Marvel Comics did the legacy characters 10x better than DC Comics

[TheRay]

Legacies are better when it’s just the heroes children. The way Nightcrawler is part of Mystiques legacy because she’s his mother.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Well, legacy was never broadly defined as such years ago. It was always the passing of the torch from one superhero to the next like Barry did to Wally when the former died. Now under that definition, how many Marvel superheroes were legacies before 2010 (and I don't want to hear about the temporary ones that we all knew were going to be temporary )?

Well, under your definition, only three major mantles in the DCU would count, those being the Flash (Wally West), Green Lantern (Kyle Rayner), and Robin (Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Damian Wayne, Stephanie Brown). Meanwhile, in the Marvel Universe, there was Ant-Man (Scott Lang), Captain Marvel (Monica Rambeau), Black Knight (Dane Whitman), and Human Torch (Johnny Storm). And, you know what, I'm actually gonna count Ben Reilly Spider-Man in that too since it was actually the original plan to permanently replace Peter Parker with Ben Reilly.

That's not even counting the ones that came after 2010.

[Aahz]

I agree on that statement. Does Marvel throw out Miles, Ghost Spider and Silk for the sake of Peter Parker so that he will be the only one true Spiderman? No.

Does Marvel even get rid of Kamala Khan in order to bring more spotlight for Carol? Also No.

Does Marvel push Clint aside so that Kate will be the only active Hawkeye. No, it didn't happen in the Hawkeye run.

But they dumped a lot of other All new All Different Characters to bring back the originals (Cap, Ironman, Thor, Hulk...) and some of those mantels were given to ther characters before and always returned to the original.

The new Spiderman Characters kind of comparable to the Batfamily or the Superman Family, where DC has also a large number of Legacy Characters having their own books while the Franchise is still usually lead by the original.

And in of Kamala Khan Carol got moved up to a new a "bigger" mantle, and she can likely keep that since AFAIK non of previous owners were particularly popular.

[The Darknight Detective]

Well, under your definition,

Which is supported by Wikipedia and other reference sites, FWIW.

only three major mantles in the DCU would count, those being the Flash (Wally West), Green Lantern (Kyle Rayner), and Robin (Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Damian Wayne, Stephanie Brown).

... and the Atom, the Hawks, Doctor Fate, Green Arrow, Flash and GL post-COIE, etc. All of those different variations qualify, as well as Jakeem Thunder and Zatanna. DC had a ton there and for decades before Marvel really started doing it.

Meanwhile, in the Marvel Universe, there was Ant-Man (Scott Lang), Captain Marvel (Monica Rambeau), Black Knight (Dane Whitman), and Human Torch (Johnny Storm). And, you know what, I'm actually gonna count Ben Reilly Spider-Man in that too since it was actually the original plan to permanently replace Peter Parker with Ben Reilly.

The Ant-Man and Human Torch examples I have already had my say on, while I'll give you the others. But it's not even close to DC's history of legacy and none of them were on the scale of Wally replacing Barry. How many times has Marvel replaced a character (for good!) with the history and sales of a Barry Allen with another character? That's not necessarily a good or bad thing, but Marvel hasn't really been doing what DC has done since I was a kid.

Marvel seriously wanted to get rid of Peter Parker for hood?! I mean, that dwarfs Didio talking about getting rid of Dick Grayson (who, despite his iconic status and history, has never been as popular as Peter), yet that's the first time I ever heard of it. That's just nuts. If what you say is correct, then it might qualify, but color me skeptical.

[Jim Kelly]

This "legacy" stuff makes me think of the "legacy students" at U.S. universities. We don't have that in Canada (I don't think we do, maybe I was too sheltered to know about it), but it sounds perverse to me. Rory Gilmore would be a legacy student, because Richard was a Yale man. Kind of an old money thing. It seems like queue jumping to me--queue jumping is not good, it will get you a disapproving stare.

