Why let the Marvel Heroes suffer from their "actions ?"

[Anthony W]

So it's better for Younger heroes to have tragedy and Angst instead of being well rounded and happy ?

Not younger heroes, Marvel heroes. I covered this on another thread but the character is practically a DC hero. You could drop her right into that universe and not miss a beat.

I say this as I am a fan fo Ms. Marvel and her stories and it does have it share of ups and downs. It's great to see a fresh take on the hero dynamic that doesn't revolve around tragedy and angst.

One person's fresh is another person's boring.

I'm kind of surprised that they don't do the tragedy and Angst stuff for Carol Danvers/ Captain Marvel. Especially given her history, that Marvel tends to overlook/takes bits and pieces of and throws out the rest.

I don't know, movie synergy?

[WebLurker]

I guess, in regards to the OP, the Doyalist reason is that while it can be interesting to see hero characters go dark, misguided, or royally screw up, things have to reset so you can get back to normal and have stories about them being the good guys again. I guess it also depends on the story and how the antagonists are presented. Cases in point from the MCU Ant-Man movies, we're glad to see Yellowjacket get his just desserts, while we root for Ghost to escape.

Not being cryptic, just saying that the younger heroes are kind of boring. Most tend to lack the energy and the edge of the originals. That is what I meant by the edges being rounded off. Take Ms Marvel, she is basically the Cyclops of her generation minus the things that make Cyclops interesting like tragedy and angst. Instead of tragedy and angst she is just well adjusted and happy. That makes her kind of boring and reliant on other characters to carry her. Kate Bishop? No, just no. America? For awhile it looked like she was going to be a star, now it seems the character is in hero rehab.

Have to disagree about Kate Bishop. On the other hand, I will concede she's at her most interesting when she's playing off Clint Barton, but in her own solo series they did get a lot of mileage of her pushing through everything that got thrown at her.

You can disagree on whether such-and-such new character has enough "energy and edge" to stand on their own two feet beside the character they gained the legacy from, but it can be done. I mean you do have Miles Morales who, in the old Ultimate Comics, at least, never seemed to be quite as interesting as Ultimate Peter Parker (although I will argue that the Miles comics are still a cut above the average), but then X-Men was able to pull it off twice in one line, with X-23 and Wolverine, and then legacy-ing the legacy with Honey Badger for X-23. Mileage may vary.

[JudicatorPrime]

I want a Marvel Event where the heroes don't HAVE to suffer for their actions because they did the right thing.

I am sick and tired of story after story of heroes turning evil, being overly flawed, or battling other heroes for moral/ethical reasons.

How about heroes being heroes, for once?

But our heroes are human...or at least have human sensibilities. There's no getting around their foibles. Not unless you want to read Golden Age Superman or something like that where he's always right, always has all of the perfect answers, never faces any unanticipated fallout or backlash from his actions, and is probably about as fun to read as the ingredients on a pack of gum.

[XPac]

But our heroes are human...or at least have human sensibilities. There's no getting around their foibles. Not unless you want to read Golden Age Superman or something like that where he's always right, always has all of the perfect answers, never faces any unanticipated fallout or backlash from his actions, and is probably about as fun to read as the ingredients on a pack of gum.

Though I do think hero vs hero events are a bit overdone, I would agree that ultimately the flaws and the conflicts of the marvel heroes are what make them distinct. If you look back at the world Jack and Stan first created, heroes were butting heads left and right. The more flawed conflicted MU was what we initially had... but during the 80's or do, things just got sunnier for whatever reason and everyone just started getting along more. What we got in recent years was somewhat of a reversal of that.

All that said, again the hero vs hero event thing probably needs a bit of a break.

[DigiCom]

But our heroes are human...or at least have human sensibilities. There's no getting around their foibles. Not unless you want to read Golden Age Superman or something like that where he's always right, always has all of the perfect answers, never faces any unanticipated fallout or backlash from his actions, and is probably about as fun to read as the ingredients on a pack of gum.

