Who agrees? Carol back as Ms. Marvel and Kamala with new original title

[CrimsonEchidna]

Mar-Vell can stay dead.

[Will Evans]

I think we can confidently say that it would have done much worse.

In comics, Carol doesn't have any agency in her own origin story. She's a rare example of positive collaterial damage, gaining powers because she was lucky enough to be rescued by Mar-Vell.

That’s already been retcon though for the last few years. Carol now was born a Kree/Earthling hybrid from her mother. The psychotron explosion now just brought up her powers quicker than when they were going to eventually form.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Ms. Marvel fits Kamala just fine.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I think Monica Rambeau would qualify. Her story doesn't really need Spider-Man and can easily be adapted to exclude him and she has a very strong powerset..

I agree, but I said super strong for a reason

Monica is a great character, but her powers do make her hard to handle

I think he means having a male hero who wasn't the main protagonist first. Abin Sur was just part of Hal's origin story but Hal was established as the lead character first.

Exactly.

I don't think Carol needs a name change, or that she should be replaced. But I do think Marvel needs a superstrong female character who has their own mythos and origin that revolves around them.

IN ADDITION TO, not in replacement of.

That’s already been retcon though for the last few years. Carol now was born a Kree/Earthling hybrid from her mother. The psychotron explosion now just brought up her powers quicker than when they were going to eventually form.

Except that that's not much of a solution, as they only activated because of Mar-Vell, and because she was kidnapped. Saying 'You totally would have gotten powers anyways' is a cop out.

[marhawkman]

That’s already been retcon though for the last few years. Carol now was born a Kree/Earthling hybrid from her mother. The psychotron explosion now just brought up her powers quicker than when they were going to eventually form.

did they do that before or after 1996? 'cause that's kinda like Ultragirl's origin story.

[KurtW95]

did they do that before or after 1996? 'cause that's kinda like Ultragirl's origin story.

Did it around the time of the movie, which was really weird because the movie still had her as a full human. But the retcon was pretty awful.

[KurtW95]

But based on what other than personal preference and knowledge that he was Marvel's first Capt Marvel? I don't think there's anything wrong with preferring him over the other folks who have used the name. It's just that there's no practical reason for Marvel as a company to make the changes suggested.

To show respect to Lee and Colan and keep a great creation of theirs in the public eye. Why should one of their great characters be kept from appearing in new stories? And in a related manner, why should Cockrum's design be banished? As a matter of personal taste, I like all of his designs and I do not like McKelvie's designs. But to disregard personal taste, I don't think anyone can counter that Cockrum's has had more of a dynamic influence on comics. So, why bury a costume he designed?

[Steroid]

To show respect to Lee and Colan and keep a great creation of theirs in the public eye. Why should one of their great characters be kept from appearing in new stories? And in a related manner, why should Cockrum's design be banished? As a matter of personal taste, I like all of his designs and I do not like McKelvie's designs. But to disregard personal taste, I don't think anyone can counter that Cockrum's has had more of a dynamic influence on comics. So, why bury a costume he designed?

Gene Colan famously didn't actually like the character of Mar-Vell but still if he was brought back there is no reason both he and Carol can't share the name. From a business perspective it doesn't take a genius to realize why Marvel wouldn't change her back to Ms. Marvel. A billion dollar movie speaks volumes. I get that this thread didn't go the way you thought it would apparently but you asked if people agreed with you and now don't want to accept the answer.

[Agent Z]

I think we can confidently say that it would have done much worse.

In comics, Carol doesn't have any agency in her own origin story. She's a rare example of positive collaterial damage, gaining powers because she was lucky enough to be rescued by Mar-Vell.

In fairness, most superheroes don't.

[KurtW95]

Gene Colan famously didn't actually like the character of Mar-Vell but still if he was brought back there is no reason both he and Carol can't share the name. From a business perspective it doesn't take a genius to realize why Marvel wouldn't change her back to Ms. Marvel. A billion dollar movie speaks volumes. I get that this thread didn't go the way you thought it would apparently but you asked if people agreed with you and now don't want to accept the answer.

You could've made a movie about a can of pain and release it after IW and say it ties in with the Marvel Studios logo slapped on it and it would've made a billion dollars. Those times have passed as the quality has taken a nosedive, but you can't pretend any movie released in that timeframe, that featured a character that said studio promised would be important in the final movie of it's longest series, wouldn't have made as much money.

And what is wrong with Carol being Ms. Marvel in a vacuum? Let's say that Kamala had been introduced under a different name and Carol kept her name until this day. Why would her name need to change? I cannot imagine any compelling argument why. Yours seems to lay on the shaky foundation that the change was good because it happened. And it should not be changed back because a bunch of casuals watched her with that name in movies.

And people wonder why there are objections playing loosey goosey with the source material with retcons, giant changes, and adaptions themselves that force a retcon in the comics to match said change. I'm not saying all change is bad and there should be no room to let characters change. But there does seem to be an argument that all change is good and if you disagree, you are just nostalgic and need to get over it. Which I mentioned makes no sense with me, as when I got into comics, Mar-Vell had been dead a long time. I mean he died before I was born. But I still want him back. And there were a lot of status quos I didn't like when I got into comics that I am not asking to bring back either. Claiming nostalgia is just a cheap way to dismiss an argument.

[marhawkman]

Did it around the time of the movie, which was really weird because the movie still had her as a full human. But the retcon was pretty awful.

oh you mean this?

hmm.... yeah... Car-Ell... really Marvel?

So yeah, 20 years after Tsu'Zana's origin was written... they changed Carol's to be more like Tsu'zana's? lol wut.

[80sbaby]

You could've made a movie about a can of pain and release it after IW and say it ties in with the Marvel Studios logo slapped on it and it would've made a billion dollars. Those times have passed as the quality has taken a nosedive, but you can't pretend any movie released in that timeframe, that featured a character that said studio promised would be important in the final movie of it's longest series, wouldn't have made as much money.

You mean like Ant-Man and Wasp did?

[The Cool Thatguy]

In fairness, most superheroes don't.

Depends on the hero. Most at least have their own mythos, like Thor, Cap, Spider-Man, etc.

The spin offs? They rely on another hero, like Nightwing, Silk, etc.

[Digifiend]

did they do that before or after 1996? 'cause that's kinda like Ultragirl's origin story.

Which is exactly why Suzy should be reintroduced. She's been gone since before Kamala's debut, so they've never met, and nor does Suzy know that Carol turned out to be half-Kree herself. She could have some interesting new interactions with them both now.

[9th.]

You mean like Ant-Man and Wasp did?

It also ignores the massive hate train Brie Larson received before and during the actual film.