FF is called dated by people that don't like them.
I know we have some young posters but I'd like to inform them that FF had been labeled as outdated as far back as Onslaught. Contrary to a lot of recent arguments, Marvel neglected a lot of their properties in the 90s because they were pushing the X-men above all else (remember Wolverine scarring Ben Grimm's face?). It was horrible (that's why I had no problem with Joe Quesada trying to prop up non-X-men related properties in 2001 but that's a different discussion). Long term FF fans (I don't mean the anti-Marvel pro Fox team) know this and witnessed these terrible years.
A lot of arguments against the FF arose around this period (the 90s) and they never left. For the record, there's nothing like an "outdated" property. Hickman showed emphatically that the FF as a concept is still very relevant and should play a vital role in the Marvel universe. Heck, I could argue very strongly that the Ultimates right now is quite close to classic FF storytelling.
They are not dated. They are what is called: A classic.
The only people who call them dated never took more than a single glance at them in the first place.
The Fantastic Four is Marvel's First Family. Their presence casts a long shadow. And their absence creates a huge hole in the Marvel Universe that nobody else can hope to fill.
The FF isn't replaceable. That's the glaring sign of being a true classic. They are unique.
I'm a fan of the Fantastic Four when they are well written. Unfortunately. Not a lot of modern writers do and cannot write them well.
Last edited by Darrin Kelley; 08-11-2017 at 02:27 PM.
Good one.
And there is one-sort of.
The Deep a comic book about a mixed race family-black father, Asian wife (I think) and mixed kids. They had two graphic novels and a show on Netflix. They are explorers not superheroes.
Interesting Disney did have a movie about a black family heroes-UP Up & Away. It had Michael (I always die in movies) Pagan and Sherman Hemsley and one of the black guys from Jeeper Creepers 2.
Have we had either one in comics? I have seen mixed families but not an all race one.
As for FF being called dated-I never heard that.
Stable is a word I would call them. You know if you get FF-you will get someone named Reed, Ben, Sue & Johnny. The book was always about family.
Please... folks have read both of them and decided they were not interested. Unlike the attacks on 90% of Marvel now.They are called dated by people that don't like them and likely never liked them. It's like how people complained about the X-men. More than likely didn't read the title at all.
I like FF, I just read the trades. The last issue I bought was FF 502.
I was interested in X-Men until certain antics by fans (towards two franchises) and X-office personnel killed my interest in them as a whole. That includes movies, merchandise, comics and tv shows.
Because outside of Hickman no one does anything interesting with them and they aren't interesting enough as individuals to hold bland stories and attention like interesting characters can.
I'm about to do something politically incorrect. And tell you that you are dead wrong.
The Thing held onto his own series before and after the original Secret Wars. The series was compelling enough to have lasted quite a long time by any day's standards. He also was the featured star of Marvel Two-In-One for most of the history of that book's run. Something he could not do at all if he wasn't interesting.
No. The problem isn't the characters. It's the writers who are not up to the challenge of handling the characters that are the issue.
Anytime someone tried to duplicate them. It resulted in a pale and forgettable imitation. This includes Marvel's own attempts.
I was introduced to the Fantastic Four through the original 70's Godzilla comics. And the member I was drawn to the most happened to be The Thing. Who I found very deep and compelling from the outset. Their personalities and story made me a fan for life.
Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways:
One's personal faith does not interfere with the pursuit of truth;
Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided.
Harvard ethicist Louis M. Guenin describes the "kernel" of intellectual honesty to be "a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an incentive for deception".[1]
Intentionally committed fallacies in debates and reasoning are called intellectual dishonesty.
The individual characters on their own, in separate books,are just fine.
I think the problem is the character dynamic of these four characters put together.
It just screams sitcom from the sixties and has not aged well. And I don't think this is fixable without making real and permanent changes to this aspect of the property.