There's a fairly large difference between "never faces any fallout or backlash" and "suffers from his actions and is truly shunned by his peers". There's nothing wrong with heroes making mistakes... until you get story after story of them screwing up monumentally, to the point that they never do the right thing at all.

I mean, are we really so creatively bankrupt that the only story we can think about to tell with a hero is how he messes up royally and needs to be punished?

[Raye]

Yes, I just said she got what she wanted. And she knew she had put their lives in danger when she trapped them with Devondra, but it was to rebalance the world of the Soul Stone. So she had to create a new universe and unlock secrets of the universe to help her. Gamers wasn’t about to sacrifice her friends for nothing, she knew if she didn’t do this that Devondra would destroy everything.

Yeah, but what she did was still HORRIFIC. It was in NO WAY justified. If her efforts to re balance the soul stone required the destruction and recreation of the universe, I'm sorry but it's not worth it. It could have simply been avoided by accepting that the price of restoring her soul was not worth paying, that the price was simply too high. And I never got the impression that she was trying to fix things, otherwise it wouldn't have been up to Loki and all the other characters to stop her, it would have worked out fine without their intervention. Maybe there were some signs of regret, but when pressed about her actions by Flowa, she was basically just like 'I have all the power so i get to decide the fate of the universe' So no, she is not blameless. And though she was suffering some mental issues, what with Thanos and all, I think enough of her remained that she has to accept some blame, it wasn't a case where her mind was basically rewritten like some of the others where i would accept them not being responsible, such as Cap. Something distressing happened to her, and she reacted in a very extreme way. Right up until the bitter end, she fought against efforts to actually fix the mess she had made. I think she should get a chance to make things right, but I don't think she is in the same position as Cap where she can be absolved of blame for what happened.

It can sometimes can be a bit glaring when things are swept under the rug too quickly.

In Axis for example, the mutants basically took over New York. And it was done very publically for all the world to see. Because it was caused by them being magically inverted, I can't say they DESERVE anu consequences for what happened. But I'm frankly a little shocked that everyone just sort of forgot about it and moved on, when a certain vocal portion of the public pretty much hates mutants anyways. You'd think that would have pushed the anti-mutant stuff to new levels... but no one took the bait. I suppose that's a good thing but still... not what I expected.

Right, like in that situation, because it was so public, I think there should have been some fallout similar to what Cap is going through. Not blame, because they were not in their right minds, but due to the nature of the event, some consequences should have resulted. Speaking of the Inversion, I also think the fallout from that was handled very inconsistently in general. Tony remained inverted and had the Superior storyline, and then.... it was just over and not mentioned again, even though he had some some really awful things while inverted, (and I actually enjoyed the story. I'm not saying i wanted that o be his new forever status quo, but i was just miffed how it was just over and the status quo reset so abruptly, with no lasting consequences) meanwhile of the two other characters caught in the perma-inversion bubble, Sabretooth remained inverted, still is, and Havok was just kinda forgotten about, at least from the stuff I read showed, i may have missed something there, though.

[Anthony W]

Have to disagree about Kate Bishop. On the other hand, I will concede she's at her most interesting when she's playing off Clint Barton,

We have a word for characters like that, sidekicks. Some people may want to say partner but Bishop brings nothing to the table. She doesn't even have a name of her own to bring to the table The exchange is too lopsided.

but in her own solo series they did get a lot of mileage of her pushing through everything that got thrown at her.

I'll take your word for it.

You can disagree on whether such-and-such new character has enough "energy and edge" to stand on their own two feet beside the character they gained the legacy from, but it can be done. I mean you do have Miles Morales who, in the old Ultimate Comics, at least, never seemed to be quite as interesting as Ultimate Peter Parker (although I will argue that the Miles comics are still a cut above the average

And I think the reason for that is Miles was given some time as the only Spider-Man in his Universe before he was brought over.

but then X-Men was able to pull it off twice in one line, with X-23 and Wolverine, and then legacy-ing the legacy with Honey Badger for X-23. Mileage may vary.

