Fan Forum
Remember Me?
Register

  New Forum Poll   |     Summer TV Shows   |     Request a Forum   |     View New Forums

Reply   Post New Thread
 
Forum Affiliates Thread Tools
Old 03-14-2017, 05:29 AM
  #31
Fan Forum Legend

 
have a little faith's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 454,054
Can't wait for more news
__________________
Star Wars Posting Challenge
Wentworth Miller || CampaignVote
Sarah || My Art Thread
have a little faith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2017, 11:25 AM
  #32
Obsessed Fan

 
LightYears's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 5,963
Can't say I'm thrilled about the Domino casting, but that's due to her age rather than race. Sorry, but I seriously have no interest in seeing a romantic relationship between a twenty-something Domino with a forty or maybe fifty-something Cable. That is, if the writers have plans for that. I was hoping they'd cast an actress in her thirties. I hope Zazie does a good job, but it might be hard for me to buy her onscreen relationship with whoever plays Cable.
LightYears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2017, 09:40 PM
  #33
Fan Forum Hero

 
sum1's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 75,363
Domino should be 30s or 40s.
__________________
Icon by lunas_borednow
sum1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2017, 09:59 PM
  #34
Obsessed Fan

 
LightYears's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 5,963
I completely agree, sum1. I only said they should've cast an actress in her thirties, because I knew they weren't going to pick an actress in her forties. It's a shame they didn't go with Lizzy Caplan, Mary Elizabeth Winstead or even Sofia Boutella. I feel they would've been far more suited for Domino.
LightYears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2017, 07:03 AM
  #35
Fan Forum Legend

 
have a little faith's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 454,054
Yea this sounds like it's going to be
__________________
Star Wars Posting Challenge
Wentworth Miller || CampaignVote
Sarah || My Art Thread
have a little faith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 08:59 AM
  #36
Fan Forum Hero

 
sum1's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 75,363
With regard to the question of changing the races of characters, I fully understand and appreciate the need to give roles to minority actors and have minorities represented onscreen, but I don't think changing the race of major characters is the answer. Except when the minority actor cast is damn good. A few other types of cases work, in my opinion, as well, when for one reason or other the change is an improvement. For example, I wasn't bothered by Alicia, the Thing's girlfriend, being switched from white to black in the older Fantastic Four movies. In fact, I felt it added something to a character I previously found boring. Also, Mordo being cast as black didn't bother me in the Doctor Strange film and the actor, Chiwetel Ejiofor, is damn good. That was probably an improvement in the character. Though I couldn't help but notice that a white member of the cast, Mads Mikkelsen, looked a lot like what Mordo looks like (in terms of facial features) in the comics.

No, the real major racial mess-up in Doctor Strange was Tilda Swinton, a white actor, being cast as the Ancient One, who's a Tibetan man in the comics. Not only whitewashing, but also a cowardly chickening out over the touchy topic of Tibet. China has been oppressing Tibet for generations, and putting a major Tibetan character in the film might have endangered Marvel's Chinese market for the film. People involved in the film admitted this was the reason for not keeping the character Tibetan. Personally, I think it stinks.

In fact, I tried to encourage a boycott of the film originally, on account of this issue. Alas, I am ashamed to say, I failed to live up to the boycott myself. Since the time when I encouraged a boycott of Doctor Strange, the Marvel movies have become much more important to me because I have embarked on a journey of re-exploring old Marvel superhero comics, as a way of connecting with my past and my past self and of healing my rather battered mind. As such I could no longer ignore a major Marvel MCU movie and I was very curious to see how the various topics were dealt with onscreen. Long story short, I broke with my boycott intentions and watched the movie on dvd, but I would still suggest that anybody for whom watching the movie is NOT important should make an attempt to boycott it. Disney Marvel really doesn't deserve big bucks for spitting on Tibet's suffering to please the imperialist Chinese government. For my part, I can only apologize to the people of Tibet for my weakness.
__________________
Icon by lunas_borednow

