Sure he is, even by default. He certainly was put to more creative use than Darkseid, whose most compelling trait is his werid Omega Effect.
Darkseid, and in fact all of the New Gods, suffer from terminal stagnation. There is just nothing significant that is or can be done with them beyond fulfilling almost literal roles of walking stereotypes.
Darkseid will never have even a hint of any other interests beyond power and destruction, Orion will always be the short-fused warrior longing for battle and attempting to develop a conscience, and the other New Gods (except perhaps Mister Miracle, by far the most succesfull creation of the whole lot, mainly because he less formulaic and has a great supporting cast) are even more monodimensional.
Meanwhile, Thanos is more of a hands-on guy and has a pechant for involving himself in more complex plots and to hold more complex motivations. He has healthy senses of humor and irony that manifest themselves once in a while, and unstable yet persistent alliances with many of his own enemies or former enemies, most notably Warlock.
In short, he is a character, albeit a challenging one. Darkseid isn't.
I don't think anybody really "gets" Darkseid other than Jack Kirby. By the same token, I don't think anyone other than Jim Starlin really gets Thanos (although I have read very few non-Starlin Thanos stories). Under Kirby, it was Darkseid's enigmatic personality that ws the draw. I'm thinking particularly of the scene in which an old man and his granddaughter encountered Darkseid in "Happyland" (in Forever People). That's the definitive Darkseid for me. OTOH, Starlin has done so much with Thanos over the years (including having him play the hero), that it's difficult to argue Darkseid is a better character given how much (or rather how little) Lirby was allowed to develop him.
If you're going to be provocative, I'm going to be wishy-washy: Tie.
Let me be up front and say I don't really like either character.
BUT, I will take Darkseid every time. I can't think of anything in comicdom that bores me more than Jim Starlin's Marvel Cosmic stories. Sorry, I've given it more than a fair shot, and it just isn't my thing.
There have been a few stories in which I don't mind Darkseid.
I think they have done more with Thanos than DC has done with Darkseid, and by that I mean there is more variety with Thanos's stories. I only tried to read one Jim Starlin Thanos story, and I'm with Travis on this one. But other writers have fleshed him out quite a bit more.
I'm not voting on this one either, because my head says Thanos, but my heart goes to Darkseid.
You guys are talking as if Thanos and Darkseid are two different characters ...
*snort*
Actually, I don't understand Thanos at all. Never have. Mainly because I read all the stories where Starlin "developed" him in real time, and it was clear to me that Starlin was just stoned or something and doing it all on the fly. (And swiping a lot of European stuff and shoving it into superhero drag.) Hey, it was the '70s -- everything was kinda loosey-goosey. Grown-up men were wearing leisure suits and gold chains around their necks and outrageous facial hair. Ever seen Boogie Nights? Yeah.
Remember the "Blood Brothers"? That was the first hint of Thanos. Make sense of that. Plus, Roy Thomas was doing a Christ allegory with Warlock initially, but when Starlin got a-hold of him he became ... Heck, I dunno. A guy on acid, I'd say. Maybe *koff* Starlin knew some people *koff* who did acid (and/or a lot of weed). Anyway, all of it was, to me, a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, especially since every single Thanos/Warlock story ended with a big, fat Reset Button.
I think later, when these stories were being heralded as great stuff, Starlin tried to make something coherent out of them so they could continue. I don't think he succeeded. I think Thanos went from a walking contradiction whose motivations and behavior made no sense to a sober person, to a two-dimensional tyrant who made too much sense and got boring. Then back again, then forward again. Rinse, repeat.
Upshot is that if I see a Thanos story advertised, my first thought is "which Thanos?"
My feelings about Darkseid are less conflicted. He was a pretty standard Kirby villain (See: Dr. Doom), which meant he talked a lot about how evil he was and how we was executing really evil plans, and oh yes, he's evil. But nothing ever happens. At the end of the day, both Darkseid and Dr. Doom are all hat, no cattle. I mean, when was the last time either one just flat out killed anyone? No, they talk about how evil they are, and how they MIGHT kill a whole bunch of people, and moo-hoo-haw-haw maybe I'll kill YOU. But they never do.
Actually, I do perceive Thanos and Darkseid as different characters, although obviously they have a common core that is difficult to ignore. Starlin was clearly making it up as he went in those early Iron Man and Captain Marvel stories and Darkseid seemed like a convenient bad guy to introduce in the plot. But they diverged soon enough.
Thanos is a boaster with a knack for underachievement and self-sabotage, who finds himself drawn time and again to seek alliance with people that want to stop him. There is an undercurrent in many of his stories about how badly he wants acknowledgement and approval. And oh, he is also a nihilist seeking death's favor.
Darkseid is a tyrant and, in some readings, a control freak. In that respect he is opposite to Thanos. Unlike Thanos, he has a true supporting cast (albeit a very exotic one) but very often they become mere witnesses to Darkseid's posturing and sadistic schemes.
I hear Kirby meant for his original New Gods stories to have a true conclusion. That makes a lot of sense; most characters work best in stories with definite arcs and resolutions, and that is particularly true of the New Gods, and of Darkseid above all others. It surprises me that the character was emphasized so much since Crisis, because he is very ill suited for the role of recurrent villain. He is someone to fear, oppose and eventually destroy, not someone that can be hanging over everyone's heads for extended periods without weakening the sense of menace.
Thanos, by contrast, is at least arguably more of an insane titan than an evil overlord. He is trickier to write, but can work in a variety of roles for extended periods if enough care is taken. I feel that he has been overextended and made difficult to understand, but the potential was there.
Replies
Sure he is, even by default. He certainly was put to more creative use than Darkseid, whose most compelling trait is his werid Omega Effect.