[The Darknight Detective]

This "legacy" stuff makes me think of the "legacy students" at U.S. universities. We don't have that in Canada (I don't think we do, maybe I was too sheltered to know about it), but it sounds perverse to me. Rory Gilmore would be a legacy student, because Richard was a Yale man. Kind of an old money thing. It seems like queue jumping to me--queue jumping is not good, it will get you a disapproving stare.

I'm pretty sure we copied that from the Brits, Jim, but I admit to being pretty ignorant on the subject beyond Goodbye Mr. Chips.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Which is supported by Wikipedia and other reference sites, FWIW.

Most reference sites don't limit it to heroes that take over permanently. So, under the most widely applied definition, all of the different Captain Americas, all of the multiple Spider-Men (like Ben Reilly, Kaine, and Miguel O'Hara), Kate Bishop as Hawkeye, Rhodey as Iron Man, etc. would all count.

... and the Atom, the Hawks, Doctor Fate, Green Arrow, Flash and GL post-COIE, etc. All of those different variations qualify, as well as Jakeem Thunder and Zatanna. DC had a ton there and for decades before Marvel really started doing it.

Again, yes, but Marvel still did it. They did it less, but still a fair amount of the time. You just weren't noticing it.

The Ant-Man and Human Torch examples I have already had my say on, while I'll give you the others. But it's not even close to DC's history of legacy and none of them were on the scale of Wally replacing Barry. How many times has Marvel replaced a character (for good!) with the history and sales of a Barry Allen with another character? That's not necessarily a good or bad thing, but Marvel hasn't really been doing what DC has done since I was a kid.

Human Torch might be up in the air (but I still count it). However, I don't even see how Ant-Man is a controversial example. Scott literally STOLE the suit from Hank and then became Ant-Man. He's still Ant-Man today.

And as for permanently replacing Barry, again, most definitions of legacy heroes don't require them to permanently supplant the "classic." However, in the case of Wally and Barry, Wally ended up becoming iconic and within a few years was the definitive Flash for a lot of people, supplanting Barry among the fanbase. Not even Kyle ever really achieved that in the Green Lantern franchise, which is why it was actually less controversial when they brought back Hal than when they brought back Barry.

But Marvel kills off popular characters and replaces them all the time. Again, a legacy hero doesn't need to be a permanent replacement. Wolverine was killed off and replaced with Laura Kinney. Thor was retired and made unworthy and replaced with Eric Masterson and then Jane Foster. Peter Parker has been killed off multiple times, including in the Ultimate universe where he was replaced permanently by Miles Morales and, in the main universe, Ben Reilly is even currently the star of Amazing Spider-Man while Peter is in a coma.

Marvel seriously wanted to get rid of Peter Parker for hood?! I mean, that dwarfs Didio talking about getting rid of Dick Grayson (who, despite his iconic status and history, has never been as popular as Peter), yet that's the first time I ever heard of it. That's just nuts. If what you say is correct, then it might qualify, but color me skeptical.

Yes, that was indeed the original plan. It was sort of their first attempt to get rid of the marriage. Peter would retire to live a life of domestic bliss with Mary Jane, while Ben would take over as the "back to basics" Spider-Man that they wanted.

But, no, it doesn't dwarf Didio's talk of killing off Dick Grayson, because, in the end, they were both bad ideas born out of a wrong-headed philosophy. The idea that natural character progression should be eschewed and/or reversed simply because the powers that be wanted to bring a character more in line with how they were when they were growing up. As well as the belief that certain things, i.e. marriage and/or a protege made the Silver Age heroes look "old" because, for some reason, every hero has to be under the age of 25.

[The Darknight Detective]

Most reference sites don't limit it to heroes that take over permanently. So, under the most widely applied definition, all of the different Captain Americas, all of the multiple Spider-Men (like Ben Reilly, Kaine, and Miguel O'Hara), Kate Bishop as Hawkeye, Rhodey as Iron Man, etc. would all count.

They count, but they're kind of cheap because there weren't any real risks creating them.

Again, yes, but Marvel still did it. They did it less, but still a fair amount of the time. You just weren't noticing it.