Last edited by sum1; 03-16-2017 at 09:59 AM
sum1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 10:17 AM
  #37
Fan Forum Star

 
PhoenixRising's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 114,753
I totally agree with you, sum1. I've made the same argument about casting Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie. Seriously, a character from Scandinavian mythology, whose name is "Brynhildr" and is one of the characters in the classic Nordic legend, The Vosunga Saga, about the Viking hero Sigurd saving the beautiful Valkyrie, Brynhildr, who had been imprisoned by Odin in a circle of fire, and was the basis for Richard Wagner's epic opera, The Ring of the Nibelung... and they cast a black actress in the role. Yes, it does matter when we're talking about a character steeped in Scandinavian culture and folklore. Look at how much outrage there was from the media when the movie 'Gods of Egypt' cast white European actors as Egyptian gods, yet this is okay? It's the same as casting Tidla Swinton, a white Englishwoman, as The Ancient One in Doctor Strange. Okay, so there's a lot of political issues surrounding the whole thing with China and Tibet, I get it. But why couldn't they simply cast an Asian actor as The Ancient One and just not specify nationality? Then the audience could assume anything.

It's the same kind of nonsense I've been reading online regarding the fake outrage at casting a white actor as Danny Rand/Iron Fist. I know sum1 has issues with the actor in particular just because he doesn't like that actor, which is fine. But people who say that Danny Rand should be changed to an Asian character because they feel that Danny Rand as originally conceived is now "politically incorrect" or a form of "cultural appropriation" - or even worse, an example of the "white savior" trope - are just insane. Does this mean that The Karate Kid is now also a version of cultural appropriation because Daniel Larusso is a white Italian kid from New Jersey being trained by an Okinawan Karate master? Seriously, all this PC nonsense is just ruining comic books and comic book adaptations and sucking the life out of everything we love about them. There's nothing wrong with showing diversity, but I'd prefer using more characters that were actually conceived as non-white characters, like Luke Cage, Sam Wilson, Shang-Chi, Misty Knight, Monica Rambeau, etc. Or how about creating new ones? And by new ones, I mean new characters with their own individual identities and not ones that merely step into the roles of established characters like Captain America, Iron Man, Spider-Man, or Green Lantern, as comics have been doing recently.
__________________
In Loving Memory of Christine Dettloff(cheekymonkey503). Rest In Peace, Dear Cheekymonkey. ~ Alex

Last edited by PhoenixRising; 03-16-2017 at 10:50 AM
PhoenixRising is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 12:24 PM
  #38
Fan Forum Legend

 
have a little faith's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 454,054
Wow I'll have to catch up on the conversation
__________________
Star Wars Posting Challenge
Wentworth Miller || CampaignVote
Sarah || My Art Thread
have a little faith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 01:16 PM
  #39
Fan Forum Hero

 
sum1's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 75,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post)
It's the same kind of nonsense I've been reading online regarding the fake outrage at casting a white actor as Danny Rand/Iron Fist. I know sum1 has issues with the actor in particular just because he doesn't like that actor, which is fine. But people who say that Danny Rand should be changed to an Asian character because they feel that Danny Rand as originally conceived is now "politically incorrect" or a form of "cultural appropriation" - or even worse, an example of the "white savior" trope - are just insane.
Calling cultural appropriation over Iron Fist is ridiculous. Since when can white people not do martial arts? White people have been learning martial arts, and often picking up some Asian culture with it, for generations. If Marvel can't do Iron fist as he was originally conceived they shouldn't do him at all. It's all just bull. There's good reason to respect different cultures of different ethinicities and races and respect different peoples' claim on their own traditions, but there's a point beyond which political correctness vanishes up it's own arse hole.