Darkseid, and in fact all of the New Gods, suffer from terminal stagnation. There is just nothing significant that is or can be done with them beyond fulfilling almost literal roles of walking stereotypes.
Darkseid will never have even a hint of any other interests beyond power and destruction, Orion will always be the short-fused warrior longing for battle and attempting to develop a conscience, and the other New Gods (except perhaps Mister Miracle, by far the most succesfull creation of the whole lot, mainly because he less formulaic and has a great supporting cast) are even more monodimensional.
Meanwhile, Thanos is more of a hands-on guy and has a pechant for involving himself in more complex plots and to hold more complex motivations. He has healthy senses of humor and irony that manifest themselves once in a while, and unstable yet persistent alliances with many of his own enemies or former enemies, most notably Warlock.
In short, he is a character, albeit a challenging one. Darkseid isn't.
Randy, are you trying to be provocative again? :)
I don't think anybody really "gets" Darkseid other than Jack Kirby. By the same token, I don't think anyone other than Jim Starlin really gets Thanos (although I have read very few non-Starlin Thanos stories). Under Kirby, it was Darkseid's enigmatic personality that ws the draw. I'm thinking particularly of the scene in which an old man and his granddaughter encountered Darkseid in "Happyland" (in Forever People). That's the definitive Darkseid for me. OTOH, Starlin has done so much with Thanos over the years (including having him play the hero), that it's difficult to argue Darkseid is a better character given how much (or rather how little) Lirby was allowed to develop him.
If you're going to be provocative, I'm going to be wishy-washy: Tie.
"Yosemite Sam: A more interesting character than either Darkseid or Thanos. Discuss."
True dat.
The Baron said:
Let me be up front and say I don't really like either character.
BUT, I will take Darkseid every time. I can't think of anything in comicdom that bores me more than Jim Starlin's Marvel Cosmic stories. Sorry, I've given it more than a fair shot, and it just isn't my thing.
There have been a few stories in which I don't mind Darkseid.
I think they have done more with Thanos than DC has done with Darkseid, and by that I mean there is more variety with Thanos's stories. I only tried to read one Jim Starlin Thanos story, and I'm with Travis on this one. But other writers have fleshed him out quite a bit more.
I'm not voting on this one either, because my head says Thanos, but my heart goes to Darkseid.
You guys are talking as if Thanos and Darkseid are two different characters ...
ClarkKent_DC said:
*snort*
Actually, I don't understand Thanos at all. Never have. Mainly because I read all the stories where Starlin "developed" him in real time, and it was clear to me that Starlin was just stoned or something and doing it all on the fly. (And swiping a lot of European stuff and shoving it into superhero drag.) Hey, it was the '70s -- everything was kinda loosey-goosey. Grown-up men were wearing leisure suits and gold chains around their necks and outrageous facial hair. Ever seen Boogie Nights? Yeah.
Remember the "Blood Brothers"? That was the first hint of Thanos. Make sense of that. Plus, Roy Thomas was doing a Christ allegory with Warlock initially, but when Starlin got a-hold of him he became ... Heck, I dunno. A guy on acid, I'd say. Maybe *koff* Starlin knew some people *koff* who did acid (and/or a lot of weed). Anyway, all of it was, to me, a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, especially since every single Thanos/Warlock story ended with a big, fat Reset Button.
I think later, when these stories were being heralded as great stuff, Starlin tried to make something coherent out of them so they could continue. I don't think he succeeded. I think Thanos went from a walking contradiction whose motivations and behavior made no sense to a sober person, to a two-dimensional tyrant who made too much sense and got boring. Then back again, then forward again. Rinse, repeat.
Upshot is that if I see a Thanos story advertised, my first thought is "which Thanos?"
My feelings about Darkseid are less conflicted. He was a pretty standard Kirby villain (See: Dr. Doom), which meant he talked a lot about how evil he was and how we was executing really evil plans, and oh yes, he's evil. But nothing ever happens. At the end of the day, both Darkseid and Dr. Doom are all hat, no cattle. I mean, when was the last time either one just flat out killed anyone? No, they talk about how evil they are, and how they MIGHT kill a whole bunch of people, and moo-hoo-haw-haw maybe I'll kill YOU. But they never do.
After a while that stops being impressive.
Kinda the point of the thread in many ways.
ClarkKent_DC said:
Actually, I do perceive Thanos and Darkseid as different characters, although obviously they have a common core that is difficult to ignore. Starlin was clearly making it up as he went in those early Iron Man and Captain Marvel stories and Darkseid seemed like a convenient bad guy to introduce in the plot. But they diverged soon enough.
Thanos is a boaster with a knack for underachievement and self-sabotage, who finds himself drawn time and again to seek alliance with people that want to stop him. There is an undercurrent in many of his stories about how badly he wants acknowledgement and approval. And oh, he is also a nihilist seeking death's favor.
Darkseid is a tyrant and, in some readings, a control freak. In that respect he is opposite to Thanos. Unlike Thanos, he has a true supporting cast (albeit a very exotic one) but very often they become mere witnesses to Darkseid's posturing and sadistic schemes.
I hear Kirby meant for his original New Gods stories to have a true conclusion. That makes a lot of sense; most characters work best in stories with definite arcs and resolutions, and that is particularly true of the New Gods, and of Darkseid above all others. It surprises me that the character was emphasized so much since Crisis, because he is very ill suited for the role of recurrent villain. He is someone to fear, oppose and eventually destroy, not someone that can be hanging over everyone's heads for extended periods without weakening the sense of menace.
Thanos, by contrast, is at least arguably more of an insane titan than an evil overlord. He is trickier to write, but can work in a variety of roles for extended periods if enough care is taken. I feel that he has been overextended and made difficult to understand, but the potential was there.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next