Have Marvel comics changed for the better or worse?

[StoneGold]

Actually, remember when Thor talked completely normal? You know, when Stan and Jack created him, and he talked like he was Don Blake inside Thor's body?

[turtlefood]

everyone should sound like spider-man as our Bendis intended

[motherofpearl1]

What I find upsetting is how the personalities of the characters have changed over the years. Yes, we all know nothing can stay the same or it gets boring, but why do they have to make well loved characters completely unlikeable? I was a big X Men fan, but my favourite characters no longer resemble the people they used to be - Wolverine essentially a traitor,Rogue a spineless bore, Colossus gradually turning into a bad guy. This is apparently what younger audiences want. and so Marvel happily sacrifice older readers to appease them.

Yet look at the success of the Avengers film - and the characters there are more like their 'old' selves.

[Probably_not_a_Nurgling]

It was worse for a while, then swung back to better.

[md62]

As a long term reader (over 40 yrs) my Marvel list has shrunk to 3 titles for many reasons. I don't enjoy the way many of the characters are written. The $4 cover price. Decompression. The last 2 reasons lead me to feel I am not getting the value I want.

[timeismoney]

I like how people bring up the price point for the reason they drop a book and i respect that but look at the top ten comic for this month 8 out of ten is 3.99. So the way i see it is most people drop book because they don't like the art or the writing and drop them less because of price point.

[TAG]

...This question is directed towards older fans first, but anyone of any age is welcome to voice your opinion on it. Do you prefer the older characterizations of Thor and the Thing? Or do you prefer the less characterized versions that are in Marvel comics today?

Have Marvel comics changed for the better or worse?

I think the change in how comics are written/presented is difficult for most of who have been reading comics from the 70's. Event comics in particular really bother me. But you’re right; there is less characterization in today's comics. Which is a reason why I've dropped a considerably amount in the last two years. I also like your theory about enjoying the NuDC comics because of the lack of vested interest.

What I find upsetting is how the personalities of the characters have changed over the years. Yes, we all know nothing can stay the same or it gets boring, but why do they have to make well loved characters completely unlikeable? I was a big X Men fan, but my favourite characters no longer resemble the people they used to be - Wolverine essentially a traitor,Rogue a spineless bore, Colossus gradually turning into a bad guy. This is apparently what younger audiences want. and so Marvel happily sacrifice older readers to appease them.

Yet look at the success of the Avengers film - and the characters there are more like their 'old' selves.

Like you I was a huge X-Men fan during the Claremont days. I really liked the characters. But not only do I not recognize them now, I don't even like who they are.

As a long term reader (over 40 yrs) my Marvel list has shrunk to 3 titles for many reasons. I don't enjoy the way many of the characters are written. The $4 cover price. Decompression. The last 2 reasons lead me to feel I am not getting the value I want.

I'm starting to deal with the decompression in comics, but the $4.00 price tag is just ridicules.

[tolworthy]

The characters i've read in Marvel comics in more recent years, are not the same characters.

I agree with others, that characters SHOULD change, but NOT RANDOMLY. And the changes should MATTER. E.g. not be forgotten a few issues later. That was the curse of the 1950s comics that Marvel once rejected.

This question is directed towards older fans first, but anyone of any age is welcome to voice your opinion on it. Do you prefer the older characterizations of Thor and the Thing?

They are two completely different sets of characters. Take The Thing for example:
old Thing:
Top fighter on the planet (the Hulk was marginally stronger due to his height, but he was less reliable): (full details here)
New Thing:
Punching bag, certainly not in the top rank.
Old Thing:
Bravest one of all (e.g. see Contest of Champions).
New Thing:
Begged for mercy on the cover of a recent Fantastic Four (by Millar?).
Old Thing:
Trapped in a monstrous body
New Thing:
Thanks to the sliding time scale he changes roughly every month (more recently weekly)
Old Thing:*
Deep psychological commitment issues (see Alicia; self hatred)
New Thing:
No particular purpose or inner conflict.

I much prefer the first set of characters, because the stories built up, year after year. That enabled readers to care deeply about characters and their past. Today the characters have no past, so their stories are less interesting. Take The Thing for example:

The old Thing lived in the real world, and interacted with real history: e.g. he was a WWII veteran, met the Beatles, etc. His story developed, it had a long term shape and direction:
Progressed from angry (circa FF1-30)
to tragic (circa FF 30-to 140)
to accepting (circa FF140-236)
to finally facing his issues (Littleville, Battleworld, Alicia and Johnny, Monster Island: FF236-296),
to resolution (key moments were FF296, FF302, She-Thing allowed him to see himself as other see him then Reed moved out and he became leader of the FF, now at peace).
It was a moving story.

The new Thing exists in a timeless limbo, where he fought in some undefined war - nothing specific. He got de-matured at the end of Simonsons run, and there's been no permanent character development since.

I agree with Tony of the Wastebasket: The original Marvel Universe ended in 1991, and the modern Marvel Universe, while it often has superb stories, only has short stories, and features different characters. The new universe, with its families (multiple Hulks, multiple Wolverines, multiple Spider-folk, etc.) its shorter stories, and its abandonment of any firm links with our world, is much closer to the DC comics of the 1950s.