Quote:
There's nothing wrong with showing diversity, but I'd prefer using more characters that were actually conceived as non-white characters, like Luke Cage, Sam Wilson, Shang-Chi, Misty Knight, Monica Rambeau, etc. Or how about creating new ones? And by new ones, I mean new characters with their own individual identities and not ones that merely step into the roles of established characters like Captain America, Iron Man, Spider-Man, or Green Lantern, as comics have been doing recently.
I'd like to see Monica Rambeau onscreen. I'd much rather see her Captain Marvel than Carole Danvers's version. Monica was a great strong black female character way back in the '80s and was Avengers leader for a while. She's an old favorite of mine.

What's this about Spider Man being replaced? When did this happen?
__________________
Icon by lunas_borednow
sum1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 01:30 PM
  #40
Fan Forum Star

 
PhoenixRising's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 114,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post)
Calling cultural appropriation over Iron Fist is ridiculous. Since when can white people not do martial arts? White people have been learning martial arts, and often picking up some Asian culture with it, for generations. If Marvel can't do Iron fist as he was originally conceived they shouldn't do him at all. It's all just bull. There's good reason to respect different cultures of different ethinicities and races and respect different peoples' claim on their own traditions, but there's a point beyond which political correctness vanishes up it's own arse hole.

I'd like to see Monica Rambeau onscreen. I'd much rather see her Captain Marvel than Carole Danvers's version. Monica was a great strong black female character way back in the '80s and was Avengers leader for a while. She's an old favorite of mine.

What's this about Spider Man being replaced? When did this happen?
Yep, that's why I mentioned Daniel Larusso from The Karate Kid. You probably couldn't make that movie today without offending someone. Sheesh, do I have to apologize for watching Chuck Norris, Jean Claude Van Damme, and Steven Segal movies too?

While I'd like to see Monica Rambeau on screen, I think I'd prefer her being given a new name, like the one she had later on - Photon - or something else. It's not that I object to her original name, "Captain Marvel," but narratively it doesn't fit since she had nothing to do with the storyline involving Mar-Vell, Carol Danvers, the Kree, Eon, or the mantle of "Protector of the Universe." Monica's power had nothing to do with any of that. She could transform herself into different forms of living energy at different wavelengths, which was quite formidable, but other than the name Captain Marvel, she really had nothing to do with that storyline. She just adopted the name because it wasn't in use at the time, since Mar-Vell was dead from cancer and Carol was "indisposed" with her consciousness and power having been absorbed by Rogue and her body being turned into "Binary" of the Shi'ar Imperial Guard.

Spider-Man wasn't "replaced," sum1. I'm referring to Miles Morales, the Spider-Man from the Ultimates universe who has now become part of the 616 universe since the Ultimates universe was destroyed. Peter is an adult now, and running his own company while being Spider-Man as a global superhero, and Miles is the younger Spider-Man based mostly in New York. I appreciate what Brian Michael Bendis was trying to do, but all Morales does is detract from Peter's place in popular culture the way John Stewart has done to Hal Jordan. When the Green Lantern movie with Ryan Reynolds came out, there was an outcry from the PC millennial crowd because they incorrectly assumed that the Green Lantern's race had been changed from black to white. Many of them didn't know about Hal Jordan because the Cartoon Network's Justice League series featured John Stewart instead of Hal Jordan, which only confused the hell out of audiences, most of whom remembered Hal Jordan from the comics and the original Superfriends cartoon, and the newer, younger audiences who only new the Justice League cartoon from the 2000's. Thank goodness DC and WB put Hal Jordan back as Green Lantern in the newer JL cartoons so as to stop the confusion. I understand what they were trying to do, but it didn't have to be at the expense of Hal Jordan's legacy. And now I'm just afraid that Marvel might be doing the same thing to Peter Parker.
__________________
In Loving Memory of Christine Dettloff(cheekymonkey503). Rest In Peace, Dear Cheekymonkey. ~ Alex

Last edited by PhoenixRising; 03-16-2017 at 01:38 PM
PhoenixRising is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 04:09 PM
  #41
Fan Forum Hero

 
sum1's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 75,363
There seems to be a practice of replacing or duplicating male or white superheroes with female or minority ones with the same or similar names, roles and powers. Apart from sidelining the original, classic heroes, this insults minorities and women because it seems to be done on the assumption that minority or female characters can't make it on their own without a boost from a successful white male hero. Comic book companies should have the courage to create brand new female and minority superheroes, not based on on white male ones, and have the faith in those new female and minority characters to carry them to success.

