch a break as Peter Parker or Spider-Man.

But you also have the tormented Bruce Banner, Tony Stark with his addiction problems, Matt Murdock with his series of tragedies and his Catholic guilt hanging over all of it, the X-Men, who always find themselves fighting for their right to exist and are always fearful of whether or not they have a future, Steve Rogers, a man out of time who is continually struggling to identify his place in a modern world and to reconcile his personal beliefs with those of the country he represents.

I could go on, but suffice it to say, the difference between Marvel and DC has always been that DC's heroes are larger than life while Marvel's are more flawed and ordinary.

Oh, I completely agree with you. Looking at DC heroes outside of their universe and as characters of fiction, there is no greater, what I mean with my statement is that the DC heroes themselves within the DC universe are not as superpowered as the heroes in the Marvel universe. In the DC universe you have aliens, regular humans, science experiments, and meta-humans

Which I think if the spirit of the statement from the OP, however, I could be wrong

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I see it as a generational backlash to the Grim Dark world of the 90s and its legacy which continued in the 2000s with stuff like Ultimate Marvel. I mean after Ultimate Marvel made any non-Spider-Man hero practically indistinguishable from villains, people needed something in the other direction. Also Marvel is now owned by Disney, and that means that Tony Stark, as per Shane Black in Iron Man 3, can never be an alcoholic in the movies. In the comics he keeps himself in check. In the wake of the Me Too crisis, the writer of the Black Panther movie pointed out that Tony Stark's attitude in the first half of ''Iron Man 1'' wouldn't fly in a movie if it came today, and Disney-Marvel probably intuited that so well before that, later movies made him monogamous and in a committed relationship with Pepper Potts (his Mary Jane) which wasn't there in the comics but kept for the films.

And you know Civil War was this event built on "flawed" heroes and that ended up polarizing Marvel thanks to Millar's mangled execution of an inherently stupid premise.

Do something badly time and time again and expect the entitled praise that comes with the notion of "the Cult of Marvel" (i.e. edgy flawed heroes which is something Quesada and others fostered in a manner very much like a mid-life crisis dude getting into a biker gang) and eventually the audience will stop caring.

I think people do need to re-examine the Cult of Marvel. Stan Lee for instance always kept a line between light and dark and he was more light than dark. His comics weren't all that violent, and Lee's condemnation of Garth Ennis' Fury series is legendary and exceptional (since he never passes judgment on such things). He did push things to some extent but not as much as people thought. The Fantastic Four in the Lee/Kirby run was fairly light hearted and adventurous, and the Lee-Ditko/Lee-Romita run were more light than dark, more comic than tragic, and the Peter there wasn't the non-functional man-child you have since 2008.

It was edgy for its time but that time was the Silver Age and it's not that hard to be edgier than the Silver Age.

[Snoop Dogg]

In the comics he keeps himself in check.

Nobody tell him.

[Prof. Warren]

Oh, I completely agree with you. Looking at DC heroes outside of their universe and as characters of fiction, there is no greater, what I mean with my statement is that the DC heroes themselves within the DC universe are not as superpowered as the heroes in the Marvel universe. In the DC universe you have aliens, regular humans, science experiments, and meta-humans

Well, that's actually kind of the opposite of what I was saying.

Maybe I phrased my point badly.

I meant to say that within the DC universe, their heroes are much more godly and above the regular citizenry than Marvel heroes are in theirs.

There's an "everyday" quality to Marvel's heroes that DC heroes have never quite embodied.

DC heroes are likely to have statues erected in their honor. Marvel's are more likely to have garbage thrown at them.

That's not a statement of saying one universe's characters are innately better or greater as fictional characters, only to note that they have different qualities and that their respective universes reflect those differences.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Nobody tell him.

He attended AA meetings in Bendis' Invincible Run and was more distracted busy with superhero work than otherwise.

[Prof. Warren]

I see it as a generational backlash to the Grim Dark world of the 90s and its legacy which continued in the 2000s with stuff like Ultimate Marvel. I mean after Ultimate Marvel made any non-Spider-Man hero practically indistinguishable from villains, people needed something in the other direction. Also Marvel is now owned by Disney, and that means that Tony Stark, as per Shane Black in Iron Man 3, can never be an alcoholic in the movies. In the comics he keeps himself in check. In the wake of the Me Too crisis, the writer of the Black Panther movie pointed out that Tony Stark's attitude in the first half of ''Iron Man 1'' wouldn't fly in a movie if it came today, and Disney-Marvel probably intuited that so well before that, later movies made him monogamous and in a committed relationship with Pepper Potts (his Mary Jane) which wasn't there in the comics but kept for the films.