[Ronin1108]

I perosnally think today's age is more concerened with trade paper backs and all that instead of just having a solid story. That's why I see it like Hickman's damn near definitive run on FF will be remembered and held in a higher regard compared to your annual summer action figure war aka "event". Many of the "events" also suffer from TERRIBLE CHARACTERIZATIONS which often take readers out of the book due to PIS. The reason why Cap walking up to Thanos solo in Infinity Gauntlet knowing he had no chance in hell is memorable was because THAT's Cap: never say die, never give up. That's iconic. There hasn't been a SINGLE recent "event" moment like that for ANYONE in the past 20 years.

Also death has become nothing more than a selling point in this age. Nightcrawler, Wasp, Professor X in Messiah Complex, Nova, etc.. all were used to only moved the story forwards, while "The Death of Captain Marvel" again, just on another level compared to what's out here nowadays, and even then they continue to try and pull him back into the fold every few years, or whenever they have a space story (ie. skrulls, kree, etc..) to cheapen his story. Shoot Kraven had one of THE best exits as a villain, and now?? He's an unkillable zombie...SMFH.

So to answer the question, yes it's changed, but nowhere near it being for the better.

[Nomads1]

According to Marvel, it changed because it's audience changed. Kids (which they still insist is their main consumer base) nowadays need constant stimuli, not distractions, such as different speach patterns, background information, and tied-up ccontinuity may lead to. In a world of computer games, pop-corn movies, and text messages, Marvel had to adapt it's language to be as fast,as simple, and as least thought provoking (maybe that isn't the right expression - thought demanding, perhaps?) as possible, in order to remain competitive. Some may argue that in order to steal into other niches of consumer, Marvel may have lost much of it's own, but that's debatable. Right or wrong, that's how they chose to do things. Must be doing something right. DC hasn't gone full swing that way, and yet Marvel continues to beat them in the charts.
Me, I miss those days of little details and a little bit more content for my buck(bucks, nowadays). However, it's the way of the world, you don't move, you lose (not saying it's the right way, mind you, just the way it is).

Peace

[Mr MajestiK]

It is the editors problem since the character does not belong to the writer it belongs to Marvel and will be around far longer than any writer or editor> it is valuable property not to be damaged at a writers whim.

It seems like now editors don't even bother< when they make Cap a torture I guess that protecting the character is meaningless now. It is getting pretty hard to find folks that you can simply call a hero now in the MU, it is hard to find any that you can even call a decent human being.

Agreed 100%.

I think a lot of the changes that have taken place over a number of years definitely haven't been for the better.

Sure (in some instances) we have better art that was the case back min the 60's/70's but if the scripted dialogue rings hollow all the pretty art in the world doesn't mean a thing.

I for one hate the way Thor and hercules sound now for the simple fact that there's nothing that distinguishes them from any other characters in the 616 MU at present.

JMS succeeded in retaining the essence of Thor's voice in spite of a slight reduction of Thor's usage of faux Shakesperian speech but fraction has just destroyed Thor for me as a character just off of his banal dialogue alone. :smh:

[crossbones]

its clear these so called Architects are only using Marvel to fund their own projects.

this.

10char

[timeismoney]

Their is this saying that tradition will destroy the world, the whole point of this say is that if we go buy tradition along nothing will ever advance. The thing is there will always be somebody who think Marvel or DC for that matter was best back in the day and some who think it is better now it is totally objective. As for where Marvel stand today it is both good and bad and Marvel spoil its fans so that any change rub them the wrong way almost but to expect comic to be like the was 20, 30 years ago is just not possible. That is like wishing games still played in 32 and 64 bits.

[Ronin1108]

Their is this saying that tradition will destroy the world, the whole point of this say is that if we go buy tradition along nothing will ever advance. The thing is there will always be somebody who think Marvel or DC for that matter was best back in the day and some who think it is better now it is totally objective. As for where Marvel stand today it is both good and bad and Marvel spoil its fans so that any change rub them the wrong way almost but to expect comic to be like the was 20, 30 years ago is just not possible. That is like wishing games still played in 32 and 64 bits.

Wouldn't go with the video game analogy, cuz they always pushed the medium forward, as opposed to it being in a bit of a funk creatively right now. Now that isn't to say some of the best video games aren't 16-32 bit (golden axe, streets of rage, chrono trigger, etc) but you can't make the same comparison that what;s being done in comics now is "moving forward". I mean just look at DC that's more known as the "legacy" company just reboot their whole universe to bring it back to regular status quo, and even on top of that , take things like cap and batman's deaths, replacements, and then how quick it was reverted back?? Things like that are why you can say there's issues with the Comic medium today.

[stephen wacker]

Readers should probably decide whether or not they want "editorially driven" comics or not. it seems to change hourly. Even from the same people. Editors should have a strong hand... except they should never tell a creator what to do!

Anyway the status quo from most fans is that things have never been worse they they are NOW (whenever "now" is").

SW