I think it needs to be asked why Marvel thinks new female characters have to be carbon copies of older male ones. Jane Foster Thor, Ironheart ("heart"?! Why not Iron Care Bear if they're going to stereotype that much?), X-23, the female Hawkeye, etc. Admittedly, Marvel has created some good characters by basing female characters on male ones (I'm a fan of She Hulk, for example), but still, it's not the best method and it does imply a lack of faith in female characters.

As for Monica Rambeau using the Captain Marvel name, the name does not otherwise belong exclusively to Mar-Vell and his successors. Long before Mar-Vell was invented, the name began as that of a Fawcett comics superhero of the 1940s Golden Age of comics and he was the most successful superhero of the era, in terms of sales. So he had to be in the minds of Marvel writers when they invented Mar Vell. That considered, I think it's fair for Monica to use the name. Danvers didn't use it until the 21st century. She used to be Ms. Marvel before she was Binary.
__________________
Icon by lunas_borednow

Last edited by sum1; 03-17-2017 at 07:39 AM
sum1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2017, 11:32 PM
  #42
Fan Forum Star

 
PhoenixRising's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 114,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post)
There seems to be a practice of replacing or duplicating male or white superheroes with female or minority ones with the same or similar names, roles and powers. Apart from sidelining the original, classic heroes, this insults minorities and women because it seems to be done on the assumption that minority or female characters can't make it on their own without a boost from a successful white male hero. Comic book companies should have the courage to create brand new female and minority superheroes, not based on on white male ones, and have the faith in those new female and minority characters to carry them to success.
sum1, I've been saying this for years. DC's most prominent black male characters are Black Lightning and Cyborg. Black Lightning is even getting his own CW show, and Cyborg will be in the Justice League movie. So why was it necessary to have Hal Jordan share the spotlight with John Stewart? Not to mention Kyle Raynor and Guy Gardner for that matter. Why can't Hal get to secure his legacy? Why does John have to exist off of Hal's legacy? I kind of understand replacing Ronnie Raymond's Firestorm with a black character, since Ronnie died, but again, it's still having a black character exist on the back of an established white character instead of standing on their own merit, like you said. It's insulting to have a minority character have to exist on the back of a previously established white character's legacy, and it's not fair for that established character to have their legacy compromised, like Hal Jordan or Peter Parker, or now Steve Rogers and Tony Stark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post)
I think it needs to be asked why Marvel thinks new female characters have to carbon copies of older male ones. Jane Foster Thor, Ironheart ("heart"?! Why not Iron Care Bear if they're going to stereotype that much?), X-23, the female Hawkeye, etc. Admittedly, Marvel has created some good characters by basing female characters on male ones (I'm a fan of She Hulk, for example), but still, it's not the best method and it does imply a lack of faith in female characters.
Wait, there's a female Hawkeye? Yeah, that's original. When did they come up with that one? Was Mockingbird not enough for them? And Ironheart is just ridiculous. No one's gonna care about Ri-Ri Williams(like that's not a stereotypical name, Brian Bendis) in 50 years, they're gonna remember Tony Stark. At least when James Rhodes became War Machine there was an actual narrative reason for it having to do with Tony's alcoholism and Tony needing someone to pass the War Machine armor to after he was finished with it. Ri-Ri just seems like Marvel deciding they needed to fill a quota. And Jane Foster as the female Thor? Haven't we done this before with Eric Masterson and Beta Ray Bill? Seriously, it's like anyone can lift that hammer these days.

