What went wrong with Marvel's push of Carol?

[electr1cgoblin]

Boring stories, mediocre writers. That's it. And yes, Civil War II didn't helped. Every characters can become a fan-favorite, Marvel need to let her be written by people not chosen because of their gender but because of their Talent.
For example, have you seen what Aaron has done with Jane-Thor, a concept who with a lesser writer could have been totally stupid ? Give him Captain Marvel. Hey, you can even let Bendis write her, at least the first issues will be good before going absolutely nowhere. She needs an A-list writer to become an A-list character.

Personally, I think either Peter David or Joss Whedon (if he could be convinced to do it) would be GREAT candidates to write more of Carol's adventures. I'd add Kurt Busiek but doubt he's coming back to Marvel.

[gurkle]

I usually think it's a terrible idea to have a writer come back to something they wrote before, but I think putting Chris Claremont back on the character for a limited run might be effective. He's still famous enough that it would get some publicity, he obviously knows the character (did more than anyone else to shape the character) and his old-fashioned writing style wouldn't be as out of place on a book that isn't intended to be a huge seller.

It won't happen, of course, but I think Marvel's unofficial "Carol must be written by a woman" rule has become a bit arbitrary. (And, of course, so is the unofficial rule that women are mostly only assigned to write women, instead of being given a shot at the male heroes.) Though I did think Butters and Fasekas did a good job and wish they could have stayed longer.

[electr1cgoblin]

I usually think it's a terrible idea to have a writer come back to something they wrote before, but I think putting Chris Claremont back on the character for a limited run might be effective. He's still famous enough that it would get some publicity, he obviously knows the character (did more than anyone else to shape the character) and his old-fashioned writing style wouldn't be as out of place on a book that isn't intended to be a huge seller.

It won't happen, of course, but I think Marvel's unofficial "Carol must be written by a woman" rule has become a bit arbitrary. (And, of course, so is the unofficial rule that women are mostly only assigned to write women, instead of being given a shot at the male heroes.) Though I did think Butters and Fasekas did a good job and wish they could have stayed longer.

Wow, I never even considered Claremont, but that's an awesome idea. However, as you indicated, it's probably never gonna happen.

[lordozone]

It won't happen, of course, but I think Marvel's unofficial "Carol must be written by a woman" rule has become a bit arbitrary. (And, of course, so is the unofficial rule that women are mostly only assigned to write women, instead of being given a shot at the male heroes.)

This. Let women write male heroes, and let men write female heroes if they have good ideas for the characters. stop caring about what Tumblr and Twitter will say, they don't buy comics.

[anthony_lynch15]

I'm just gonna use that every time, really...

Hahaha - you actually made me laugh out loud.

[regnak]

agreed. she has been an avenger for decades so she has some visibility. the push to make her Captain Marvel was a good move, getting away from the sexist code name and bathing suit costume. she was always a soldier and the part of her past has now been brought forward a lot more. her solo series was great, but the last two relaunches have suffered from too much head office interference. CW 2 was horrible for her character. she needs a good writer to stick with the book to develop the character better and integrate her more into the MU in a natural way. she rarely references her time with the X-men, stuff like that should a major part of her character development.

LOL, Ms. owes its prominence to feminists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms.

Around 1971, in a lull during a WBAI-radio interview with The Feminists group, Michaels suggested the use of Ms. A friend of Gloria Steinem heard the interview and suggested it as a title for her new magazine. Ms. magazine's popularity finally allowed the term to enjoy widespread usage.[14] In February 1972, the US Government Printing Office approved using "Ms." in official government documents.[15] In 1976 Marvel Comics introduced a new superhero named "Ms. Marvel," billing her as the "first feminist superhero."

[4sake Baned]

Mis manage stories, to much tell & not enuff show, to many random creative teams changes leaving the ongoing/arcs to coming off as not all that connected, over estimating how many readers are in her core fanbase, being badly written/written in which way that turned of potential reads in team books & guess spots..

[Immortal Weapon]

Marvel has been pushing Carol since House of M. Brian Reed's Ms. Marvel run was all about Carol trying to achieve her current status quo. I disagree with the notation that she didn't earn it. They failed in keeping her interesting once she got there.

[electr1cgoblin]

Can someone tell me about Carol's current characterizaton, in regards to the following:

Do they reference Mar-Vell at all?
Do they acknowledge the Rogue attack?
Any reference to the horrible Immortus episode?
How about the Warbird period? Her alcoholism?

These are some of the key things I remember about her past and Busiek incorporated them to the point where I liked the character that came out the other side of these conflicts and challenges. I just get the feeling that they've swept all that under the rug in order to make this new "Carol" who might well be a fine person, but someone that really isn't the Carol I remember...?

[skyvolt2000]

And how many of those books will last as long or sell as much as their DC counterparts?

