Marvel characters you don't care for.

[Zero Hunter]

I have really not liked Carol since they made her Captain Marvel. When she was Ms Marvel I thought they handled her so much better and she was so much more likable as a character. I know it is just a name and costume change, but ever since they changed her she has gone from kinda meh to totally unlikable and back to meh again. It is like the writers have absolutly no idea what they really want to do with her so you get one version under this writer and then a totally different version under the next. It is no wonder her series never last when your getting whiplash from writer to writer.

[CosmiComic]

People like to attach the labels of stuff they deride to characters they don't like. So liberals who don't like Carol Danvers will complain that she's a robo-conservative military stooge who is so Republican she bleeds chain-smoking eagles with guns and oppresses (mutant) minorities and all that, while conservatives will paint her as a feminazi liberal elitist who hates men or something. But like most comic book characters, she's all over the map, and you can easily find stuff to love, or hate, about her, in her many contrary words and actions over the last decades and dozen or so writers.

I mean, I think complaining about imperialism is correct, whereas complaining about feminism isn't. So their criticism may be valid. But IMO, one can't really be elitist and liberal at the same time, at least not if liberal = progressive, because progressive leans towards equality

Comic books are inconsistent sometimes, especially when it comes to Hero v Hero stories. I think Civil War II has affected Carol's popularity. But honestly, I didn't like Cap in Civil War I despite Marvel trying to make the other side look fascistic.

[Spiderfan001]

I have really not liked Carol since they made her Captain Marvel. When she was Ms Marvel I thought they handled her so much better and she was so much more likable as a character. I know it is just a name and costume change, but ever since they changed her she has gone from kinda meh to totally unlikable and back to meh again. It is like the writers have absolutly no idea what they really want to do with her so you get one version under this writer and then a totally different version under the next. It is no wonder her series never last when your getting whiplash from writer to writer.

This.
Kelly's run is decent but Ms Marvel was amazing.
Even if they wanted to, just change the costume.At least keep her personality.

I really miss Ms Marvel and Spider-man in here runs.They were great friends in there.And kinda dated in that era, they didn't go further in confirmed canon but I like to think they did.

[marhawkman]

I mean, I think complaining about imperialism is correct, whereas complaining about feminism isn't. So their criticism may be valid. But IMO, one can't really be elitist and liberal at the same time, at least not if liberal = progressive, because progressive leans towards equality

Comic books are inconsistent sometimes, especially when it comes to Hero v Hero stories. I think Civil War II has affected Carol's popularity. But honestly, I didn't like Cap in Civil War I despite Marvel trying to make the other side look fascistic.

Both Civil War events had a fundamental... flaw. They make the superhero community act like children fighting over who has the best toy. Or rather approach towards fighting crime... but the fact they choose to fight over it? well it make the entire discussion of who is best entirely beside the point. It's like wrestling over who can play with a toy car and breaking it in the process. The CW1 event was fine... until it reached that breaking point. The movie version did it better I think since it added an external motivation.

But CW2? It's a different reason for fighting, but... overall just as dumb. It's basically Minority Report: the superhero edition. Like Minority Report it has the same flaw: no one really knows the future. Trying to use precogs... affects the future, IF they're right, sometimes they're not. If they're wrong? well... that's where things go from "ethically questionable" to "crimes against humanity". But the flipside? If you can get good information, using it is the right course of action. The trick is to know when to do what.

To be honest, the basic concept of the Initiative? that was GREAT! both in and out of universe.... except for the concept of forcing people to join just because they have powers. That was police state nonsense.

[CosmiComic]

Both Civil War events had a fundamental... flaw. They make the superhero community act like children fighting over who has the best toy. Or rather approach towards fighting crime... but the fact they choose to fight over it? well it make the entire discussion of who is best entirely beside the point. It's like wrestling over who can play with a toy car and breaking it in the process. The CW1 event was fine... until it reached that breaking point. The movie version did it better I think since it added an external motivation.

But CW2? It's a different reason for fighting, but... overall just as dumb. It's basically Minority Report: the superhero edition. Like Minority Report it has the same flaw: no one really knows the future. Trying to use precogs... affects the future, IF they're right, sometimes they're not. If they're wrong? well... that's where things go from "ethically questionable" to "crimes against humanity". But the flipside? If you can get good information, using it is the right course of action. The trick is to know when to do what.

To be honest, the basic concept of the Initiative? that was GREAT! both in and out of universe.... except for the concept of forcing people to join just because they have powers. That was police state nonsense.

