Apparently Marvel has a bit of a problem with its two new titles, New Warriors and Children of the Atom where all the buzz appears to be mostly negative. This always amuses me because if you don't like a book, just don't buy it but nowadays everything has to be skewered over the internet fires before they even come out.

Now I wasn't planning on getting either book as Marvel does enjoy creating numerous new characters connected to their other more successful franchises as in the just-as-new Strange Academy. Now we get another ten or twelve neophyte heroes with bad code-names as the good ones are all taken. Snowflake? B Negative? Safespace? People are really upset by these New Warriors but are they worth the angst? Even if the books ever come out now, most likely they won't last that long. 

Have you guys heard the uproar? And what's your take?

-

Views: 111

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

To be frank, I didn't care about the old New Warriors, so, I'm not going to concern myself with the new ones.

Also, if Marvel and its comics exist twenty years from now, people will say, "'Snowflake'?  'Safespace'? Merciful Zontar, what '20's' names for characters!"

I'm not following new comics anymore, but I have heard about this controversy. I have two theories about this:

* Marvel is doing this intentionally to drive publicity.

* It's a classic example of 40-something creators attempting to write younger characters without any idea of what they're really like, a la Bob Haney on Teen Titans.

More than likely it's a but of both.

Here's a take on the situation: https://youtu.be/c7VWTScVLr8

Also how relevant are the old New Warriors today that another roster will be in the next few years?

The Baron said:

To be frank, I didn't care about the old New Warriors, so, I'm not going to concern myself with the new ones.

Also, if Marvel and its comics exist twenty years from now, people will say, "'Snowflake'?  'Safespace'? Merciful Zontar, what '20's' names for characters!"

Like the Baron I was never interested in the original New Warriors, These character names are already past their prime. Grunge, anyone?

Who is the arch nemesis of this group, Boomer?

From what I can tell, the creators are fairly young but if they are trying to woo the LBGT community, will they sell that many comics? 

Just imagine had they done this in the 80s with characters named Powder Puff, Drag Queen and the like! Insensitive names are still insensitive to some no matter what the context or intention is.

Reaction has been bad but Marvel is turning this back on their readers by calling them sexist, racist, homophobes and body-shamers. Thus if you don't support these books, there's something wrong with you!

Randy Jackson said:

I'm not following new comics anymore, but I have heard about this controversy. I have two theories about this:

* Marvel is doing this intentionally to drive publicity.

* It's a classic example of 40-something creators attempting to write younger characters without any idea of what they're really like, a la Bob Haney on Teen Titans.

More than likely it's a but of both.

Here's a take on the situation: https://youtu.be/c7VWTScVLr8

Get Off My Lawn Man

Mansplainer

Metrosexual Max

General Backinmyday and the Slackers


Travis Herrick (Modular Mod) said:

Who is the arch nemesis of this group, Boomer?


Travis Herrick (Modular Mod) said:

Like the Baron I was never interested in the original New Warriors, These character names are already past their prime. Grunge, anyone?

Who is the arch nemesis of this group, Boomer?

I believe he goes by the name, O.K. Boomer! He has, as Randy hints, the ability to drive people off of lawns and drone on endlessly about how much better music used to be. He's melted Snowflake and broken through Safe Space-- but he still has to face the awesome might of.... The Meme-maker!

(and his laughing sidekick, Gif!)

Okay, sure. I wrote a superhero story a decade ago that had a villain called the Troll whose power was baiting people and spreading noxious rumours-- but that was intentional parody.

We have way too many team books as it is, and the New Warriors don't even have much of an inherent theme. The only way to justify relaunching them is by having a superb tale to tell with them.

I welcome "woke' characters, but "safespace" as a concept is a hard enough sell for me.  And these two simply feel phoned in.

A for Children of the Atom, it may be a fabulous book for all I know.  I don't think this is the proper time, though.  Again, there are simply too many X-Books as it is.  It may work if they provide an outlet for stories that can't be told with the Krakoa team.

Oh, my God, remember  Extraño?

Philip Portelli said:

From what I can tell, the creators are fairly young but if they are trying to woo the LBGT community, will they sell that many comics? 

Just imagine had they done this in the 80s with characters named Powder Puff, Drag Queen and the like! Insensitive names are still insensitive to some no matter what the context or intention is.

Reaction has been bad but Marvel is turning this back on their readers by calling them sexist, racist, homophobes and body-shamers. Thus if you don't support these books, there's something wrong with you!

Randy Jackson said:

I'm not following new comics anymore, but I have heard about this controversy. I have two theories about this:

* Marvel is doing this intentionally to drive publicity.

* It's a classic example of 40-something creators attempting to write younger characters without any idea of what they're really like, a la Bob Haney on Teen Titans.

More than likely it's a but of both.

Here's a take on the situation: https://youtu.be/c7VWTScVLr8

Of course, I remember Extrano and yes he was what most Americans saw as a stereotypical flamboyant gay man though, of course, he was portrayed as mostly sexless. At least he was shown to be a caring and strong character.

But then again, even now, most gay men are shown as sexless especially by Marvel. Iceman is usually alone. The new Giant-Man is single. The prehistoric Starbrand loses his partner. So it's okay to be gay as long as you don't be gay!

To be fair, how many superheroes do have long running, stable relationships? 

Philip Portelli said:

Of course, I remember Extrano and yes he was what most Americans saw as a stereotypical flamboyant gay man though, of course, he was portrayed as mostly sexless. At least he was shown to be a caring and strong character.

But then again, even now, most gay men are shown as sexless especially by Marvel. Iceman is usually alone. The new Giant-Man is single. The prehistoric Starbrand loses his partner. So it's okay to be gay as long as you don't be gay!

That's true, Randy but they have the option of having a relationship. Usually, gay men in comics (and TV and movies) don't. There is the one gay character and that's that!

Remember the new Alan Scott? He was gay, a big deal was made about it and the first thing they do is kill off his partner!

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Welcome!

No flame wars. No trolls. But a lot of really smart people.The Captain Comics Round Table tries to be the friendliest and most accurate comics website on the Internet.

SOME ESSENTIALS:

RULES OF THE ROUND TABLE

MODERATORS

SMILIES FOLDER

TIPS ON USING THE BOARD

FOLLOW US:

OUR COLUMNISTS:

Groups

© 2020   Captain Comics, board content ©2013 Andrew Smith   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service