Page 336 of 354 FirstFirst ... 236286326332333334335336337338339340346 ... LastLast
Results 5,026 to 5,040 of 5304
  1. #5026
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coin Biter View Post
    What I find disappointing about a blustering oaf take on Odin is that it’s perhaps the least interesting portrayal that could be made of perhaps consistently the most interesting figure of the Norse pantheon. The wise and sinister ruler of the myths; the conflicted, complex, and devious figure in Wagner’s Ring Cycle; the fatal trickster in Gaiman’s work; the erratic but awe-inspiring figure in Lee/Kirby; the benign and intelligent patriarch of Simonson; the compromised and elegiac figure of Thor: Ragnarök ... all to be preferred to cosmic Donald Trump.
    a nice character review

    And I agree, I find this odin a shambles and dull
    Last edited by kilderkin; 10-21-2018 at 07:29 PM.

  2. #5027
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    With the Orishas
    Posts
    12,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coin Biter View Post
    What I find disappointing about a blustering oaf take on Odin is that it’s perhaps the least interesting portrayal that could be made of perhaps consistently the most interesting figure of the Norse pantheon. The wise and sinister ruler of the myths; the conflicted, complex, and devious figure in Wagner’s Ring Cycle; the fatal trickster in Gaiman’s work; the erratic but awe-inspiring figure in Lee/Kirby; the benign and intelligent patriarch of Simonson; the compromised and elegiac figure of Thor: Ragnarök ... all to be preferred to cosmic Donald Trump.
    Agreed 100%.

    I have a very serious problem with Odin’s portrayal in recent times. He’s a bit of a sexist buffoon lately that’s just downright unlikeable.

    I prefer the more complicated depictions of the Odin character that we actually used to see in the past.

  3. #5028
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Username taken View Post
    Agreed 100%.

    I have a very serious problem with Odin’s portrayal in recent times. He’s a bit of a sexist buffoon lately that’s just downright unlikeable.

    I prefer the more complicated depictions of the Odin character that we actually used to see in the past.
    I suspect a large majority of fans would like to see a more nuanced portrayal of Odin.

    I can't see the advantage of portraying him as a out and out sexist buffoon. Yes..I suppose if you simply want to come to conclusion that gods are unworthy, then it makes things very easy if you write it that way...but from readers point of view it then becomes such an easy and lazy writing stance, that it becomes a tad boring.
    Last edited by JackDaw; 10-22-2018 at 01:06 AM.

  4. #5029
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    With the Orishas
    Posts
    12,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    I suspect a large majority of fans would like to see a more nuanced portrayal of Odin.

    I can't see the advantage of portraying him as a out and out sexist buffoon. Yes..I suppose if you simply want to come to conclusion that gods are unworthy, then it makes things very easy if you write it that way...but from readers point of view it then becomes such an easy and lazy writing stance, that it becomes a tad boring.
    Yeah, it makes for more interesting reading.

    The "blustering, woman demeaning oaf" Odin is probably the least interesting version of the character.

    Although I don't entirely blame Aaron for this, the seeds of some of this was sown in Fraction's run.

  5. #5030
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Username taken View Post
    Yeah, it makes for more interesting reading.

    The "blustering, woman demeaning oaf" Odin is probably the least interesting version of the character.

    Although I don't entirely blame Aaron for this, the seeds of some of this was sown in Fraction's run.
    But Aaron has been "in charge" for ages now, and there was a wealth of other material (other than Fraction's) he could draw if he wanted to take the character in a different direction. I think its totally fair to assume he's writing Odin in a way that reflects his own personal preference rather than anybody else.

    I've read quite a large chunk of the run. And have to say I've been reasonably impressed. Things like the large sweep of time he covers, the large action scenes...and the idea that future may be considerably grimmer than now for long periods, but that with sufficient determination things might be slowly turned round have been strong, strong plus points.

    But I do feel it falls short if way he portrays not just Odin, but also "old" Thor (does anybody really call him Odinson??) and "new" Thor. Old Thor looks to rival his father in the boorish stakes...and I'm really unconvinced that Jane Foster could just pick up the hammer, and not just be "worthy" (I don't think she would be IN terms Norse gods would define worthy), but be instantly competent in fighting, fighting strategy, fighting skills, etc.

    Yes...I know it's all fiction...and Aaron can write it however he wants...but equally as a reader I can say whether or not I find a characterisation remotely plausible...and in this case, I've not found the characterisation remotely plausible.

