Would You Be Open To Legacy Characters PERMANENTLY Replacing The Originals?

[Ultimate Captain America]

I do think there's this assumption by some people that fictional characters are like gum - that they can be "used up" after a while. While that's true about certain characters, it's arguably not true in most cases.

To show that's not the case, let's use the MCU as an example. The MCU is actually "permanently" replacing original characters with legacy ones the way this thread pitches that 616 should. Is it better off for doing that?

It's hard to tell. John Walker for example was great and worked as a great foil for Sam, but John Walker was conceptualized as a Steve Rogers villain. I don't know if a fourth Steve Rogers film with John Walker as the villain would have been any less good than Falcon and the Winter Soldier.

Kang is another interesting example. While Kang is primarily an Avengers villain, his most interesting relationships have been with Steve Rogers and Tony Stark. Kang is the opposite of Steve Rogers - a conqueror from the future instead of a freedom fighter from the past - and you can get a lot of story mileage out of that. Whereas with Tony, Kang has always been the only villain besides Mandarin to hurt Tony's ego and to essentially make him feel primitive. MCU Tony had yet to have his ego challenged by another futurist like himself... and now Kang is coming but you can't tell either of those stories in the MCU with Tony and Steve being gone.

I'm not suggesting that the MCU moving with legacy characters was a mistake. Just pointing out that, if we think about it, the MCU hasn't really unlocked any more story potential than 616 just by choosing to go with legacy characters.

Remember that films have several problems that comics do not. Actors sign contracts for a limited number of films, they age, things like disease, pregnancy, disability, and even death may interfere with them playing characters, and at some point they may want to move on to other projects and leave the character behind.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Remember that films have several problems that comics do not. Actors sign contracts for a limited number of films, they age, things like disease, pregnancy, disability, and even death may interfere with them playing characters, and at some point they may want to move on to other projects and leave the character behind.

I don't have a problem with the MCU doing what they're doing. I actually prefer it since 616 will never do it, so we get to see the hypothetical universe where legacy characters replace the OG's for once. I'm just saying that from a storytelling potential, it doesn't really have more or less potential than 616.

I also think that part of the reason other fans are okay with the MCU is for that same reason - because the 616-verse doesn't do it, so we fans get to have our cake and eat it too by having a universe for each. It's like the MC2 concept but better executed.

[Digifiend]

Remember that films have several problems that comics do not. Actors sign contracts for a limited number of films, they age, things like disease, pregnancy, disability, and even death may interfere with them playing characters, and at some point they may want to move on to other projects and leave the character behind.

Yeah, it's already, tragically, happened with Black Panther.