Some people place far, far too much emphasis on Disney's role in what Marvel does, conjuring all kinds of imaginary scenarios.

Tony Stark could have an alcohol problem in the movies...if there were a place for it. Tony's alcoholism, to do it justice, takes far more narrative space than a movie every few years can devote to. And in the comics, he keeps himself in check for the most part but much of that has to do with not wanting to retread the same old beats. How many times do you want to go back to that Demon in a Bottle well? How many times can you go back before it loses its potency? In the current issues, Dan Slott is putting an interesting digital spin on Tony's addiction problem. Curious to see where he takes it.

As for Tony's attitude in the first Iron Man, he may not be able to be depicted in the same way today. But neither would Pepper Potts be able to be depicted as she was in IM 1 with her slut-shaming of Tony's dates. No one thought much about those kinds of scenes then but they would be glaringly tone-deaf today. It's not about Disney's influence, it's about how the larger culture has changed in a relatively short time.

[Snoop Dogg]

Marvel characters, including the Gods, were the ones established with human flaws and feet of clay and anxieties baked into their DNA in the 60's, and then DC characters followed suit later.

The Hulk is a special case where the fundamental stuff of the crafty, surly anti-hero was changed into what the character is generally thought of now, so now that the character is just going back to those fundamentals it feels fresh and new.

Fandom today probably doesn't react more negatively to character failing or having flaws or suffering than fans of old, but they have the internet, so--

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Some people place far, far too much emphasis on Disney's role in what Marvel does, conjuring all kinds of imaginary scenarios.

To quote Shane Black himself, "I think we were just told by the studio that we should probably paint Tony Stark as being kind of an industrialist and a crazy guy, or even a bad guy at some points, but the 'Demon in a Bottle' stuff of him being an alcoholic wouldn't really fly. I don't blame that." (https://screenrant.com/disney-iron-m...emon-bottle/2/). So Tony could create Ultron and basically single-handedly pre-redeem MCU Hank Pym in the process...but alcoholism and skirt chasing, not a chance.

https://screenrant.com/mcu-phase-1-disney-differences/

So Disney does in fact expect the MCU to toe the line. Especially since Phase 3 where Kevin Feige cut himself off the Marvel Creative Committee, Perlmutter and became a separate vertical in the Disney family.

There's still problems and issues between Disney and Marvel, Winter Soldier made HYDRA cool, but Hydra are Nazis, a fact that was repeated and stated countless times in earlier comics but the movie made them marketable, and in the process you have the mess that is Secret Empire which Chris Evans, on twitter, expressed shock over. It's a good thing that for most people Chris Evans is Cap.

Marvel characters, including the Gods, were the ones established with human flaws and feet of clay and anxieties baked into their DNA in the 60's, and then DC characters followed suit later.

Call me crazy, but I always found the DC Universe a more democratic place than the Marvel Universe. In DC, sure Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman are at the top but Justice League stories and events don't always revolve just around those three, and the events, whether good, bad, stupid (as most events usually end up being), tend to offer a wide variety. The fact that every hero and person in DC have their own fictional cities and own supporting casts and regular groups in each place tend to allow for more width and scope, and you get a sense that it's about something bigger than just New York (and even then Manhattan and Queens, maybe some parts of Brooklyn...and mostly Midtown, and Downtown in Manhattan).

As discussed in another thread, DC have also generally put out more number of prominent female superheroes than Marvel have historically, not that I'd call them feminists. To me the so-called Marvel revolution of the '60s basically boiled down to male pride and male angst.

Fandom today probably doesn't react more negatively to character failing or having flaws or suffering than fans of old, but they have the internet, so--

Maybe if the OP can list specific stories and examples. If he means stuff like Civil War, Secret Empire, it would be a mistake or a mis-representation to say that fans are reacting negatively to characters failing or having flaws or suffering in those stories.

And you know fans of the old did object to heroes failing...a good part of the backlash to Gwen Stacy's death was less to do with the character killing or more about Spidey failing to save "my woman" (as he refers to Gwen in that story...yeah not dated well), and Gwen's death and the adulation people have over that edgy moment which led to the fridging of women, is basically missing white woman syndrome. People objected to Phoenix's death and the X-Men failing to save her.