Lets see Wonder Woman had a HUGE head start-so lets exclude her and her 600+ issues.
Supergirl-same with Supergirl and her 7 volumes which you have to split among the 3 versions of her. If not you have at least 150.
Batgirl-has to be split among the 3 ladies who bore her name-Cass (72), Step (19) & Babs (60).
Harley has 81 in the can.
Lois Lane 136
Batwoman has 40.
Starfire 12
Catwoman 120
Huntress 12
Power Girl 27
Zantanna 18
Katanna 10



Marvel
Dagger 30 (with Cloak)
Dakota North 5
Dazzler 42
Black Widow 30 ongoing (if you count minis-50)
Emma Frost 18
Rogue 12
Storm 10
Carol Danvers at least 100+
She Hulk over 150+
Ms Marvel 30+
Jane Foster-21+
Squirrel Girl 21+
Hell Cat-if we count EVERY series with her name and before she got powers 300+
Spider Gwen-17+
Silkk-10+
Spider-Girl 155
Moon Girl 14+
Shiri 12
Spider Woman 60+
Sorry no Sue Storm

At LEAST these women got SHOTS at ongoings.

And the Dc females do not have threads demanding their cancellation or boycotts.

I can't name anything NASTY said about ANY DC female unlike at Marvel. Especially at Moon Girl.

The minority females at Dc fall victim to bad creative teams-the few who get shots.

Now why has Carol struggled?

Easy what does she bring to the table? NOTHING that no one else has already bought and maybe done better.

Marvel would have been better pushing Monica or Misty-since the black female heroine market is WIDE OPEN.

Or Sue Storm since she is a wife, mother and powerful member of the FF-she represents the do it all female.

[Ianbarreilles]

Can someone tell me about Carol's current characterizaton, in regards to the following:

Do they reference Mar-Vell at all?
Do they acknowledge the Rogue attack?
Any reference to the horrible Immortus episode?
How about the Warbird period? Her alcoholism?

These are some of the key things I remember about her past and Busiek incorporated them to the point where I liked the character that came out the other side of these conflicts and challenges. I just get the feeling that they've swept all that under the rug in order to make this new "Carol" who might well be a fine person, but someone that really isn't the Carol I remember...?

All of those are still canon but I think majority of why it's not acknowledged as much particularly avengers 200 and the rogue incident is that they're viewed as a real low point for the character the writers prefer to simply not address them.

And The alcoholism is also a low point for Carol but it has in fact been acknowledged in some civil war ii tie ins specifically captain marvel and invincible iron man's tie ins so they're still very much canon even Carol's kree roots and ties to mar-vell were acknowledged in both the ultimates and captain marvel's civil war ii tie ins.

[ed2962]

Can someone tell me about Carol's current characterizaton, in regards to the following:

Do they reference Mar-Vell at all?
Do they acknowledge the Rogue attack?
Any reference to the horrible Immortus episode?
How about the Warbird period? Her alcoholism?

These are some of the key things I remember about her past and Busiek incorporated them to the point where I liked the character that came out the other side of these conflicts and challenges. I just get the feeling that they've swept all that under the rug in order to make this new "Carol" who might well be a fine person, but someone that really isn't the Carol I remember...?

It's all still canon, but the first three things happened literally 35 yrs ago. With that and with Carol's periods as Warbird and Binary, I think the idea is that we have to move forward for Carol to even have a chance to catch on with modern fans. If every other story is about her referencing that time Binary punched Rogue at the X-Mansion, it might be harder for younger readers to find an entry point.

[Captain Craig]

Marvel
Dagger 30 (with Cloak)
Dakota North 5
Dazzler 42
Black Widow 30 ongoing (if you count minis-50)
Emma Frost 18
Rogue 12
Storm 10
Carol Danvers at least 100+
She Hulk over 150+
Ms Marvel 30+
Jane Foster-21+
Squirrel Girl 21+
Hell Cat-if we count EVERY series with her name and before she got powers 300+
Spider Gwen-17+
Silkk-10+
Spider-Girl 155
Moon Girl 14+
Shiri 12
Spider Woman 60+
Sorry no Sue Storm

An oversight that should be added:
Elektra = 66 ongoing + minis=92
'86 mini=8
'95 mini=4 (Root of Evil) Prestige Format
'96 series=20
'01 series=35
'02 mini=4 (Glimpse & Echo) ran while the '01 ongoing did
'05 mini=5 (The Hand)
'09 mini=5 (Dark Reign)
'14 series=11
'17 series=coming in March

Wth Marvel's funky accounting and any excuse for a "milestone" the upcoming 2017 series could see an issue #100 marketed around October.

[Alan2099]

All of those are still canon but I think majority of why it's not acknowledged as much particularly avengers 200 and the rogue incident is that they're viewed as a real low point for the character the writers prefer to simply not address them.

Shame. her Warbird period was the only time she ever felt like an interesting character to me.

[electr1cgoblin]

It's all still canon, but the first three things happened literally 35 yrs ago. With that and with Carol's periods as Warbird and Binary, I think the idea is that we have to move forward for Carol to even have a chance to catch on with modern fans. If every other story is about her referencing that time Binary punched Rogue at the X-Mansion, it might be harder for younger readers to find an entry point.

I get that, but the past is a huge part of what informs the character. You wouldn't make that same argument about the death of Peter Parker's uncle, right? That happened more than 50 years ago. Same with Tony's heart condition, Banner's abusive childhood, the death of Daredevil's father, etc. These events shaped the people we know as heroes today, and while you are correct in saying they shouldn't be referenced in every issue, they should not be forgotten and should be remembered as part of the mosaic of that person's life.