Mileage may vary? More like "the car is sitting in the front yard on concrete blocks"

[JudicatorPrime]

All that said, again the hero vs hero event thing probably needs a bit of a break.

I totally agree with you there. While it's not uncommon for heroes to clash over misunderstandings or the best approach to a dilemma, Marvel has turned our heroes into the comic version of Congress where political ideology and brinksmanship supersedes even basic common sense solutions, let alone doing what's right with respect to the greater good.

[JudicatorPrime]

There's a fairly large difference between "never faces any fallout or backlash" and "suffers from his actions and is truly shunned by his peers". There's nothing wrong with heroes making mistakes... until you get story after story of them screwing up monumentally, to the point that they never do the right thing at all.

I mean, are we really so creatively bankrupt that the only story we can think about to tell with a hero is how he messes up royally and needs to be punished?

Perhaps. I see it as an addendum to the overarching lesson, "With great power comes great responsibility." But accepting that responsibility also requires the holders of said power to be more intelligent, more considerate, more informed and more circumspect than your average Jane or Joe. Writers are obviously going to put characters in dire situations where they have to act. That's no different than real life. Sometimes exigency calls for immediate action, the ramifications for which can only be appreciated in hindsight. I'm totally fine with that. But I see your point. We need balance. For all of the crap that heroes go through, sometimes you want to see them written with Ice Cube in mind where everything comes up aces and "today was a good day."

[Snoop Dogg]

Right, like in that situation, because it was so public, I think there should have been some fallout similar to what Cap is going through. Not blame, because they were not in their right minds, but due to the nature of the event, some consequences should have resulted. Speaking of the Inversion, I also think the fallout from that was handled very inconsistently in general. Tony remained inverted and had the Superior storyline, and then.... it was just over and not mentioned again, even though he had some some really awful things while inverted, (and I actually enjoyed the story. I'm not saying i wanted that o be his new forever status quo, but i was just miffed how it was just over and the status quo reset so abruptly, with no lasting consequences) meanwhile of the two other characters caught in the perma-inversion bubble, Sabretooth remained inverted, still is, and Havok was just kinda forgotten about, at least from the stuff I read showed, i may have missed something there, though.

Superior Tony Man did have the lasting consequence of making Pepper hate that bih. Havok was a villain in X-Men Blue with his first actually cool design, but the culmination of that plot got hijacked by editorial so that the main characters of the book weren't even there when the main villains made their big play and lost. Oh, and Havok got uninverted and then immediately had all his scars healed because no one apparently realized what a terrible message that sends.

[DigiCom]

We need balance. For all of the crap that heroes go through, sometimes you want to see them written with Ice Cube in mind where everything comes up aces and "today was a good day."

Precisely. Or, in other words:

[Michael Watkins]

the villains get away with just as much. how many of them actually do their time in prison?

[LordUltimus]

the villains get away with just as much. how many of them actually do their time in prison?

The difference is that they're villains. We EXPECT them to act that way.

[XPac]

the villains get away with just as much. how many of them actually do their time in prison?

Truthfully heroes have it better than the bad guys they face MOST of the time. 99% of the stories out there end with the heroes winning and the villains losing. There are a FEW exceptions, like say Fall of the Hulks, but even that is usually just a chapter in a larger story where the heroes end up wining. Heroes win more than they realistically should because obviously that's what is required for stories.

[Silver Fang]

Truthfully heroes have it better than the bad guys they face MOST of the time. 99% of the stories out there end with the heroes winning and the villains losing. There are a FEW exceptions, like say Fall of the Hulks, but even that is usually just a chapter in a larger story where the heroes end up wining. Heroes win more than they realistically should because obviously that's what is required for stories.

And sadly that gets old. I think villains ought to win sometimes because it shows them as a threat, and keeps the heroes on their toes. Unlike say, Pokemon where Team Rocket is a huge joke, and the heroes are arrogant and complacent because they always win. I stopped watching Pokemon VERY early on as a kid because that formula got boring, and I disliked the heroes because of it. lol