View Poll Results: Permanent Legacy Characters

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

    29 19.73%
  • No

    62 42.18%
  • Depends on the hero they're replacing

    56 38.10%
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 153
  1. #31
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,186

    Default

    Yeah, the problem is a lot of these static heroes go through the same motions forever, or through some massive OOC change up to 'freshen things up'.

  2. #32
    Extraordinary Member Nomads1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro/Brazil
    Posts
    5,362

    Default

    I would be willing to say that I'dd see based on the character, how it's done, and so on (just look at Jim Hammond and Johnny Storm, but, then again, I love Jim and mostly don't like much Johnny), however, thinking hard about it, and hoe it has been done in recent years, I'll have to go with no. Usaully the original is a much better crafted and intresting character then what we end up getting.

    Peace

  3. #33
    BANNED Xheight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    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.
    Good points even if I don't agree with all you say. I went with a firm no and it does apply to mainstays and much as characters I don't care about or minor characters. I feel that one of the great strengths of Marvel from its start in the 60's was continuity and character so forever Matt Murdoch will be DD because DD isn't a job anymore than Iron Fist is a job or Spiderman is. Marvel has no doubt struggled with this over the decades as the corporate nature of the comics is selling Spiderman or DD and that has pressured them to tweak the brand if not out break it and produce an "All-New", "Fresh start" reimagining of the character or group even if they sought to retain a basic concept and heroism. I don't want or need a new Iron Man that isn't Tony Stark because that is what make Iron Man interesting not the legacy of the hero powers and presence. The only depends that I can see as having worked has been for dead characters like Mar-Vell or characters intended to be symbols beyond the suit like Cap and have died. Which goes to your point if that leg up is needed to get a character moving then what is it that they are trying to move here product or character posing as story.

    Over on the other side DC has put much more into legacy but as much as I enjoyed Superman & Batman: Generations for example they are better as Elseworlds.
    Last edited by Xheight; 09-21-2021 at 10:57 AM.

  4. #34
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    19,547

    Default

    Depends on the character.

    Obviously, if I'm a fan of the main character I'm not gonna be happy about them being replaced. Personal bias definitely plays a role yknow? Like, if Sam Alexander had just been a new Nova, and not Richard's replacement, I'd have been a hell of a lot less salty about it.

    Beyond that, I think a permanent legacy only works in select circumstances. Replacing someone who is popular and active, like Cap or Thor or Spidey or Logan, that's not gonna fly longterm. Even a short term replacement, that everyone knows is short term (Superior Spider for example) tends to piss readers off, and they already know it's temporary.

    But if the character isn't popular, or has been out of commission for a long time? Like Captain Marvel or DC's Mister Terrific? A legacy is perfectly valid and can elevate an IP to new heights.
    "We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."

    ~ Black Panther.

  5. #35
    Uncanny Member Digifiend's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    36,490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFJamie94 View Post
    Would work in Movies, not so much in Comics.
    Not as the mainline anyway. Something akin to MC2 would work, though not MC2 itself as more than two decades have passed since that started and most of the Young Avengers and Champions didn't exist yet (except of course, Cassie Lang, aka Stinger), so a new future Marvel universe nowadays would need updating to add folks like Kamala and Kate.
    Appreciation Thread Indexes
    Marvel | Spider-Man | X-Men | NEW!! DC Comics | Batman | Superman | Wonder Woman

  6. #36
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,652

    Default

    I voted yes, as I generally prefer the newer Legacy Heroes over/compared to their original counterparts. Most Legacy Heroes are made with more contemporary sensibilities that allow for more robust and nuanced characters and stories. Often, there are many, many things you can do with Legacy Heroes that you can't really do with the old guard (either because it would be too much of a shift that'd make them functionally new character — typically displeasing more diehard nostalgia-driven fans while arguably wasting what could have gone to a newer hero anyway — or simply because it is something that really cannot be done except with a new Legacy Hero with the aforementioned contemporary sensibilities in character and story creation).

    That all said, while I didn't vote on it, I do feel it depends on the Hero mantle in question. There are indeed a number them where having more than one Superhero of a given mantle makes complete sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    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 am in agreement with this part of this post, though. It's not unreasonable to conclude that many of those who voted "Depends on the hero they're replacing" did so disingenuously, using that option more to mean "Depends on whether I like or care about the hero they're replacing." In those case, it wouldn't matter that an older hero was being permanently replaced by a newer legacy hero, as the older hero wasn't cared for in the first place (and the newer legacy likely wouldn't be either).
    Last edited by J. D. Guy; 09-22-2021 at 07:15 AM.

  7. #37
    BANNED Xheight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J. D. Guy View Post
    I voted yes, as I generally prefer the newer Legacy Heroes over/compared to their original counterparts. Most Legacy Heroes are made with more contemporary sensibilities that allow for more robust and nuanced characters and stories. Often, there are many, many things you can do with Legacy Heroes that you can't really do with the old guard (either because it would be too much of a shift that'd make them functionally new character — typically displeasing more diehard nostalgia-driven fans while arguably wasting what could have gone to a newer hero anyway — or simply because it is something that really cannot be done except with a new Legacy Hero with the aforementioned contemporary sensibilities in character and story creation).

    That all said, while I didn't vote on it, I do feel it depends on the Hero mantle in question. There are indeed a number them where having more than one Superhero of a given mantle makes complete sense.



