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

[CosmiComic]

It's also kind of a middle finger to whoever the first guy was.
I mean look at Dan Garrett, there are people who don't even know who he is and some other guy is running around in his outfit.
I think if you want to have characters do that for a little bit, you need to be working towards setting them up with their own identity eventually, honestly even if it's as simple as adding a color to the name.

That's the fault of the comics not building up Dan Garrett. Are we supposed to be beholden to the original forever, even if the newer one is better or more suited for modern times?

[ed2962]

That's the fault of the comics not building up Dan Garrett. Are we supposed to be beholden to the original forever, even if the newer one is better or more suited for modern times?

"Fault" is kind of a loaded word. I mean, he simply stopped being popular a long time ago. And by the time Ditko came up with the Ted Kord version, the old fans moved on to other interests.

[CosmiComic]

"Fault" is kind of a loaded word. I mean, he simply stopped being popular a long time ago. And by the time Ditko came up with the Ted Kord version, the old fans moved on to other interests.

Well, a lot of heroes don't get popular because the company doesn't support them. Popularity doesn't necessarily just appear.

[TheRay]

That's the fault of the comics not building up Dan Garrett. Are we supposed to be beholden to the original forever, even if the newer one is better or more suited for modern times?

Yes, that's true it is the comics' industry's doing, but, no, we're just not supposed to use his name.

[Shadowcat]

My name is for Langford.
The picture is of his son, Ray.

The character pictured is still a legacy, so my comment still stands.

[SpiderTBliss]

How exactly is it random?

How would it not be? You have Bruce Wayne as Batman, Peter Parker as Spiderman etc. If you create a new character to replace them and be a legacy then it's just some random new character that people have come up with and put the bat/spider mask on.

[CosmiComic]

How would it not be? You have Bruce Wayne as Batman, Peter Parker as Spiderman etc. If you create a new character to replace them and be a legacy then it's just some random new character that people have come up with and put the bat/spider mask on.

But it's not random. Those characters were intentionally created to replace them. That's the opposite of random.

[marhawkman]

But it's not random. Those characters were intentionally created to replace them. That's the opposite of random.

From an out-of-universe perspective? yes. In-universe? NOPE~!!!!!!!

[skyvolt2000]

From an out-of-universe perspective? yes. In-universe? NOPE~!!!!!!!

Unless it was planned in advance like we saw with Steel, Conner and the other Supermen or Kyle in Green Lantern.

Along with the end game of the replacement NOT staying and eventually getting their own name.

Which both companies have done.

Now the results vary.

While we saw Steel boast a long run under his name. War Machine get plenty of shots.

We saw others that did not pan out like Fate or Shuri's run as Panther.

Even more others never get a shot like Power Man Jr (without Ironfist) or Black Goliath Jr.

[Spiderfan001]

From an out-of-universe perspective? yes. In-universe? NOPE~!!!!!!!

This

And a big no, comic characters being eternal is fun and I want next gens to have the experience we did.No need to change everything

Peter's been Spider-man for generations, same w/ Bruce and Clark and it was never a problem.This "legacy characters for next gen" makes no sense.Ofc make new characters but replacing old ones PERMANENTLY is a no-no, I'd rather we get more OC's than legacies as well.

[Ultimate Captain America]

It happened once in DC. The Flash, Barry Allen, died and was replaced by Wally West. And it was for good, permanent, not going back. Even adaptations to other media, such as the Justice League animated series, used Wally West.

Until... someone had the bright idea to bring Barry Allen back, despite the years, despite fans getting used to the idea that Wally IS Flash. You can just imagine what happened next.

You know the way things work. If Marvel did this, if they truly committed themselves to this, someone would eventually come someday and pull a "Barry Allen is back" stunt, and we would be through the same crisis.

[CosmiComic]

From an out-of-universe perspective? yes. In-universe? NOPE~!!!!!!!

I don't quite follow. It's not necessarily random in-universe either.

[kilderkin]

I'm rarely in favour of replacement of original versions, add ons are nice, but generally I like both to be around

I can't, right now, think of a replacement I preferred except maybe quasar over the earlier marvel boy if that counts

Certainly none of the current or recent legacy feel like better characters with the exception of ms marvel over carol, but that's a slight conundrum in that it's a legacy of a legacy

But in short, no

[marhawkman]

I don't quite follow. It's not necessarily random in-universe either.

Right, but that means writing a story about it and is a lot more than just "intentionally created to replace them"

[Kaitou D. Kid]

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.