I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
Another of these sky is falling threads. Of course not.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
in media and games there's a notable absence.
a lot of the runs have been treading water. Rosenberg's run was just a slaughterhouse
IVX AVX seemed to attack the X-brand more directly
not this poorly. emphasis on "this"
aaron's avengers depiction is just parody at this point and to be honest im lowkey hoping for it to just be revealed they were all hit by some memory **** machine or the celestial base having that effect that's making them act like this. I mean in the hot spring scene thor's just "umm am i still worthy... oh no did suddenly become unworthy" or sth idc
fraction's run was also better power-wise
It's hard to put my finger on when Thor began going south as character, but I I believe it was when De Falco decided that Hulk is stronger than Thor, but Thor more powerful.
"Sir, does this mean that Ann Margret's not coming?"
----------------------
"One of the maddening but beautiful things about comics is that you have to give characters a sense of change without changing them so much that they violate the essence of who they are." ~ Ann Nocenti, Chris Claremont's X-Men.
The X-Men already had a crapload of cartoons and games and ruled the comic book world in the nineties and early 2000's while the Avengers were b-list niche characters. As an Avengers fan i don't have much issue with the mutants not getting the spotlight for once.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
I think a lot of it has to do with the lack or interest and/or ability to write a book that leans more towards fantasy than your average big fight in the streets comic book. Marvel, certainly modern Marvel, does not know how to handle this character. They just know, despite everything, he's still popular. So many people still see Thor as Conan in a cape from a weird rainbow space city. Thor is nothing like Conan, like at all. Too many creators also know almost nothing about Thor, his mythos or the most basic superficial knowledge of the real myths. A lot of the time it honestly feels like Marvel keeps Thor going and involved in evens and Avengers, not because they understand him or like him, but because they feel they're supposed to.
Yes, Thor has gone down the crapper. I'm withholding my opinion of Cates' stuff because it seems fairly early, but his heart seems in the right place.
Why is it that no writer since JMS seems to understand how Thor should be portrayed?
Minus Lebowski Thor, even the MCU got it right.
Put simply, this is what Thor fans want to see more of in the comic books...
Excelsior!!!
"Sir, does this mean that Ann Margret's not coming?"
----------------------
"One of the maddening but beautiful things about comics is that you have to give characters a sense of change without changing them so much that they violate the essence of who they are." ~ Ann Nocenti, Chris Claremont's X-Men.
I think Thor's major trouble (Outside of Aaron) is that he's been a mainstay on the Avengers, and as the consistent powerhouse of that team, he gets Worfed a lot.
A couple of years ago when they were trying putting the Hulk on the Avengers for synergy he got jobbed out constantly, his healing powers ignored, and issue after issue of being mind-controlled, despite the fact that he's supposed to be nearly impossible to control.
Likewise he was reduced to a parody of the Savage Hulk, who could hardly even speak.
Being on teams is bad for powerhouse characters, and for badass characters. If the character happens to be both...well.
As a Hulk fan, I've learned to dread his appearance in other books. I'd rather he stay out of crossovers completely. Such appearances are almost always used to put someone else over.
I think Thor fans are in the same boat. The problem is that the character is married to the rest of the MU, and particularly the Avengers.
Yeah, Hemsworth Thor is light years away from 'My god has a hammer' or 'Ultron, we would have words with thee.' And I do think movie synergy is indeed part of it. The same sort of thing that has Tony Stark being a snark machine, on par with Spider-Man (or comic-book Hawkeye used to be), or that has resulted in the same Scott Lang who *beat up Dr. Doom with science!*, turning into a lovable screwup who fails upward (humorously) at just about everything like MCU Scott.
Which makes me wonder. Tony Stark being such a quippy fellow turned MCU Hawkeye into a deadly dull waste of celluloid, since Tony had pretty much already stolen his niche. Since MCU Thor has similarly drank Hercules Falstaffian buffoon milkshake all up, what sort of tremendous ponderous bore is MCU Hercules going to be?