  6. #5031
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    With the Orishas
    Posts
    12,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    But Aaron has been "in charge" for ages now, and there was a wealth of other material (other than Fraction's) he could draw if he wanted to take the character in a different direction. I think its totally fair to assume he's writing Odin in a way that reflects his own personal preference rather than anybody else.

    I've read quite a large chunk of the run. And have to say I've been reasonably impressed. Things like the large sweep of time he covers, the large action scenes...and the idea that future may be considerably grimmer than now for long periods, but that with sufficient determination things might be slowly turned round have been strong, strong plus points.

    But I do feel it falls short if way he portrays not just Odin, but also "old" Thor (does anybody really call him Odinson??) and "new" Thor. Old Thor looks to rival his father in the boorish stakes...and I'm really unconvinced that Jane Foster could just pick up the hammer, and not just be "worthy" (I don't think she would be IN terms Norse gods would define worthy), but be instantly competent in fighting, fighting strategy, fighting skills, etc.

    Yes...I know it's all fiction...and Aaron can write it however he wants...but equally as a reader I can say whether or not I find a characterisation remotely plausible...and in this case, I've not found the characterisation remotely plausible.
    I agree 100%.

    To be honest, I was a really huge Aaron fan at the beginning of his Thor run. I also enjoyed the heck out of Jane Thor's run. However, in recent months, just like you, I've started to have problems with Aaron's Thor run.

    I understand some of his creative choices but I fundamentally disagree with them particular with hard retcons concerning Mjolnir's origin (and Thor's post-mjolnir loss characterization) and the eventual fate of the weapon and how it all ties into Thor's mythos going forward (although it must be stated that he somehow gets the weapon back because he's wielding it in the future).

  7. #5032
    Astonishing Member Panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox_Nihil View Post
    My first post on the forum, although I've been following this thread occasionally! It must be Odin's fault!

    It's true that Aaron's Odin isn't exactly a new character, but that's not an 'excuse'. I mean, he is perfectly functional for the stories Aaron wants to tell, but nothing more than that. He is not someone I want to read about in his own title. So, he's not a 'good' character or interesting character per se, not for me, and, as I can clearly see on this forum, not for the majority of posters.

    But, yes, Simonson's Odin is so much above the other versions, it's not even a matter of taste. Although it can be a matter of one's own beliefs. So, if someone wishes him to be a despotic, unwise, petty king of gods (among other things) and nothing more, because it suits their vision of how gods should behave, then I can do nothing about it. But that aside, I am not even sure what is the point of conflict here. That Aaron has ruined him? I don't believe so, although I didn't read much of his run, because I didn't find it as captivating as many people think. If someone 'ruined' Odin after Simonson's highs, that was Tom DeFalco, but I don't want to go around blaming anyone for things like that. The same is true with Jane Foster: Aaron didn't ruin the sacred magic of Mjolnir, but Tom DeFalco once more when he allowed Captain America to hold it, simplifying the prerequisites for wielding the hammer. (Although it might have something to do with Mark Gruenwald, who championed Captain.) But, pushing things that way would be a misdirection - it was almost necessary and by default that something like that would happen. After highs you can go only down. But I can't recall people going around and blaming DeFalco for that. Perhaps because we didn't have social networks and forums to magnify things and emotions back then. The only thing that happened was that many people stopped buying the magazine.

    As for why Odin has been staying down ever since, gradually hitting new lows, well, that's another problem. It's easier that way, I think. Powerful and wise Odin is not easy to write. Even Simonson had to remove him from the scene for indefinite time.

    But his version is still head and shoulders and torso and an empty eye socket above all the rest. There is no contest here.
    I agree with you about DeFalco, though I've read little of the run. I don't mind other heroes being able to pick up the hammer, but it shouldn't grant them Thor's abilities, and certainly not the physical attributes that come from Thor's mixed heritage. Though Simonson opened that can of worms with Bill (though I think it was debatable whether Bill's strength in Thor form was Thor-enhanced or simply his own science-enhanced strength), he did shut it pretty firmly closed by removing that enchantment from the hammer, iirc. Unfortunately DeFalco had other ideas.