Now, I don't have a problem with X-23 or She-Hulk for the same reason I don't have a problem with Jessica Drew/Spider-Woman. Sure, She-Hulk has the same power as her cousin, Bruce Banner. But she's always brought something unique to the table, whether it's her being able to retain her intelligence, or her storyline as a lawyer, or her breaking the fourth wall long before Deadpool ever did(I loved her stand alone series), Jennifer Walters has established herself as Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman, so I have always been a fan of hers. And let's face it, she's drop-dead gorgeous and sexy as well. She's a comic book geek's ultimate fantasy. As for Laura Kinney/X-23, I think she's got a really good storyline that sets her apart from just being a female version of Wolverine. Sure, she's James Logan Howlett's clone, but I think they really established her as her own character, and she's got a depth and identity all her own. And yeah, her relationship with Cyclops has a bit of inspired irony to it.

Jessica Drew as Spider-Woman is a character I love because she's established herself without having anything to do with Peter Parker's storyline. Her origin is with the High Evolutionary and Wundagore Mountain, as one of his genetic engineering experiments. That links her more with Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver's storyline. But except for having the name Spider-Woman she is totally separate from Peter's storyline aside from the occasional team up with him. So in those three instances I make exceptions. Well, also with Carol Danvers as Mr. Marvel, now Captain Marvel, which I'll get to later. But why doesn't Marvel use their established female characters more, like Monica Rambeau, or Tigra, or She-Hulk, or Spider-Woman, or The Wasp? You're right, it's like they don't have much faith in female superheroes unless they take on the mantle of more masculine characters like Iron Man and Thor. God forbid a superhero be feminine, but again, these are male writers who don't really know how to write female characters that well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1 (View Post)
As for Monica Rambeau using the Captain Marvel name, the name does not otherwise belong exclusively to Mar-Vell and his successors. Long before Mar-Vell was invented, the name began as that of a Fawcett comics superhero of the 1940s Golden Age of comics and he was the most successful superhero of the era, in terms of sales. So he had to be in the minds of Marvel writers when they invented Mar Vell. That considered, I think it's fair for Monica to use the name. Danvers didn't use it until the 21st century. She used to be Ms. Marvel before she was Binary.
Well, again, I have no problem with Monica Rambeau being a superhero, but I still think the Captain Marvel name should be used by someone connected to the Captain Marvel narrative and storyline involving Eon, the Kree, the nega-bands, and the mantle of "Protector of the Universe." You're right in that the name Captain Marvel doesn't belong exclusively to Mar-Vell(at least did initially didn't), but Marvel Comics actually does now own the rights to that name. The Fawcett comics Captain Marvel which was bought by DC and published under the title 'SHAZAM' now goes by the name 'SHAZAM,' after his wizard mentor, and is no longer Captain Marvel, since DC lost the rights to the name. But to me, it's more like situation with the Alan Scott Green Lantern. Was Alan Scott the first to have the name Green Lantern, long before Hal Jordan? Yes. But Alan Scott had nothing to do with the Green Lantern Corps. storyline involving the Guardians and the planet Oa, or the Lantern Corps. Alan's power was mystical, not cosmic like Hal's. His power ring and lantern were magical artifacts, not extraterrestrial mechanisms like Hal's. Alan was more supernaturally-based, while Hal was more science fiction-based. So that's why I consider Hal to be the first of the modern Green Lanterns and having a legacy completely separate from Alan's.

And that's also why I prefer Carol having the Captain Marvel name instead of Monica, as Monica really has nothing to do with the Captain Marvel storyline. Even her black & white costume is totally different aside from the eight pointed star in the center. And since Carol has been wearing the Captain Marvel red & blue even longer than Mar-Vell has, and has been going by Ms. Marvel since the 1970's as the female equivalent of Mar-Vell, I feel she's more worthy of the name. But I would still like to see Monica Rambeau return to the comics as Photon, or perhaps be given a better name.
__________________
In Loving Memory of Christine Dettloff(cheekymonkey503). Rest In Peace, Dear Cheekymonkey. ~ Alex

