Does anyone else miss the old Jessica Jones?

[Of Atlantis]

I personal view is if we're talking about a character that isn't say Spider-Man or Wolverine I'd rather a character be used poorly in a high profile situation than not at all (not that I agree Jessica was poorly used). Bendis usage of Cage for example directly spilled over into Thunderbolts and Mighty Avengers. So even if one didn't personally like Cages usage of the character, it increased the odds of other writers using them. The more opportunities a character has to be used, the more opportunities they have to be used well. Sitting in limbo being forgotten about is always worse case scenario IMO.

I don't think there are many that specifically didn't enjoy Bendis's Cage for the most part. His usage was essential I think in getting involved with the Thunderbolts. And you're exactly right, guys like Spider-man and Wolverine could be used poorly and survive the experience, but if we were to look at the usage of Bendis's Iron Fist, Moon Knight or Bucky Barnes (imo of course), you won't be able to say the same. They were often slighted or portrayed poorly I felt, and characters in need of appealing to the masses in order to keep their stock rising or keep them relevant really suffer with poor high profile portrayals. So we'll just have to agree to disagree in regards to the exposure outweighing the portrayal.

I've been at the end of too many high profile poor portrayals of some of my favourites to be understanding of that opinion, respectfully.

[XPac]

I don't think there are many that specifically didn't enjoy Bendis's Cage for the most part. His usage was essential I think in getting involved with the Thunderbolts. And you're exactly right, guys like Spider-man and Wolverine could be used poorly and survive the experience, but if we were to look at the usage of Bendis's Iron Fist, Moon Knight or Bucky Barnes (imo of course), you won't be able to say the same. They were often slighted or portrayed poorly I felt, and characters in need of appealing to the masses in order to keep their stock rising or keep them relevant really suffer with poor high profile portrayals. So we'll just have to agree to disagree in regards to the exposure outweighing the portrayal.

I've been at the end of too many high profile poor portrayals of some of my favourites to be understanding of that opinion, respectfully.

Well, given where Jessica and Luke are right now if indeed there was any damage done to them over their usage I'd argue it's fairly negligable. They're probably more prominant now than they ever have been.

It's like when people during Civil War were arguing how much damage was being done to the Iron Man character... yet really his stock was rising to the point where he's arguably the number 1-2 character in the entire company. Obviously more credit cam be given to the movie than anything else, but if the character suffered from the potrayal I can't really imagine him being any better off than had he not suffered through it.

Iron Man I think is the best example of the benefits of usage I think. He was everywhere after Civil War... on a good month he showed up more than even Wolverine and Spider-Man, with plenty of poor potrayal complaints attatched. Not that the complaints weren't justifiable... but the good far out weighted the bad. Characters sitting in limbo don't get movies and TV shows on Net Flicks. Characters being used in high profile books do.

[mreddie]

Even when she joined the New Avengers, she didn't do much.

It wasn't til the Mighty Avengers she felt more important, she can be the superhero mom Marvel is giving to Jessica Drew at the moment and a wasted opportunity to cash in with the Netflix show.

[t hedge coke]

Some of y'all really really hate moms or what?

[lilyinblue]

I think one of Jessica's more unique character attributes is that despite having powers, she's doesn't really WANT to be a superhero. I wouldn't be opposed to her doing more PI work, but throwing her back into hero-mode almost seems against character.

[Of Atlantis]

Well, given where Jessica and Luke are right now if indeed there was any damage done to them over their usage I'd argue it's fairly negligable. They're probably more prominant now than they ever have been.

If we're talking strictly comics, neither are part of a solo book. Jessica is nowhere to be found in ANAD Marvel and Luke's only appearance seems to be as part of the upcoming Power Man & Iron Fist book. Mind you, the Alias trades have been rereleased, but that's on account of the Netflix series, which was based on her 2004 story, not anything after. And keep in mind the Netflix series evolved from the show they were developing which had been in production limbo for years, even preceeding her tenure on the New Avengers, if you can even call it that. I think you're giving too much credit to that tenure for keeping her relevant, as the only thing anyone ever cared about in regards to her was Alias.

