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

[Midnight_v]

One billion dollar movie that came almost at the end of and tied into one the most successful movie franchises of all time and a low rated streaming show?

No, no I don't.

There seems to be this "speak it into existence" strategy with Captain Marvel, that if you keep saying the character is popular and keep up the non-stop pop culture astroturfing eventually it's going to happen.

It's kind of It's own religion at this point.

The whole thing is very *FETCH* as they say

[cranger]

Nope.

Terrible idea. I think Carol has been Captain Marvel long enough at this point.

Kamala has also carved out a niche for herself.

No point in regression. Backwards never, forward ever.

I have no interest in any characters changing names, if they do and it is cool then whatever, hopefully it makes a good story. But... I love when this 'regression' thing gets thrown around like some sort of truth. This is not an attack just an amusing (to myself) thought, but I find the 'forward' part never really applies and people just want things to be stuck the way they are now. The contradiction of liking a change but not liking change.

[kcekada]

I'm okay with Carol as Captain Marvel -- I'm just not a fan of her current outfit. I think she's outgrown Ms. Marvel title.

[KurtW95]

It's not an upgrade to throw away your own unique name to change it one where you'd be the fifth person taking it. It would be like LeBron changing his name to Michael Jordan. And to the people saying Kamala is so popular, why not prove that she doesn't need someone else's name to be popular? Because either she is popular and she doesn't need it or her popularity is a lie and she relies on the name that isn't hers. It is also not an upgrade to have Falcon become Cap as it implies that he was insignificant until taking another guy's name. Which does minimize his impact as Falcon. An important first in comics treated like who he was didn't have any weight or is worth preserving.

I think she's outgrown Ms. Marvel title.

Why?? Why do you view Ms. Marvel as a lesser title?

[Will Evans]

I don't need Carol to be Ms. Marvel again but it would be nice if somebody else started using the Dave Cockrum suit.

Which will be Kamala when she returns, right guys?
Right guys?????
Hello???

[cranger]

It's not an upgrade to throw away your own unique name to change it one where you'd be the fifth person taking it. It would be like LeBron changing his name to Michael Jordan. And to the people saying Kamala is so popular, why not prove that she doesn't need someone else's name to be popular? Because either she is popular and she doesn't need it or her popularity is a lie and she relies on the name that isn't hers. It is also not an upgrade to have Falcon become Cap as it implies that he was insignificant until taking another guy's name. Which does minimize his impact as Falcon. An important first in comics treated like who he was didn't have any weight or is worth preserving.



Why?? Why do you view Ms. Marvel as a lesser title?

While I agree in general that the reasons people seem to justify why they like names seems backwards, but in the case of Kamala most of her fans never heard the name Ms. Marvel before. It was certainly not like Miles inheriting his identity. Marvel did not promote her as a new Ms. Marvel.

I do think narratively it would make sense for her to step out of the shadow of her hero. But there is a lot of time to get there.

[Digifiend]

Kamala's tried it! She shapeshifted into Carol as Ms. Marvel, but complained that the costume gives her a wedgie. When designing her own costume, the only thing she took from that one was the thunderbolt logo. It's not suited to her, especially considering her faith, which requires her to be modest.

[KurtW95]

Think about the new Nightcrawler Spider-Man series. If that were permanent and all other characters using the Spider-Man name were killed off, it would not be an upgrade. Because Kurt would be giving up his unique ID. And time passing does not change the fact. And saying that a change should not be reversed because of how long it has been in canon is an argument that would not allow said change said change to happen in the first place. And while I think it should never have happened in the first place, it having happened and people who support it turning around and now saying it can't be changed are not consistent in their reasoning.

[Username taken]

I have no interest in any characters changing names, if they do and it is cool then whatever, hopefully it makes a good story. But... I love when this 'regression' thing gets thrown around like some sort of truth. This is not an attack just an amusing (to myself) thought, but I find the 'forward' part never really applies and people just want things to be stuck the way they are now. The contradiction of liking a change but not liking change.

