View Poll Results: Permanent Legacy Characters

Voters
139. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    27 19.42%
  • No

    58 41.73%
  • Depends on the hero they're replacing

    54 38.85%
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 140
  1. #16
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    10,684

    Default

    Yeah, sure. People will complain legacy characters are lazy while acting like never changing the same characters for 60-80 years isn't. Makes no sense to me. So I'd be open to it eventually

  2. #17
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    73,435

    Default

    Not in the slightest.

  3. #18
    Astonishing Member Drops Of Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    4,094

    Default

    I voted on depends because that is the closest to what I feel. I think the idea of a permanent legacy is interesting, but not in the main line of comics. We know how things work in the 616 universe. Like it or not, Marvel has built their universe on recycling ideas and stories. The status quo can never go away completely, because it's what keeps them alive. A character like Peter Parker or Logan are never going to stop being Spider-Man and Wolverine permanently, and I've made my peace with that. I do think that an alternative imprint where they have the liberty to let characters age in real time and pass their legacy on is fine, though. It's basically what the Ultimate Universe was supposed to be before they started making some questionable choices. But anyway, it's how we got Miles Morales, and look how well that turned out! Something like that would've never happened in the main universe, because they would never have the guts to kill Peter permanently. If Miles was created in the main line, maybe he would've been just another ''Superior Spider-Man'' story and wouldn't have gotten as big as he did in the Ultimate Universe. The MCU is another example of something like this working, but it's working precisely because the MCU doesn't function like the main line of comics. So the answer is yes, you can do it, but it's better to do it on a particular piece of media where you will have the creative liberty to explore this concept to its fullest instead of being restrained by the inevitable status quo.

  4. #19
    Invincible Member Digifiend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    27,703

    Default

    Ultimate was about modernising the universe and it being a universe where anyone can die, not having a universe where people could age up and pass on their legacies. In fact, until the debut of Miles Morales, the Ultimate Universe's sliding timescale was much slower than 616. Nobody aged up at all, only about one year passed between Peter Parker becoming Spider-Man and getting killed in action - that's 11 years of comics. After Miles's debut, it pretty much ran in real time, and he aged up three years, in four real world years, before Secret Wars.
    Appreciation Thread Indexes
    Marvel | Spider-Man | X-Men | NEW!! DC Comics | Batman | Superman | Wonder Woman

  5. #20
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    813

    Default

    It depends on the Character. I'm okay with Characters like Captain Marvel, Ghost rider, Nova etc.
    But I feel Characters like Spider-Man and Iron Man are evergreen. One of the reasons we enjoy reading Spider-Man is for the adventures of Peter Parker. When forming the wider Marvel Universe back in the 60's, Lee, Ditko and Kirby focused on the personal lives of these Super Heroes, so the civilian identity is much a part of the comic than the Super Hero action.

    I didn't mind when Ultimate Peter Parker got killed off and replaced with Miles, it felt like Ultimate Spider-Man was coming to an end anyway and Miles brought new life to the Universe.

    In fact, I don't mind a younger set of super heroes working alongside the adult heroes, it feels like newer readers have their comics they can love while I can still have mine. The wide range of options are something I'm very okay with.

    The basic argument comes down to "Do you want Progressive ideas in super hero comics or traditional ideas?" and I think there's room for both. I consider myself to be a progressive, but sometimes you want something that you know. Sometimes you want something like Watchmen where you have to take the World seriously and is a deep read, but other times you just want to see Spider-man beat some dudes up.

  6. #21
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,654

    Default

    With the 'depends' option you're basically just going to get people who are okay with characters they've never warmed to getting replaced with someone more to their taste, but are dead set against their favourites getting replaced. Without wanting to get too confrontational, I can't help thinking it's a selfish double-standard.

    I mean, I get it: Daredevil is a big name with a lot of cool things going for the character, but I've never really warmed to Matt Murdock himself, and back when Danny (Iron Fist) Rand was subbing for him I couldn't help see how beneficial it would be for IF to take over the DD identity permanently, combining the strength of the DD brand and rogues gallery with the elements I love about Iron Fist. Could have been a great upgrade to Danny and his fans. For Matt and his fans, though... not fair at all. Marvel fandom is full of people who think their favourites are important and should be protected and respected, but that the heroes they don't like are unimportant and disposable. If hero-x needs to take hero-y's identity to short-cut to success, then imo they don't deserve it.

  7. #22
    Extraordinary Member John Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,122

    Default

    I voted for the 'it depends' option.

