Marvel characters you don't care for.

[Raz]

Liberal elite?

you know, people they disagree with

[CosmiComic]

you know, people they disagree with

I'm not pro interventionist but idk how it counts as liberal

[parker stark]

Deadpool
Venom
Carnage
Sentry
Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers)
Blade
Ghost Rider (Robbie Reyes)
Rictor
Shatterstar

[Baron of Faltine]

Perhaps the biggest irony is the insistence that characters can't change leads to the biggest change in that it removes what makes those characters compelling. Quesada's insistence on Spider-Man being young and down on his luck as the main draw ignored the fact that it's how Peter overcomes his bad luck that makes him compelling which is why the marriage to MJ was so important and beloved. The insistence on keeping Wolverine and Storm the same as they were under Claremont is what makes them different from what they were in those days. They went from dynamic characters to static characters and in many ways regressed.

I agree, I a silly paradox, and proof that they only stopped at the surface level when come to understanding a character and what makes it likeable

[Baron of Faltine]

Perhaps the biggest irony is the insistence that characters can't change leads to the biggest change in that it removes what makes those characters compelling. Quesada's insistence on Spider-Man being young and down on his luck as the main draw ignored the fact that it's how Peter overcomes his bad luck that makes him compelling which is why the marriage to MJ was so important and beloved. The insistence on keeping Wolverine and Storm the same as they were under Claremont is what makes them different from what they were in those days. They went from dynamic characters to static characters and in many ways regressed.

How?
Why can't they have May now?

How old were peter & MJ when May was born?

Expecially considering the sliding timescale(everything in MU will always "start" 14/15 years ago)
Meaning that the events of old happened....at worst 1 perhaps 2 years ago in marvel time-line
Really sliding time in MU is crazy. At this point I can only assume that there were extensive period of times where heroes just forgot what sleep is and wore the same costumes for months!

[mathew101281]

America Chavez: don’t hate her, but I don’t feel anything in particular towards her.
Groot: one note character.

Marvel can’t move on from old characters because new characters aren’t really built to be bread winners(money makers) long term. A lot of the new characters are more “interesting characters,” rather then franchises. It’s franchises that make Marvel their money. A lot of it has to do with how modern comics are written to. Back in the 60’s it was easier to introduce new heroes then give them a large supporting cast and villains and such, because stories were more compressed. Now most stories are told in 4-6 issue arches which translates to only two stories a year. This hardly enough story space to introduce a lot of supporting cast.

[Baron of Faltine]

America Chavez: don’t hate her, but I don’t feel anything in particular towards her.
Groot: one note character.

Marvel can’t move on from old characters because new characters aren’t really built to be bread winners(money makers) long term. A lot of the new characters are more “interesting characters,” rather then franchises. It’s franchises that make Marvel their money. A lot of it has to do with how modern comics are written to. Back in the 60’s it was easier to introduce new heroes then give them a large supporting cast and villains and such, because stories were more compressed. Now most stories are told in 4-6 issue arches which translates to only two stories a year. This hardly enough story space to introduce a lot of supporting cast.

Interesting comment and give lot of food for thought. Never figured I should have included the change of writing style in the whole equation. Even if it was kind of obvious in hindsight

[Spiderfan001]

America Chavez: don’t hate her, but I don’t feel anything in particular towards her.
Groot: one note character.

Marvel can’t move on from old characters because new characters aren’t really built to be bread winners(money makers) long term. A lot of the new characters are more “interesting characters,” rather then franchises. It’s franchises that make Marvel their money. A lot of it has to do with how modern comics are written to. Back in the 60’s it was easier to introduce new heroes then give them a large supporting cast and villains and such, because stories were more compressed. Now most stories are told in 4-6 issue arches which translates to only two stories a year. This hardly enough story space to introduce a lot of supporting cast.

I can agree with this.
Peter's first 10 years vs miles's first 10 years show this(Although he has many other problems as well so not the best example).

Other things
1)Death means nothing in the MU now.Stories like The Night Gwen Stacy died can't be made to have as much of a impact.
That and death lasts lesser the further we go.Kraven's last hunt had us wait decades whereas Ock came back in less than 1

2)Risk.Why would people waste money on something they are not familiar with rather than stick with what they know they like.Comics are a lot more expensive now.

3)Agendas:Some decent characters(Thor Jane) suffer from blatant shoving of agenda's down out throat.Like when Thor Jane had the encounter with wrecker and Titania IIRC.That turns people off the comic.

4)Events:They used to be hype, not we have one every 3 months.

[Baron of Faltine]

I can agree with this.
Peter's first 10 years vs miles's first 10 years show this(Although he has many other problems as well so not the best example).

Other things
1)Death means nothing in the MU now.Stories like The Night Gwen Stacy died can't be made to have as much of a impact.
That and death lasts lesser the further we go.Kraven's last hunt had us wait decades whereas Ock came back in less than 1

2)Risk.Why would people waste money on something they are not familiar with rather than stick with what they know they like.Comics are a lot more expensive now.

3)Agendas:Some decent characters(Thor Jane) suffer from blatant shoving of agenda's down out throat.Like when Thor Jane had the encounter with wrecker and Titania IIRC.That turns people off the comic.

4)Events:They used to be hype, not we have one every 3 months.

Oh yes, I wholeheartedly agree.
Also about Events two personal observations:
1 Events often exist only to remind readers that is a shared universe, since nowadays comic lines are often so compartmentalised that seem AU. So to showcase readers of X-men that Thor exist in same universe, Events Events Events.
2 the Event Hype is terrible, as is 99% a big FAT lie. Everything they promise will happen won't or not as you expected or wanted( often toying with "this character will join this team" only with ending with technically teaming up for total 5 panels) and is so pervasive and I bad faith it hurt!

Also there's the growing market for the trade that push the writing in this directions, whereas the increased price of comics tend to become more and more a issue for readers(paying 5 euros for a 20 pages? Screw it!)

[CosmiComic]

America Chavez: don’t hate her, but I don’t feel anything in particular towards her.
Groot: one note character.

Marvel can’t move on from old characters because new characters aren’t really built to be bread winners(money makers) long term. A lot of the new characters are more “interesting characters,” rather then franchises. It’s franchises that make Marvel their money. A lot of it has to do with how modern comics are written to. Back in the 60’s it was easier to introduce new heroes then give them a large supporting cast and villains and such, because stories were more compressed. Now most stories are told in 4-6 issue arches which translates to only two stories a year. This hardly enough story space to introduce a lot of supporting cast.

But how many supporting characters does a hero need?

[PCN24454]

Marvel can’t move on from old characters because new characters aren’t really built to be bread winners(money makers) long term. A lot of the new characters are more “interesting characters,” rather then franchises. It’s franchises that make Marvel their money. A lot of it has to do with how modern comics are written to. Back in the 60’s it was easier to introduce new heroes then give them a large supporting cast and villains and such, because stories were more compressed. Now most stories are told in 4-6 issue arches which translates to only two stories a year. This hardly enough story space to introduce a lot of supporting cast.

Most people have settled into the idea that the Marvel Universe is interconnected. Having solo casts is honestly dying out and won't return.

[PCN24454]

But how many supporting characters does a hero need?

It's not the number; it's the sense that they have an actual world that revolves around them. Most heroes don't have that anymore. Even Spider-Man no longer has that.

[CosmiComic]

It's not the number; it's the sense that they have an actual world that revolves around them. Most heroes don't have that anymore. Even Spider-Man no longer has that.

I don't really have a huge problem with that. One or two supporting characters is nice IMO but it's not a huge prerequisite for me. IMO it's nice to see the heroes as part of a bigger whole.

Of course, if this is the case, maybe comics need to adjust to that to help promote these characters

[sunofdarkchild]

I'm not sure the decompression is the problem. Jessica Jones was created by the king of decompression and still built up a compelling enough story and world to make a well-received 3-season tv show out of. Good writing is still good writing, whether it's a story that takes 3 issues or just 1.

[CosmiComic]

Maybe it's just the writers haven't caught up with everything yet. I think a decompressed story can still develop supporting characters. In some ways it might be easier.