It's like when people during Civil War were arguing how much damage was being done to the Iron Man character... yet really his stock was rising to the point where he's arguably the number 1-2 character in the entire company. Obviously more credit cam be given to the movie than anything else, but if the character suffered from the potrayal I can't really imagine him being any better off than had he not suffered through it.

Iron Man I think is the best example of the benefits of usage I think. He was everywhere after Civil War... on a good month he showed up more than even Wolverine and Spider-Man, with plenty of poor potrayal complaints attatched. Not that the complaints weren't justifiable... but the good far out weighted the bad. Characters sitting in limbo don't get movies and TV shows on Net Flicks. Characters being used in high profile books do.

Guess it's how you define "damage". I felt creatively, his character's reputation suffered immensely and took years to repair. I wrote him off for years personally, and I'm sure many more did too. The movie carried the weight in improving his image, and frankly, Marvel got lucky it did. IIRC Gillen's Iron Man sold the lowest of the big three, as did Superior Iron Man. It wasn't until Marvel completely reshifted their marketing focus and loaded up on LCS incentives that ANAD Iron Man managed to ship an impressive amount. #1 shipped 280k. Shipped, not sold. #3 shipped less than 60k. That's a ridiculous drop. And it might be worth considering his constant usage is mandated due to the fact he's a mainstay Avenger due to the movies, not because people find him particularly interesting, just the fact they have no choice but to tolerate his constant appearances in the "important" titles.

As for high profile books getting Netflix and tv shows. How relevant were generic SHIELD agents in comics before AoS? Where's the Black Widow solo movie? Why hadn't Marvel pursued the rights for Deadpool when he began blowing up? How relevant were Guardians of the Galaxy before Marvel decided to make a movie about them? What were the Inhumans doing before their movie was announced? What high profile team was Black Panther a part of before his movie was announced? Scott Lang too? Hope van Dyne? High profile books and relevancy in comics don't dictate which movies or shows get made. It's the other way around.

Some of y'all really really hate moms or what?

I'd hate for people to assume I just don't like moms or whatever. I just don't feel like that creative direction resulted in her becoming particularly interesting. It seemed to peak at the revelation she was pregnant and then kind of stuck in a perpetual "now what" for me personally.

[areacode212]

I think describing what she did in Axis as "bad stabbing" is a bit unfair given the circumstances.

But certainly there are downsides to characters "growing up" for lack of a better word. She had issues... and for the most part overtime she got over those issues (and people tend to do especially with the support of family). She went from a self loathing person to a mother and wife in a relatively good place. Unlike a lot of characters she was able to complete her character journey to a degree.

And on one hand it's to see characters not remain in the same place spinning their wheels indefinately. But on the other, it can sometimes means that characters grow out of certain character flaws which made them interesting. Characters growing and evoling is sort of a double edged sword.

Yeah, well said. I'm guessing that Bendis wanted to give his character something of a "happy ending", but I always thought that he rushed it a little.

It would be great if they capitalized off the Netflix show and gave her a book again. Her life is a bit more stable now and she has new responsibilities, but she still has flaws and that hard edge. Present a mystery/case that she really wants to solve because she has a certain set of skills, and then she realizes that she misses this line of work. It would be a nice street level NYC book to go with Daredevil & PM/IF.

I personal view is if we're talking about a character that isn't say Spider-Man or Wolverine I'd rather a character be used poorly in a high profile situation than not at all (not that I agree Jessica was poorly used). Bendis usage of Cage for example directly spilled over into Thunderbolts and Mighty Avengers. So even if one didn't personally like Cages usage of the character, it increased the odds of other writers using them. The more opportunities a character has to be used, the more opportunities they have to be used well. Sitting in limbo being forgotten about is always worse case scenario IMO.

I've been split about this, but I think I'm starting to come around to this line of thinking.

Some of y'all really really hate moms or what?