It's really not the same still, so we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

Human Torch might be up in the air (but I still count it). However, I don't even see how Ant-Man is a controversial example. Scott literally STOLE the suit from Hank and then became Ant-Man. He's still Ant-Man today.

You are definitely welcome to disagree with me. GG.

And as for permanently replacing Barry, again, most definitions of legacy heroes don't require them to permanently supplant the "classic." However, in the case of Wally and Barry, Wally ended up becoming iconic and within a few years was the definitive Flash for a lot of people, supplanting Barry among the fanbase. Not even Kyle ever really achieved that in the Green Lantern franchise, which is why it was actually less controversial when they brought back Hal than when they brought back Barry.

But Marvel kills off popular characters and replaces them all the time. Again, a legacy hero doesn't need to be a permanent replacement. Wolverine was killed off and replaced with Laura Kinney. Thor was retired and made unworthy and replaced with Eric Masterson and then Jane Foster. Peter Parker has been killed off multiple times, including in the Ultimate universe where he was replaced permanently by Miles Morales and, in the main universe, Ben Reilly is even currently the star of Amazing Spider-Man while Peter is in a coma.

See my last response above.

Yes, that was indeed the original plan. It was sort of their first attempt to get rid of the marriage. Peter would retire to live a life of domestic bliss with Mary Jane, while Ben would take over as the "back to basics" Spider-Man that they wanted.

But, no, it doesn't dwarf Didio's talk of killing off Dick Grayson, because, in the end, they were both bad ideas born out of a wrong-headed philosophy. The idea that natural character progression should be eschewed and/or reversed simply because the powers that be wanted to bring a character more in line with how they were when they were growing up. As well as the belief that certain things, i.e. marriage and/or a protege made the Silver Age heroes look "old" because, for some reason, every hero has to be under the age of 25.

Just because they were both bad ideas doesn't mean that one of them can't be much worse. Killing off your top character far exceeds killing off just a "merely" popular one. That to me is not even arguable, AFAIAC. Certainly not on a profit-motive basis.

Think I'm going to leave the conversation now - at least for another year. Nothing more to add at this juncture.

[TheRay]

I think DC has done a good job of making their teen heroes stand out.

[Agent Z]

This "legacy" stuff makes me think of the "legacy students" at U.S. universities. We don't have that in Canada (I don't think we do, maybe I was too sheltered to know about it), but it sounds perverse to me. Rory Gilmore would be a legacy student, because Richard was a Yale man. Kind of an old money thing. It seems like queue jumping to me--queue jumping is not good, it will get you a disapproving stare.

Except most legacy characters aren't the offspring of the original hero so this analogy doesn't work.

[Ishmael]

Given that DC literally rejuvenated the superhero genre - invented the multiverse - and created the whole concept of a legacy character in the 50’s with the creation of Barry Allen, I think it’s pretty clear who’s done legacy characters better.

[TheRay]

Marvel could stand to do a better job of helping people see Crimson Spider and Scarlet Spider because I'm not sure how many people outside of comic fans know those characters exist.

[LAWtoyoto 432]

Since Marvel hasn't been in the legacy business anywhere near as long as DC, maybe they might dump some of them down the road if they feel they're bogging down the universe. Which is why I posted a long time ago comparing both companies regarding this matter is unfair.

Yes, but the moment if your competitor started to promote Legacy heroes, you also need to do the same for the corporate in order to fight against the competition. Not destroy or throw asides without gaining much attention to the audience.

[Jim Kelly]

Reading MIDDLEMARCH, as I have been doing, I believe the correct English term must be legatee for the person who receives the legacy. The "Robin" codename might be a legacy, but those who receive the codename are all legatees. Actually, if I were to write this in proper George Eliot language then each of my sentences should be five times as long, but as I am not a master of the subordinate clause I have not made such an effort to embellish my statements in such a fashion.

[The Darknight Detective]

Yes, but the moment if your competitor started to promote Legacy heroes, you also need to do the same for the corporate in order to fight against the competition. Not destroy or throw asides without gaining much attention to the audience.

Until Marvel ultimately starts unloading their legatees (I agree with Jim Kelly here), of course.