Last edited by PhoenixRising; 03-16-2017 at 11:41 PM
PhoenixRising is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 02:48 AM
  #43
Fan Forum Legend

 
have a little faith's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 454,054
Wow you guys and your comic book knowledge
__________________
Star Wars Posting Challenge
Wentworth Miller || CampaignVote
Sarah || My Art Thread
have a little faith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 07:32 AM
  #44
Fan Forum Hero

 
sum1's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 75,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post)
sum1, I've been saying this for years. DC's most prominent black male characters are Black Lightning and Cyborg. Black Lightning is even getting his own CW show, and Cyborg will be in the Justice League movie. So why was it necessary to have Hal Jordan share the spotlight with John Stewart? Not to mention Kyle Raynor and Guy Gardner for that matter. Why can't Hal get to secure his legacy? Why does John have to exist off of Hal's legacy? I kind of understand replacing Ronnie Raymond's Firestorm with a black character, since Ronnie died, but again, it's still having a black character exist on the back of an established white character instead of standing on their own merit, like you said. It's insulting to have a minority character have to exist on the back of a previously established white character's legacy, and it's not fair for that established character to have their legacy compromised, like Hal Jordan or Peter Parker, or now Steve Rogers and Tony Stark.
Well, I can understand them wanting to have as many minority characters as possible, but generally I feel that these should be their own characters, not some ripoff of a white character. Making a minority character a new version of a classic white character inevitably subordinates the minority character to the white character's identity and reputation and that's all wrong.

Quote:
Wait, there's a female Hawkeye? Yeah, that's original. When did they come up with that one? Was Mockingbird not enough for them? And Ironheart is just ridiculous. No one's gonna care about Ri-Ri Williams(like that's not a stereotypical name, Brian Bendis) in 50 years, they're gonna remember Tony Stark. At least when James Rhodes became War Machine there was an actual narrative reason for it having to do with Tony's alcoholism and Tony needing someone to pass the War Machine armor to after he was finished with it. Ri-Ri just seems like Marvel deciding they needed to fill a quota.
Well, I'm not familiar enough with the name Riri to know if it's a stereotype, but it is true that down the line Tony Stark is likely to be the one that's remembered. They've made a black woman into a spinoff of a white male character. Stop subordinating minority characters to white characters!

And I hear they just killed off War Machine. So much for them wanting more minority characters. I remember when he was Iron Man back in the '80s. I never had a problem with him, but back then there wasn't a general trend of making minority characters into subordinate versions of white male characters. I've very much enjoyed Don Cheadle's performances as War Machine/Rhodey in the movies and I hope Rhodey's spinal injury doesn't put him out of action. Meanwhile, Cheadle has been taking the fight to Trump on the net.

Quote:
And Jane Foster as the female Thor? Haven't we done this before with Eric Masterson and Beta Ray Bill? Seriously, it's like anyone can lift that hammer these days.
To me Masterson totally taking over the Thor role was an abomination. Thor should always be Thor, the real Thor, Thor Odinson. Beta Ray Bill was just an interesting alien and Thor got back his power soon enough in that case. I'm against anyone stealing Thor's power for an extended period and Jane Foster Thor falls squarely in that category. I want Thor to be Thor. Is that too much to ask? It's the curse of comic books that the writers always seem to feel the need to mess around with things to keep people entertained. Wolverine losing his adamantium pissed me off bigtime back in the '90s.

Quote:
Now, I don't have a problem with X-23 or She-Hulk for the same reason I don't have a problem with Jessica Drew/Spider-Woman. Sure, She-Hulk has the same power as her cousin, Bruce Banner. But she's always brought something unique to the table, whether it's her being able to retain her intelligence, or her storyline as a lawyer, or her breaking the fourth wall long before Deadpool ever did(I loved her stand alone series), Jennifer Walters has established herself as Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman, so I have always been a fan of hers. And let's face it, she's drop-dead gorgeous and sexy as well. She's a comic book geek's ultimate fantasy. As for Laura Kinney/X-23, I think she's got a really good storyline that sets her apart from just being a female version of Wolverine. Sure, she's James Logan Howlett's clone, but I think they really established her as her own character, and she's got a depth and identity all her own. And yeah, her relationship with Cyclops has a bit of inspired irony to it.
She Hulk was always a good character, better than the original Hulk in my opinion. She's one of my favorites, though I do feel they objectified her a bit much in the old days.