It depends on the character. In Jessica's case, I enjoyed seeing her as a single non-mom doing her thing in Alias. Whereas with someone like Julia Carpenter, it added an extra humanizing dimension to her character.

[StaticShock99]

Being Jessica Cage is fine to me, the marriage and baby are fine and actually make sense considering her characters arc. What she needs now is another story-line, personally I would actually be interested in reading a book about her, Luke, and Danielle.

[MyriVerse]

When Jessica Jones first appeared, she was a self loathing private eye detective who retired from being a super hero but still contributed to the community. Despite that it was still something that drove her to do right by people (for a reasonable price). Now she is an overprotective mom who back stabbed Luke twice (once during Secret Invasion and AXIS). I personally think having a family watered down the character. What do you think?

She 100 times better today. There's nothing I dislike more in a character than self-loathing.

[Raye]

It depends on the character. In Jessica's case, I enjoyed seeing her as a single non-mom doing her thing in Alias. Whereas with someone like Julia Carpenter, it added an extra humanizing dimension to her character.

That's just it for me. It feels out of character, and limits the aspects of her character that I liked the best. She never came off as a nurturer or someone who would really want to have children. Not all women do, and that's fine, and I am personally tired of seeing the same old 'she has a baby and discovers that it's what she really wanted all along' plot that reinforces the dated notion that all women should want to be mothers, and that is where they will find true happiness and fulfillment. There is nothing wrong with a character wanting to be a parent, but there's nothing wrong with one choosing NOT to be either, it depends on the character in question. I just don't think it was right *for her* specifically. I have the same problems with the current Spider-Woman storyline. (is it something about the name Jessica? weird)

[Confuzzled]

That's just it for me. It feels out of character, and limits the aspects of her character that I liked the best. She never came off as a nurturer or someone who would really want to have children. Not all women do, and that's fine, and I am personally tired of seeing the same old 'she has a baby and discovers that it's what she really wanted all along' plot that reinforces the dated notion that all women should want to be mothers, and that is where they will find true happiness and fulfillment. There is nothing wrong with a character wanting to be a parent, but there's nothing wrong with one choosing NOT to be either, it depends on the character in question. I just don't think it was right *for her* specifically. I have the same problems with the current Spider-Woman storyline. (is it something about the name Jessica? weird)

Well, Bendis basically created Jones because he couldn't use Drew for his retired superheroine story, hence the same name. I wonder whether they took a page out of JJ's plot for Spider-Woman current status quo.

Regarding Jessica J. actually becoming pregnant, it was completely possible. Even if Jessica didn't originally want to be a mom, abortion would have been a pretty huge step, especially since the baby daddy was the first man she actually imagined any kind of future with. "Now what?" seemed to be a pretty exciting new phase for such a character.

It is a different thing that Bendis and other writers dropped the ball after Jessica settled down. Despite getting a child and a loving husband, her cracks shouldn't have automatically healed. But then again, we haven't had enough focus on Married Jessica to really determine where she is mentally right now. Family life should actually add to her self-doubting nature and cause bigger issues due to increased pressures. As Reality said, a sequel series to Alias with baby mama Jessica reopening her PI agency to support fam would actually be even more interesting than the original run if handled well.

[Hrist]

I think one of Jessica's more unique character attributes is that despite having powers, she's doesn't really WANT to be a superhero. I wouldn't be opposed to her doing more PI work, but throwing her back into hero-mode almost seems against character.

Yeah, this. I like that her superhero angst had a resoloution and that she got a complete character arc. I love Alias Jess, but reverting her back would take away some of the stuff I love about Alias.

I would be interested in reading a new Jessica Jones series, but not an Alias rehash, rather something that reflects her current status quo. If she was working as a PI or a reporter again, that's a good way of generating stories, and her position as someone living on the fringes of the superhero community while actively trying to not getting sucked all the way in is pretty unique. Being the mother of a young child is also fairly unexplored but Jessica Drew is currently occupying the new mom/PI niche. I've liked some of her guest appearances (for example, Young Avengers) but she's at her best and most complex as the star of her own show. Having a husband and a baby hasn't made all her problems go away, and I think a new Jess Jones book could do a good job deconstructing the happy ending like the original deconstructed the superhero genre.

