Community >> View Post
·
Post By
Comicguy1

Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,275
In Reply To
Upper_Krust

Member Since: Fri Aug 21, 2015
Posts: 235
Subj: Re: You're Kind Of Missing The Point, And You're Overlooking Something.
Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 at 07:19:37 pm EST (Viewed 213 times)
Reply Subj: And Was Alonso Fired? Of course he was...
Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 at 07:12:04 am EST (Viewed 284 times)

Previous Post


    Quote:
    Characters have gotten killed off and replaced for decades now.


Not virtually all the main white alpha male characters in one go though.

Had it been one such character then fair enough the writer is maybe trying something different. But it was WAY too many at the same time - that's called an AGENDA.

Further worsened by the shaming, disrespect and emasculation of those original characters being replaced.


    Quote:
    Look at Chris Claremont's X-Men run.


One of the most celebrated runs in the titles history, if not THE most celebrated. Massive sales numbers.


    Quote:
    Most of the team seemed to be female.


Yes that's right, Marvel had strong female characters leading teams WAY back in the 80's.


    Quote:
    I'm sure that if there was an Internet back then, people would be complaining.


They certainly wouldn't have been complaining about the great stories being told though.


    Quote:
    Or when the new black Captain Marvell was leading the Avengers.


One of my favourite Avengers, totally loved her in Nextwave as well.


    Quote:
    This stuff has been a staple of comics for decades.


Exactly, the main difference being the Forced Left Wing Agenda being shoved down our throats now.


    Quote:
    They're trying to branch out and be diverse to get new readers.


Three things.

Firstly YOU JUST OUTLINED how comics already had female and diverse characters in them FROM THE 80s. The recent changes were less about BRANCHING OUT and more about ruining the existing white male characters. If a company has a successful brand they don't change it to be less successful (unless they have an ulterior motive - in this case pushing a political agenda).

To use the metaphor of Coca-Cola. The smart thing to do would be to ADD a new variant of Coca-cola, not change the original to Cherry Coke to appease a smaller percentage of people. Yes maybe if you put Cherry Coke in the famous red cans of classic coke then some people will be deceived and buy it anyway, but once they taste it they might not like it, so they'll go buy Pepsi-cola instead.

Secondly characters back then had personalities that were not simply their race; gender and sexuality. Additionally the characters acted like heroes rather than disrespectful, spoiled brats; whats more they weren't Mary Sue's being applauded for just being themselves - like today's SJW heroes. Heroes back then had to EARN respect. It wasn't just handed to them on a silver platter.

Thirdly comics were not centered around identity politics, they were action-adventure stories with soap opera drama. No one wants preached to and talked down to in their entertainment.


    Quote:
    Also, The Falcon has stood in for Cap in the past.


I don't have a problem with temporary stand-ins. No one does. Often a stand-in makes us respect the original more.

But if you replace a character completely and crap all over the legacy of the character being replaced then why should any fan of the original support this new character?


    Quote:
    And I'm not sure if Alonso got fired, do you have a source for That? It could have been for any number of reasons.


Lol. Wake up and smell the coffee.

- The sales are in the toilet.
- Retailers are complaining they can't shift the books
- Creators have been insulting fans online
- Leftist and Far Leftist politics were rife at Marvel under Alonso.


    Quote:
    Jim Shooter got canned, and many people consider his reign to be the best decade for Marvel (Miller on Daredevil, Simonson on Thor, Claremont on X-Men, Roger Stern's books, etc.).


His reign WAS the best, his story is well documented.

You seem to be arguing based on whether YOU like stories or directions. That's fine, but you're saying that the company has an agenda. That's hard to prove, especially as this has been going on for DECADES. You mentioned Claremont's run being great, but he himself could have had an agenda by making the team mostly female. The same with Roger Stern having Monica lead the Avengers, or when Luke Cage joined a team, or when Byrne created Northstar. And so on.

And yes, people did complain back in the day. Gwen Stacy's death caused a LOT of outrage and controversy back in the day, now it's considered one of the best deaths in comics. Or when Barbara Gordon got crippled. And so on.

Regarding the whole Diversity thing, you have to also take into account that comics don't sell like they used to. So they do have to try to appeal to readers of different races, backgrounds and cultures. Not everything these days revolves around Superman and The X-Men anymore.

Finally, while I do agree with you about heroes being too dark and grim (And not having the same compunctions about killing.), if you think about it, that applied to the 80's as well. Take Miller's Daredevil, for example. Colossus killed under Claremont (More than once, too.). Captain America killed back then. Also, I did post this on the Marvel board, but very few characters can be ruined. Almost anything in superhero comics can be reversed. Look at Hal Jordan and The Scarlet Witch.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software