Somehow that story line does not seem like a winner to me, but apparently others thought it acceptable.
Somehow that story line does not seem like a winner to me, but apparently others thought it acceptable.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
Aaron’s Thor got beat up by everyone. Cates’ Thor just wrecked Galactus. That’s the difference right there. I’m curious to see how Aaron will handle Thor in the Avengers now that Cates has restored him to someone you would fear fighting.
I think it's just a matter of time before Thor's new golden age begins. It's always right around the corner.
Exactly.
I actually preferred the way Jason Aaron handled King Thor vs Galactus. The first round went to Galactus clean but the second round had Thor put on the Necro-Sword and that coupled with the Odin force and his base power was enough to put down a weakened Galactus.
Cates just had Thor punk Galactus throughout the entire arc and blow him up at the end. I know he wanted to show Thor as a bad ass but it was a bit much.
If you ask me whether Marvel writers hate Thor, then my answer is no. No, because no matter how you slice it, Thor is beloved by Marvel writers because he got such a development in his characters that no demigod or godly characters can be compared to him. They are showing him as the God that human love. Not because of his power, but because of his love of humanity and how grown he is with them. To me, that is severely more interesting than reading Thor punching a planet or battling god because that is human. Jason Aaron might be not Walter Simonson in terms of epicness, but Aaron knew what kind God that Thor was supposed to be. The God that is with us. Not an imaginary way, but a more literal way. He is drinking with us, partying with us, telling us stories of his adventures while boasting like a prick. That is the human way of the depiction of God that human love and, that is why Thor's story starts not with a big battle splash, but with the story. The story that everyone forgets about Thor is trying to lift his hammer while questioning if he can do it or not. That is human and wether if he can blow up a mountain is secondary.
Now I know as fans we want him to have a badass power and badass fight fit of his power, a story that pits him against his peer or more in strength and he defeat him while commanding like a badass god that he should be. But is that Thor? Is that the fun-loving Thor that eat ice cream and become giddy after getting a single date with Jane Foster? I think not. It's a matter of perspective. Thor is not only badass god. He is much more than that, and we as fans will be damned if that is the only aspect of him. If his only story arc is fighting without context, then what is the fun of it? I read some posters stated that the problems with Aaron's story are how Jane Foster is better than Thor.
I think the idea is lost to some people, but the point of that story is Jane Foster is human because of that she is stronger than Thor. Thor can move stars and making a storm size of the galaxy that ate the planet, but at the end of the day, he is God. A God of course, can do that. But what about mortals who worshipped them and much weaker than them. Should they get, themself killed and damned because they can't do anything. No. They did the best they could, and no matter how you slice it, the mortals that can do that are infinitely greater than Gods who can do anything. Now, Jason Aaron wanted to portray that, but the problem with the story is that it is intertwined with a story that people would hate, and that is how he become mopey because he lost his hammer. But it does not hammer that he lost, but his self-esteem at Gods. He feels that Gods are pointless. If you look at his dad and any other Gods of Marvel, they just do whatever they wanted without care, and mortals are the ones to suffer. But he forgot that he is not them and will always be not them, because he is Thor - The God of THunder, protector of humanity. It doesn't matter how much you spin it he will always be like that. But, again if you make a story about human then you need a human feeling too and that is depression. Thor's depression is an interesting angle to read not because of the depression story is interesting. No it is not. But because even God can feel it like that, then we also can feel it too. But if we can get past that then God-like Thor surely can do it too,
So all in all Marvel modern writers don't hate Thor, but writing him monotonously won't make him interesting. If his story only features him fighting someone then it will get boring, same can be said if he is badass, then he will be jerk. They just try to make it interesting in the way that they wanted him to be and of course, the story sells that is already proven that the idea works for Thor.
Oh and that thing about Thor doesn't control lightning with his hands like in Empyre. What kind cool scene is that if after he get tangled by vines he immediately destroy it with Thunder. it's matter of coolness man.
Yeah, that to me is actually much worse.
I think it's OKAY to punk out a hero in the middle of a story because you know deep down that the hero will somehow someway win in the end. But conversely, because you know the villain is losing at the end if they lose in the middle too then basically the villain has been waisting their time and ours the entire time.