    Lets not forget that some of the existing heroes are legacy characters themselves. There was an android Human Torch before Johnny Storm but the former is very unlikely to ever meaningfully replace the latter. The male Captain Marvel may be ignored today but nobody can deny that Carol took over his mantle. I think there was a Daredevil character prior to Matt Murdock during the Golden Age when Marvel was still known as Timely.

    I love Spider-Girl/Mayday Parker but a big part of the reason why the character worked is because she existed in her own continuity which gave writers creative freedom to do whatever they want. I loved JMS idea of Peter becoming the science teacher at his old High School and I would have loved to see Peter and MJ have a kid and slowly watch that kid grow up but that's unlikely to ever happen now. Plus aging characters creates it's own problems. If Spider-Man goes from 15 to 30 to 35, does that mean Stark and Steve are in their 50's or early 60's now? Personally I don't have a problem with either of those characters aging but a contingent of comic fans and comic fans turned pro are against characters showing any signs of aging.

  8. #23
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    10,684

    Default

    I don't think Tony and Steve are nearly that much older than Peter (Steve technically is but doesn't look it)

    But I think they can do it gradually. If Peter is about 35 then Wanda and Pietro would be around 36, or Dr. Strange around 51, for instance. As long as everyone ages at the same rate (Thor being a possible exception). But it has to apply to everyone, not just those who aren't favorites.

    Plus, new heroes need a chance to be at the forefront.

  9. #24
    Leftbrownie Alpha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,298

    Default

    Doctor Strange should be way older than Spider-man. Peter became Spider-man in high school. Stephen Strange became a sorceror after being a famous surgeon. Which means he went to med school and then had to go through the steps of building a carreer and fame, plus the time of dealing with the tragedy and searching for the monastery.

    And Steve and Tony aging 15 years wouldn't chnge anything about either of them for narrative purposes. Tony could still be a playboy and a douchebag, or responsible and mature. It's just aesthetic.
    Last edited by Alpha; 09-21-2021 at 06:38 AM.

  10. #25
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    813

    Default

    I always put Tony down to being in his 30's where he became Iron Man. Right now, he'll be in his late 40's-early 50's which kind of checks out.
    Doctor Strange you can just handwave away by saying his has the best anti-ageing magic on the market.

  11. #26
    Extraordinary Member sifighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,523

    Default

    Would it really be that bad though?

    A world where Miles is the main Spider-Man? Where Laura is the main Wolverine? Where the new X-men/Generation X/other young mutants are the X-men leaders? Where Franklin, Valeria, and the Future Foundation kids lead the fantastic four? Where Young Avengers and maybe some Champions are now just the main Avengers?

    I’m not saying it has to be now, hell it took a few decades for Peter be 30-ish. I just don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing to hope to see that some day.
    "It's fun and it's cool, so that's all that matters. It's what comics are for, Duh."
    Words to live by.

  12. #27
    Astonishing Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    4,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timothy Hunter View Post
    In the scenario that the stories told with these replacements were as good as some of the classic stories featuring the original 40's-60's-70's chararacters?
    Enh... don't pretend it's the same character. that's the #1 principle. You don't NEED to try to "replace" the old character, just tell new stories.
    Quote Originally Posted by sifighter View Post
    Would it really be that bad though?

    A world where Miles is the main Spider-Man? Where Laura is the main Wolverine? Where the new X-men/Generation X/other young mutants are the X-men leaders? Where Franklin, Valeria, and the Future Foundation kids lead the fantastic four? Where Young Avengers and maybe some Champions are now just the main Avengers?

    I’m not saying it has to be now, hell it took a few decades for Peter be 30-ish. I just don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing to hope to see that some day.
    Sure, sounds neat. I just wouldn't try to treat it as the current version of things.

  13. #28
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sifighter View Post
    Would it really be that bad though?

    A world where Miles is the main Spider-Man? Where Laura is the main Wolverine? Where the new X-men/Generation X/other young mutants are the X-men leaders? Where Franklin, Valeria, and the Future Foundation kids lead the fantastic four? Where Young Avengers and maybe some Champions are now just the main Avengers?

    I’m not saying it has to be now, hell it took a few decades for Peter be 30-ish. I just don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing to hope to see that some day.
    Would work in Movies, not so much in Comics.

  14. #29
    Take Me Higher The Negative Zone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Earth. (Unless I've been kidnapped by Skrulls)
    Posts
    2,267

    Default

    The legacy characters should be replaced by characters after them if you're going to make them a mantle.

  15. #30
    Astonishing Member mugiwara's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,480

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Negative Zone View Post
    The legacy characters should be replaced by characters after them if you're going to make them a mantle.
    Definitely, after some decades when they reached the same creative dead end as the big name heroes.
    Bringing back the old, killing the young: that's the Marvel way

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •