Thor never cared about the opinion of Fury, nor should he care about Gorr.
And frankly, I don't think it good story telling that one's worthiness is determined by their own self opinion. Were that the case, Doom would have been able to lift in way back when, and God only knows how many other maniacs.
I'm actually reminded of End League, a series stuffed with parodies/archtypes of existing characters. And to lift Thor's hammer, all they had to do was believe in themselves. Needless to say, it changed hands a few times
Good story there, bad one here.
Tarene was absolutely awesome, if a woman deserves to lift the hammer in the MCU, it's her, not Jane Foster. As for her being seen lately, I think not, in fact, I don't remember her being used after Dan Jurgens.
Speaking of the MCU, I don't even understand their decision anyway, something that I saw 100% of the fans agree about the movies was that Jane and Darcy were the worst part, and as soon as they were removed we got an awesome movie, now they want to bring back what people complained so much about, basing it on a story very divisive among fans.............like what the hell Marvel, what are you thinking.
I mean, whether people like the run or not...it was titled “Thor.” People have every right to discuss it in this thread. For some, it could be the only Thor run they know, so yeah, it should be welcome.
I do understand the “Thor” is a name not a title stuff, I really do. As I said before, I’ve not even read the whole run but have kept up with it here and there. Again - Aaron just had a different story to tell and he told it that way. Doesn’t mean it was good or it was awful, but if you confine his whole run on its own, he does go with the whole “...shall possess the power of Thor” theme throughout.
I agree with both arguments. I understand why people don’t like it but also can see why people did.
Let people say it was good, let people say it was bad. Debate it, sure - but don’t say they aren’t welcome on a thread.
They’re not welcome here as we’re not welcome on theirs. This is a Thor ODINSON appreciation thread. Only for Thor ODINSON appreciation which occasionally includes derogatory remarks about the impostor. As is our right on a THOR ODINSON thread. She is not welcome here. I, and others, go to her threads and the same people defending her here threaten us off and banning warnings get sent. Therefore I also will not tolerate them here. Eye for an eye. Simple as that. I don’t want to debate. Not here. Here is a place to enjoy the ONE and ONLY Thor’s greatness.
SHE IS NOT THOR. There is an overall “Thor” thread where she can be mentioned. This specific thread was made for this very reason. Only Thor fans. Not Fosthor fans. They’re welcome if they agree that THOR ODINSON is the only God of Thunder. If they don’t, this is not the place for them. I, and others, are tired of the insults thrown at us for defending a character we love.
Good lord. This is a forum for fans of comics.
Aaron’s Thor run included Thor Odinson. This is a thread for Thor Odinson. Some people might have enjoyed what Aaron did with the character.
Fans can talk about the run here and on Janes thread as far as I’m concerned.
Comics are here to be enjoyed and discussed.
I'm not denying that it happened, I'm denying that it should have.
Think about it for a moment. The hammer basically legitimized his depression, his own opinion that he was worthless.
Is that really a good message for any story, that how you feel when depressed, is what you are actually worth?
That's setting aside the fact that Gorr's opinion amounts to racism (against an entirely fictional people who aren't a metaphor for anything, so not exactly super terrible) being legitimized.
Come on, people, there is no need for insults here. As someone wise said once, there is no such thing as a bad controversy. And all the adversity against Jane Foster as a Thor only feeds that controversy and makes her more popular.
But I feel a need to say I am not really against Aaron. (I speak ill not about Aaron as a person, only about Aaron as a calling! ) Just kidding. He's done some great things in comics, and - contrary to some other respected writers - he shows great love for the medium, and that's important to me. I am not very interested in his "run" because, in addition to the sentiments expressed in my previous message, I consider the artist in comics to be at least equally important as the writer in terms of the final effect. And I'm not a big fan of Dauterman's style and structure. It's not bad in any sense, but it's not good enough to me to keep me interested. (And there are other things I don't have time and will to discuss at the moment.) I am fan of del Mundo, though, but it's too little too late, and I'm not sure Aaron uses him to full advantage.
Last edited by Paradox_Nihil; 08-25-2019 at 09:07 AM.
Sorry, I somehow missed this. I relatively rarely visit this forum. But I'm the last person that should be asked that question. I didn't like many Thor comics over the years. I don't even think Straczynski is a good (comics) writer. He wrote as if for television, and then somehow that script ended up in comics by mistake. He doesn't have a clue about the medium (or he didn't care). Ah, TV, that Holy Grail of so many comics writers!
To answer your question, I'm fond of some of DeFalco's works, but not of his runs on more "cosmic" titles. He was just trying to be a poor man's Kirby. Of course, a poor man's Kirby can still be more impactful than many of a rich man' choices, but, still, it's not what I want from my comics. The visual style of Ron Frenz surely helped him immensely, and I respect his craft more than DeFalco's script.
Last edited by Paradox_Nihil; 08-25-2019 at 10:49 AM.