I know X-23 less well, but I generally feel that the original Wolverine should be the one called Wolverine. He's the classic and I'm generally all for the classic versions. Knowing X-23 less well, I can't say how much they've made her just a spinoff of the original Wolverine, but the whole "Wolverine's clone" business does set off alarm bells and make me worry that once again they're not going the route of allowing female characters to be their own people rather some offshoot of a male character.

Quote:
but again, these are male writers who don't really know how to write female characters that well.
I wouldn't say they all are. Chris Claremont did very well with female characters on the X-Men and Roger Stern was also good on the Avengers, developing Monica Rambeau very well.

Quote:
Well, again, I have no problem with Monica Rambeau being a superhero, but I still think the Captain Marvel name should be used by someone connected to the Captain Marvel narrative and storyline involving Eon, the Kree, the nega-bands, and the mantle of "Protector of the Universe." You're right in that the name Captain Marvel doesn't belong exclusively to Mar-Vell(at least did initially didn't), but Marvel Comics actually does now own the rights to that name. The Fawcett comics Captain Marvel which was bought by DC and published under the title 'SHAZAM' now goes by the name 'SHAZAM,' after his wizard mentor, and is no longer Captain Marvel, since DC lost the rights to the name. But to me, it's more like situation with the Alan Scott Green Lantern. Was Alan Scott the first to have the name Green Lantern, long before Hal Jordan? Yes. But Alan Scott had nothing to do with the Green Lantern Corps. storyline involving the Guardians and the planet Oa, or the Lantern Corps. Alan's power was mystical, not cosmic like Hal's. His power ring and lantern were magical artifacts, not extraterrestrial mechanisms like Hal's. Alan was more supernaturally-based, while Hal was more science fiction-based. So that's why I consider Hal to be the first of the modern Green Lanterns and having a legacy completely separate from Alan's.

And that's also why I prefer Carol having the Captain Marvel name instead of Monica, as Monica really has nothing to do with the Captain Marvel storyline. Even her black & white costume is totally different aside from the eight pointed star in the center. And since Carol has been wearing the Captain Marvel red & blue even longer than Mar-Vell has, and has been going by Ms. Marvel since the 1970's as the female equivalent of Mar-Vell, I feel she's more worthy of the name. But I would still like to see Monica Rambeau return to the comics as Photon, or perhaps be given a better name.
Well for me it comes down to personal preference. I never got especially attached to Mar-Vell or Carol Danvers, but Monica Rambeau is an old favorite of mine, so I prefer her to have the name. Carol can go back to being Ms Marvel, which is what she was originally.
__________________
Icon by lunas_borednow

Last edited by sum1; 03-17-2017 at 10:07 AM
sum1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2017, 09:01 AM
  #45
Addicted Fan

 
dragonfire's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixRising (View Post)
So why was it necessary to have Hal Jordan share the spotlight with John Stewart? Not to mention Kyle Raynor and Guy Gardner for that matter. Why can't Hal get to secure his legacy? Why does John have to exist off of Hal's legacy?
Alex I believe WB/DC may be scared to make a another Green Lantern/Hal Jordan sole movie, since the last one flopped at the box office. One thing I noticed if a DC movie flops it may be a long time before WB tries to make another one. Well except Batman WB gives Batman, and his characters unlimited chances, while they give the other DC characters only one chance.
dragonfire is online now   Reply With Quote
Fan Forum  |  Contact Us  |  Fan Forum on Twitter  |  Fan Forum on Facebook  |  Archive  |  Top

Powered by vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2017.

Copyright © 1998-2017, Fan Forum.