    I am in agreement with this part of this post, though. It's not unreasonable to conclude that many of those who voted "Depends on the hero they're replacing" did so disingenuously, using that option more to mean "Depends on whether I like or care about the hero they're replacing." In those case, it wouldn't matter that an older hero was being permanently replaced by a newer legacy hero, as the older hero wasn't cared for in the first place (and the newer legacy likely wouldn't be either).
    Sorry but "contemporary sensibilities" just sounds like code new market and only approaches story from a reset not a transition. Matt Fraction for example tried to revise Tony's NeoCon sensibilities post civil war but at the same time created Rescue and evidences both approaches but my reading was simply that this revision needed to happen faster to retain Iron Man's market following the movie. That obvious finger on the scale is what takes me out of a story.

  8. #38
    duke's casettetape lemonpeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Brooklyn's WiFi
    Posts
    5,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheight View Post
    Sorry but "contemporary sensibilities" just sounds like code new market and only approaches story from a reset not a transition. Matt Fraction for example tried to revise Tony's NeoCon sensibilities post civil war but at the same time created Rescue and evidences both approaches but my reading was simply that this revision needed to happen faster to retain Iron Man's market following the movie. That obvious finger on the scale is what takes me out of a story.
    thats not what contemporary sensibilities means tho, so you're kinda fundamentally missing the point.
    THE SIGNAL (Duke Thomas) is DC's secret shonen protagonist so I made him a fandom wiki

    also, check out "The Signal Tape" a Duke Thomas fan project.

    currently following:
    • DC: Red Hood: The Hill
    • Marvel: TBD
    • Manga (Shonen/Seinen): One Piece, My Hero, Dandadan, Jujutsu Kaisen, Kaiju No. 8, Reincarnation of The Veteran Soldier, Oblivion Rouge, ORDEAL, The Breaker: Eternal Force

    "power does not corrupt, power always reveals."

  9. #39
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemonpeace View Post
    thats not what contemporary sensibilities means tho, so you're kinda fundamentally missing the point.
    This is correct. Contemporary sensibilities means creating characters, stories, and narratives with perspectives who's sensibilities are contemporary/of a current contemporaneous timeframe.

  10. #40
    The King Fears NO ONE! Triniking1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,950

    Default

    Just because a fictional character is old doesn't mean you can't tell modern day stories with them. How do you think James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Archie Andrews, Nancy Drew, etc. are still around? And their presence doesn't stop people from creating new characters and stories in the similar genres.
    "Cable was right!"

  11. #41
    Ultimate Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    10,636

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Triniking1234 View Post
    Just because a fictional character is old doesn't mean you can't tell modern day stories with them. How do you think James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Archie Andrews, Nancy Drew, etc. are still around? And their presence doesn't stop people from creating new characters and stories in the similar genres.
    They did a Nancy Drew live action movie less than 20 years ago, in it Nancy was using a laptop as part of her everyday activities.

  12. #42
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,186

    Default

    It's possible to update those characters but it's also nice to see ones created with modern sensibilities in mind. And some concepts from back then don't necessarily work today

  13. #43
    Extraordinary Member Nomads1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro/Brazil
    Posts
    5,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    They did a Nancy Drew live action movie less than 20 years ago, in it Nancy was using a laptop as part of her everyday activities.
    I've got this in my HBO Max list to watch, but haven't found the time, yet.

    On a side-note, and keeping up with the spirit of the thread, I've always found Veronica Mars a more modern and better take on the Nancy Drew character, however, I'm glad they created her as a separate character, and not just as a Nancy drew with modern day sensibilities (or not so modern seeing that it's almos 20 years old).

    Peace
    Last edited by Nomads1; 09-22-2021 at 11:49 AM.

  14. #44
    OUTRAGEOUS!! Thor-Ul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Halfway between Asgard & Krypton
    Posts
    6,437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Triniking1234 View Post
    Just because a fictional character is old doesn't mean you can't tell modern day stories with them. How do you think James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Archie Andrews, Nancy Drew, etc. are still around? And their presence doesn't stop people from creating new characters and stories in the similar genres.
    That is something I was gonna say too. These are fictional characters and there is no real need to change them beyond publicitary stunts. Mostly, new legacy characters appears when the original had been absent from publication fro sometime already and can be used as basis for a new character. It happens all the time. It is more complicated when you try to change a character who is either still in publication or with a short absent from publication.
    But even those characters can be published and adapted to a new context with more or least success and even then you can write an story set in his original background, but with a modern style.
    "Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."

    "Great stories will always return to their original forms"

    "Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin

  15. #45
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    1,205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Digifiend View Post
    Not as the mainline anyway. Something akin to MC2 would work, though not MC2 itself as more than two decades have passed since that started and most of the Young Avengers and Champions didn't exist yet (except of course, Cassie Lang, aka Stinger), so a new future Marvel universe nowadays would need updating to add folks like Kamala and Kate.
    Aye, it causes way too many problems. People are upset when Peter is replaced with Ben for 20 issues, it will be a bigger backlash if Miles replaced him as the Amazing Spider-man forever. Plus, why would you want to bring in less People? Having a Miles and Peter in the Universe means there’s more to sell to more People. You’ll get Miles fans, Peter fans and Miles and Peter fans.

Posting Permissions

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