I don't think forcing people to join is right. But vigilantism can be fascistic in its own way, and we've seen how exaggerating the threat of street crime plays out in the real world.

I think the premise of precog is interesting in that one may want to secure the best possible future out of several futures. But hero vs. hero stories like that cause too much OOC actions to justify conflict. I actually think hero vs. hero works better before both sides become allies

[marhawkman]

I don't think forcing people to join is right. But vigilantism can be fascistic in its own way, and we've seen how exaggerating the threat of street crime plays out in the real world.

I think the premise of precog is interesting in that one may want to secure the best possible future out of several futures. But hero vs. hero stories like that cause too much OOC actions to justify conflict. I actually think hero vs. hero works better before both sides become allies

Yeah, a superhero story where a single faction of heroes gets into a fight over something.... just don't work well. It feels forced simply by dint of requiring the characters to get into a conflict about something that is seemingly not worth fighting over. Like in Civil War having Cap and Iron Man fight over stuff instead of talking about it. it's just dumb.

The reveal that the Initiative was part of some grand plan to unite the superhero community... etc.... was both great and stupid at the same time. Why didn't Tony and Reed talk to Steve about it? Steve actually LIKED the initiative in the sense of teaching young people with powers how to use their powers! It doesn't make sense in-universe.

To be honest the whole anti-vigilante thing.... is probably what people would do IRL. Comics like to pretend that it's possible to keep your identity secret. Realistically? I don't think any superhero could keep their identity secret from reporters using technology available in the real-world. When seen from that perspective, vigilante heroes would not be able to stay vigilantes for long. Either they obey the law, or they get arrested like supervillains.

Which yes, has actually been a plot point on several occasions in the comics and was a big part of Civil War 1. Violent vigilantes are tolerated when they do more good than harm. Stuff like the Stamford incident was not normal but, aside from the massive collateral damage, not that weird.

Where Civil War went wrong, and where it had multiple characters act in ways that didn't make a lot of sense in-universe, was to basically go after everyone. Not just the heroes who caused problems, but also people like Abigail Boylen who... didn't even have an interest in using her powers for anything but her own amusement. Yes, I know, they created the character just to make that point, but.... It made the story ridiculous. It got more ridiculous when they showed what she did with her initiative uniform later, but... that was at least semi-understandable. Yes, technically she had a criminal record in the context of using her powers.... but that was a form of trespassing due to her flying in restricted airspace.

But... well... that's part of where it gets weird. Even prior to this event, there were a lot of super characters who simply... didn't act as heroes or villains on a regular basis. They just didn't engage in the heroes vs villains stuff. Which is where the event went south hard. it FORCED them to act.

[CosmiComic]

Yeah, a superhero story where a single faction of heroes gets into a fight over something.... just don't work well. It feels forced simply by dint of requiring the characters to get into a conflict about something that is seemingly not worth fighting over. Like in Civil War having Cap and Iron Man fight over stuff instead of talking about it. it's just dumb.

The reveal that the Initiative was part of some grand plan to unite the superhero community... etc.... was both great and stupid at the same time. Why didn't Tony and Reed talk to Steve about it? Steve actually LIKED the initiative in the sense of teaching young people with powers how to use their powers! It doesn't make sense in-universe.

Yeah, these guys are friends and colleagues. Even the conflict in the movie version was a stretch IMO. But actively recruiting younger super heroes in a public fashion to train them is a good idea.

To be honest the whole anti-vigilante thing.... is probably what people would do IRL. Comics like to pretend that it's possible to keep your identity secret. Realistically? I don't think any superhero could keep their identity secret from reporters using technology available in the real-world. When seen from that perspective, vigilante heroes would not be able to stay vigilantes for long. Either they obey the law, or they get arrested like supervillains.

Honestly, that's why I don't care for the secret identity, and I like how it's disappearing, and already did so mostly in the MCU.

Which yes, has actually been a plot point on several occasions in the comics and was a big part of Civil War 1. Violent vigilantes are tolerated when they do more good than harm. Stuff like the Stamford incident was not normal but, aside from the massive collateral damage, not that weird.

Where Civil War went wrong, and where it had multiple characters act in ways that didn't make a lot of sense in-universe, was to basically go after everyone. Not just the heroes who caused problems, but also people like Abigail Boylen who... didn't even have an interest in using her powers for anything but her own amusement. Yes, I know, they created the character just to make that point, but.... It made the story ridiculous. It got more ridiculous when they showed what she did with her initiative uniform later, but... that was at least semi-understandable. Yes, technically she had a criminal record in the context of using her powers.... but that was a form of trespassing due to her flying in restricted airspace.

But... well... that's part of where it gets weird. Even prior to this event, there were a lot of super characters who simply... didn't act as heroes or villains on a regular basis. They just didn't engage in the heroes vs villains stuff. Which is where the event went south hard. it FORCED them to act.

Well, that's the OOC actions needed to "justify" hero vs. hero conflict.

Tbh, not every superhuman even needs to be someone who fights bad guys. There's probably more one can do with their superpowers.

[Vegeta]

I have really not liked Carol since they made her Captain Marvel. When she was Ms Marvel I thought they handled her so much better and she was so much more likable as a character. I know it is just a name and costume change, but ever since they changed her she has gone from kinda meh to totally unlikable and back to meh again. It is like the writers have absolutly no idea what they really want to do with her so you get one version under this writer and then a totally different version under the next. It is no wonder her series never last when your getting whiplash from writer to writer.

Yeah, outside of the name "Carol Danvers" she really is a completely different character now.
Different appearance
Different personality (Granted, anyone adapted into the MCU is vulnerable to this flanderization in the comics, but even prior to the film you could see a difference.)
Continually acquires new powers
Retconned superhero origin

[PCN24454]

To be honest the whole anti-vigilante thing.... is probably what people would do IRL. Comics like to pretend that it's possible to keep your identity secret. Realistically? I don't think any superhero could keep their identity secret from reporters using technology available in the real-world. When seen from that perspective, vigilante heroes would not be able to stay vigilantes for long. Either they obey the law, or they get arrested like supervillains.

In a fictional world where random characters can make cloaking technology in their basement and in the real world where famous people can still fly under the radar, I don't see why secret identities are so hard to grasp.

[CosmiComic]

In a fictional world where random characters can make cloaking technology in their basement and in the real world where famous people can still fly under the radar, I don't see why secret identities are so hard to grasp.

Because all these other organizations, including the villains, have advanced technology to discover those identities

[marhawkman]

In a fictional world where random characters can make cloaking technology in their basement and in the real world where famous people can still fly under the radar, I don't see why secret identities are so hard to grasp.

The secret boss thing IRL is reliant on it being a one-off, also it's not a full secret identity. It's way easier to hide if you use a throw-away identity that you never go back to. Stuff like the "Masked Singer"? It only works because the film crew is cooperating to help hide their identity. Also, the general public is not on the set. Sure, there's a studio audience... but they're just spectators. They can't see anything the film crew doesn't let them see. And again while it's not just one day... it's not a long time period either.

But Iron-Man for example? Hugely public figure, both in AND out of suit. Not having people figure it out the first day? plausible. Keeping it secret for years? nope. Oh and fictional cloaking tech? Meet fictional Super-radar! There was at least one continuity where Superman actually just used x-ray vision to find out who Batman was.

'cause yeah... supervillains trying to find out the secret identities of super-heroes? yeah, that's a thing that is a major plot point rather often.

OOH! real-world example! a high resolution millimeter band scanner could create a 3-image of the face inside a mask in enough detail for facial recognition.

[CosmiComic]

Plus when the hero disappears and the secret id version shows up afterwards, people will put 2 & 2 together

[PCN24454]

Plus when the hero disappears and the secret id version shows up afterwards, people will put 2 & 2 together

Doesn't that assume that

1. they're always with people that they know?

2. the superhero appears in the same place that the person once was?

[sunofdarkchild]

The Iron Man secret ID makes more sense than most to me. For one, nothing of his face or form is visible and the suit can modulate his voice. In addition, having Iron Man be an employee of Tony Stark is something that I think the public would accept pretty easily. When the military and Stark Industries claimed Iron Man had been killed by Firepower no one had any reason to think the 'new' Iron Man was the same person and Tony hiring someone else was the simplest explanation, and then Iron Man continued to operate during several periods when Tony Stark was presumed dead. There were even multiple times when two Iron Men appeared in public at once, sometimes to fight and sometimes to team up. The general assumption would be that there have been a bunch of Iron Men and multiple back-up Iron Men waiting to take over if something happens to the current one.

[Agent Z]

Yeah, outside of the name "Carol Danvers" she really is a completely different character now.
Different appearance
Different personality (Granted, anyone adapted into the MCU is vulnerable to this flanderization in the comics, but even prior to the film you could see a difference.)
Continually acquires new powers
Retconned superhero origin

What exactly is the difference in personality? And what new powers has Carol acquired?