Broadly speaking, comics are about the illusion of change, more to that, the illusion of progression.

Comics have made strides and permanent changes have been made before like the silver age almost entirely wiping off golden age and the creation of newer characters to replace the old ones.

That being said, when such changes have been made and people have moved forward, I don't see the reason to always "go back to the way things were" for no real reason.

Acknowledging progress and wanting to continue in that vein (which maintaining Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel is) is completely opposite to wanting to her to go back to her former identity. Now, if Marvel wants Carol to change to a completely new identity like Captain Cosmos with a cool new status or powerset or something, then I don't think folks would have too much of a problem with that. However, suggesting she go back to Ms. Marvel for no real reason beyond nostalgia doesn't really work for a lot of people, hence some people (at least on these boards) aren't open to the idea.

[Username taken]

Think about the new Nightcrawler Spider-Man series. If that were permanent and all other characters using the Spider-Man name were killed off, it would not be an upgrade. Because Kurt would be giving up his unique ID. And time passing does not change the fact. And saying that a change should not be reversed because of how long it has been in canon is an argument that would not allow said change said change to happen in the first place. And while I think it should never have happened in the first place, it having happened and people who support it turning around and now saying it can't be changed are not consistent in their reasoning.

That's completely different.

There are multiple active Spider-man(s) at the moment. So, killing them off and handing them over to Kurt looks weird.

At the time, Marvel turned Carol to Captain Marvel, no one was using the name at the time (I could be mistaken though). When Kamala Khan became Ms. Marvel, no one was using the name at the time.

Not to mention Nightcrawler and Peter Parker aren't linked like the way Carol and Mar-vell were.

[dkrook]

I hate it.

I would accept Monica as Captain Marvel again, but I don’t want Carol back as Ms Marvel.

Agreed, with all that was stated.

[davetvs]

One billion dollar movie that came almost at the end of and tied into one the most successful movie franchises of all time and a low rated streaming show?

No, no I don't.

There seems to be this "speak it into existence" strategy with Captain Marvel, that if you keep saying the character is popular and keep up the non-stop pop culture astroturfing eventually it's going to happen.

It's kind of It's own religion at this point.

The saddest thing about this comment is that I don't even think you realize how hard you contradicted yourself from the first half to the second. I'm not speaking into existence the fact that Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel has appeared in 2 of the highest grossing movies of all time, including one she headlined. I'm not speaking into existence that Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel is wrapping up a 50-issue comic book run and leading the flagship Avengers team right now. You're putting what, exactly, up against that, to prove the character should regress in both title and costume? Nostalgia?

[Username taken]

The saddest thing about this comment is that I don't even think you realize how hard you contradicted yourself from the first half to the second. I'm not speaking into existence the fact that Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel has appeared in 2 of the highest grossing movies of all time, including one she headlined. I'm not speaking into existence that Carol Danvers as Captain Marvel is wrapping up a 50-issue comic book run and leading the flagship Avengers team right now. You're putting what, exactly, up against that, to prove the character should regress in both title and costume? Nostalgia?

Exactly, Disney already got a billion-dollar movie with the character.

People are entitled to their opinions, and they might not like Carol, but Disney/Marvel have already made bank with her.

They've already made her happen.

[KurtW95]

I guarantee a faithful adaption of Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel would've been far more successful in the MCU. If current version of her was so successful, why was her sequel turned into a group venture.

[davetvs]

The copium use with Carol is at an all-time high. The smear campaign against the movie didn't work, so they've taken to trying to reinvent reality right in our faces. Men lie, women lie, numbers don't.

I guarantee a faithful adaption of Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel would've been far more successful in the MCU. If current version of her was so successful, why was her sequel turned into a group venture.

What is more successful than a BILLION DOLLAR GROSSING SOLO FILM? If Captain America was so successful, why did his sequels become group outings?