[Raye]

Well, Bendis basically created Jones because he couldn't use Drew for his retired superheroine story, hence the same name. I wonder whether they took a page out of JJ's plot for Spider-Woman current status quo.

Regarding Jessica J. actually becoming pregnant, it was completely possible. Even if Jessica didn't originally want to be a mom, abortion would have been a pretty huge step, especially since the baby daddy was the first man she actually imagined any kind of future with. "Now what?" seemed to be a pretty exciting new phase for such a character.

It is a different thing that Bendis and other writers dropped the ball after Jessica settled down. Despite getting a child and a loving husband, her cracks shouldn't have automatically healed. But then again, we haven't had enough focus on Married Jessica to really determine where she is mentally right now. Family life should actually add to her self-doubting nature and cause bigger issues due to increased pressures. As Reality said, a sequel series to Alias with baby mama Jessica reopening her PI agency to support fam would actually be even more interesting than the original run if handled well.

yeah, having an 'oops, now what?' storyline with a character that probably isn't exactly the best parental material and may not even want kids at all can have potential (and I do hold out hope this is where it is headed with Spider-Woman) but that's not what we got. :-/ It also is something that should be considered very carefully with characters like these, thanks to the sliding timescale and the continuing nature of the MU. They will be saddled with that decision of giving the characters children for years and years to come, way longer than the 18ish years that it would take to raise a child in the real world, barring doing something horrible like killing the child. It will become an integral part of their character effectively forever, and is not easily retconned or swept under the rug if it does not work out. Well, I guess there is the old X-Men standby of sending them forwards/backwards in time to be raised instantly. But still. For some characters, it makes total sense. Giving Reed and Sue kids, fine decision. Just, it should not be tacked on as what in this case amounted to a 'and she lived happily ever after, the end'. A baby is a huge, life changing thing, especially if you were not really planning on it/have a life that is not suited to kids, so if you give a character a baby, have a solid plan of where it's going and what it means for both parents that makes sense for their personalities and lives. Luke got that, not so much Jessica.

[Confuzzled]

yeah, having an 'oops, now what?' storyline with a character that probably isn't exactly the best parental material and may not even want kids at all can have potential (and I do hold out hope this is where it is headed with Spider-Woman) but that's not what we got. :-/ It also is something that should be considered very carefully with characters like these, thanks to the sliding timescale and the continuing nature of the MU. They will be saddled with that decision of giving the characters children for years and years to come, way longer than the 18ish years that it would take to raise a child in the real world, barring doing something horrible like killing the child. It will become an integral part of their character effectively forever, and is not easily retconned or swept under the rug if it does not work out. Well, I guess there is the old X-Men standby of sending them forwards/backwards in time to be raised instantly. But still. For some characters, it makes total sense. Giving Reed and Sue kids, fine decision. Just, it should not be tacked on as what in this case amounted to a 'and she lived happily ever after, the end'. A baby is a huge, life changing thing, especially if you were not really planning on it/have a life that is not suited to kids, so if you give a character a baby, have a solid plan of where it's going and what it means for both parents that makes sense for their personalities and lives. Luke got that, not so much Jessica.

I agree with all of this. I can see why Bendis was tempted to give Jessica a "happily ever after", but it doesn't work like that (well, not that simply) in real life. Would like to see someone like Kathryn Immonen take a stab at writing a married Jessica solo, provided Melissa Rosenberg or any of the show's other writers aren't/can't do it. Kelly Sue DeConnick would've been great for this kind of story too, but apparently that's not happening now.

[Garbledarber]

I like that unlike most characters in the medium Jessica has been allowed to grow as a person naturally. Once she became a mother and in a more stable relationship her life priorities shifted, I also love that she finally becomes an Avenger. She may deny that she wants to be a superhero but she does, she went out to use her powers as a hero before the Purple Man fucked over her life and soured her to the idea of her being a good hero. I like that she managed to work past that and evolve.