  8. #5033
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coin Biter View Post
    What I find disappointing about a blustering oaf take on Odin is that it’s perhaps the least interesting portrayal that could be made of perhaps consistently the most interesting figure of the Norse pantheon. The wise and sinister ruler of the myths; the conflicted, complex, and devious figure in Wagner’s Ring Cycle; the fatal trickster in Gaiman’s work; the erratic but awe-inspiring figure in Lee/Kirby; the benign and intelligent patriarch of Simonson; the compromised and elegiac figure of Thor: Ragnarök ... all to be preferred to cosmic Donald Trump.


    I can't disagree with your assessment. Gaiman's depiction in American Gods was fascinating in its own right, as I was reminded in the TV adaptation.

  9. #5034
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panic View Post
    I agree with you about DeFalco, though I've read little of the run. I don't mind other heroes being able to pick up the hammer, but it shouldn't grant them Thor's abilities, and certainly not the physical attributes that come from Thor's mixed heritage. Though Simonson opened that can of worms with Bill (though I think it was debatable whether Bill's strength in Thor form was Thor-enhanced or simply his own science-enhanced strength), he did shut it pretty firmly closed by removing that enchantment from the hammer, iirc. Unfortunately DeFalco had other ideas.
    I think Lee and Kirby opened that can of worms when they put that inscription on the hammer. But Simonson had a clear vision what to do with it. It wasn't just random and anyone who paid attention could see the reasoning, although it wasn't explicitly stated anywhere in the comic. Thor and Bill are champions of their people and great warriors and noble and so on, but one thing was present during Simonson's run that was often ignored or misunderstood later. Both would kill to achieve victory. Their duel "to the death", Thor (literally) killing Blockbuster many issues later - examples are everywhere.Of course, nobody is obliged to follow Simonson's vision in a company-owned material like this, but let's just say it was more coherent than anything after it and, frankly, I am a little tired of following the same-but-not-really characters for decades, with every new creative team having their own version of the characterization, origins, motives, and everything else. Following all-new, different characters is much easier.

    And I've never had a sense that Bill's strength was enhanced in any way by the hammer. He was pretty much equal to Thor in the fight, without the hammer.
    Last edited by Paradox_Nihil; 10-22-2018 at 03:27 AM.

  10. #5035
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox_Nihil View Post
    My first post on the forum, although I've been following this thread occasionally! It must be Odin's fault!

    It's true that Aaron's Odin isn't exactly a new character, but that's not an 'excuse'. I mean, he is perfectly functional for the stories Aaron wants to tell, but nothing more than that. He is not someone I want to read about in his own title. So, he's not a 'good' character or interesting character per se, not for me, and, as I can clearly see on this forum, not for the majority of posters.

    But, yes, Simonson's Odin is so much above the other versions, it's not even a matter of taste. Although it can be a matter of one's own beliefs.
    You are making a very shaky point that anything in these stories is above matters of taste. Essentially all you are doing is elevating your own personal taste to the level of objectivity. It clearly is a matter of taste because myself and others prefer a problematic Odin. My point has never been that those that don't are wrong, just that they are wrong to make the assertion that 'modern writers' get Odin wrong. That is even more illogical when that implies Lee and Kirby also got him wrong occasionally, as did Roy Thomas. Seems a big stretch to go that far out on a limb when even Simonson is squaring the Odin circle by using him as a convuluted plot generation machine, who only reveals his true intentions afterwards and sometime those reveals feel as slippery as Loki.

    Sometime it feels like old books just get a pass for being old. They are just as much pulpy comic book fun as any other comic. On a fundamental level just as disposable.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 10-22-2018 at 03:41 AM.

  11. #5036
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox_Nihil View Post
    I think Lee and Kirby opened that can of worms when they put that inscription on the hammer. But Simonson had a clear vision what to do with it. It wasn't just random and anyone who paid attention could see the reasoning, although it wasn't explicitly stated anywhere in the comic. Thor and Bill are champions of their people and great warriors and noble and so on, but one thing was present during Simonson's run that was often ignored or misunderstood later. Both would kill to achieve victory. Their duel "to the death", Thor (literally) killing Blockbuster many issues later - examples are everywhere.Of course, nobody is obliged to follow Simonson's vision in a company-owned material like this, but let's just say it was more coherent than anything after it and, frankly, I am a little tired of following the same-but-not-really characters for decades, with every new creative team having their own version of the characterization, origins, motives, and everything else. Following all-new, different characters is much easier.

    And I've never had a sense that Bill's strength was enhanced in any way by the hammer. He was pretty much equal to Thor in the fight, without the hammer.
    I think it is also important to remember Simonson was setting Beta-Ray Bill up as a mythological figure too, as a saviour figure. He was doing pretty much the same thing that Aaron constantly does in creating foils that confront issues and assumptions about Thor. This is one of the reasons I have no time for the over blown praise that Simonson's run receives. It is just a book, it happened to do things in a literary manner that has slowly become more common in comics. While a great run that should be appreciated, the way it is used as a stick to beat every other run is just baffling. Surely nobody wants to read decades worth of Simonson derivatives?

  12. #5037
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    But Aaron has been "in charge" for ages now, and there was a wealth of other material (other than Fraction's) he could draw if he wanted to take the character in a different direction. I think its totally fair to assume he's writing Odin in a way that reflects his own personal preference rather than anybody else.

    I've read quite a large chunk of the run. And have to say I've been reasonably impressed. Things like the large sweep of time he covers, the large action scenes...and the idea that future may be considerably grimmer than now for long periods, but that with sufficient determination things might be slowly turned round have been strong, strong plus points.

    But I do feel it falls short if way he portrays not just Odin, but also "old" Thor (does anybody really call him Odinson??) and "new" Thor. Old Thor looks to rival his father in the boorish stakes...and I'm really unconvinced that Jane Foster could just pick up the hammer, and not just be "worthy" (I don't think she would be IN terms Norse gods would define worthy), but be instantly competent in fighting, fighting strategy, fighting skills, etc.

    Yes...I know it's all fiction...and Aaron can write it however he wants...but equally as a reader I can say whether or not I find a characterisation remotely plausible...and in this case, I've not found the characterisation remotely plausible.
    Aaron is taking the character in a direction that I don't belive we have seen enough of to judge. He is playing a very long game with his characters.

  13. #5038
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    You are making a very shaky point that anything in these stories is above matters of taste. Essentially all you are doing is elevating your own personal taste to the level of objectivity. It clearly is a matter of taste because myself and others prefer a problematic Odin. My point has never been that those that don't are wrong, just that they are wrong to make the assertion that 'modern writers' get Odin wrong. That is even more illogical when that implies Lee and Kirby also got him wrong occasionally, as did Roy Thomas. Seems a big stretch to go that far out on a limb when even Simonson is squaring the Odin circle by using him as a convuluted plot generation machine, who only reveals his true intentions afterwards and sometime those reveals feel as slippery as Loki.
    Nobody's getting Odin wrong, because Odin doesn't exist (well, except symbolically). Clear and simple. So, anybody can make their own version as much as they like. Second thing is, as the others have said, Gaiman's Odin is fascinating, so it's not a matter of 'modern writers'. It's a matter of Marvel. And the real question is, would you like the stories with your preferred Odin as the titular character? Would you like his own comic series? Because, if the answer is No, than even you don't find him to be a 'good' character. The rest is just empty semantics, and futile "my favourite writer can do no wrong!" and we can argue about that till the end of time without any advancement.

    Lee and Kirby? I respect them very much, and Kirby has done some of the the best things in comics ever, in my opinion, but in Thor they didn't have a systematic approach or a plan. They were inventing things as they went. So, naturally, they often contradicted themselves. And, consequentially, there is no point in referring to them in this matter, because you can 'prove' anything, similar to referring to the Bible (if somebody is religious here, I apologize for this comparison).

    Roy Thomas? What he has to do with this?

    And, contrary to what you've actually said here, Simonson used Odin with a clear role and purpose. You could say he even reshaped his entire Marvel universe for that role, but that was a coherent vision, made with that idea from the beginning. Which Marvel abandoned almost immediately, but...whatever.

    Peace.
    Last edited by Paradox_Nihil; 10-22-2018 at 03:44 PM.

  14. #5039
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Aaron is taking the character in a direction that I don't belive we have seen enough of to judge. He is playing a very long game with his characters.
    He’s been writing Thor since 2012.

    I suppose it’s always possible that he could play the “it was all a dream in the shower” trick...but failing something like, it’s hardly a precipitous rush to judgement to conclude things like his portrayal of Odin is not remotely noble (he comes over as Loki without the humour or charm), and that Jane Thor comes acrosss as nobler and more competent than present day “original” Thor.

  15. #5040
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    686

    Default

    Just when I think JKtheMac can't come up with any worse excuses to justify Aaron, he goes and outdoes himself.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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