If Marvel's killing the Inhumans, that's another serious mistake
My my, I continue to find it hard to understand what's so "fresh" about this "start", if Marvel really intends to kill off the Inhumans in a new "event" book (via IGN):
If killing the Inhuman is what they intend to do, you have to wonder if it's because the TV show was such a failure, even though an abortive adaptation is no excuse. Yet this may have precedent in a few other instances. For example, DC used the failure of the Supergirl movie in 1984 as an excuse to kill off the Maid of Might in Crisis on Infinite Earths, even as her male cousin was spared the same fate following the failure of Superman III a year prior. Certainly in a manner of speaking, because according to info I'd found once, they at least had second thoughts. But movie or no movie, it's a terrible shame in the end, they had to kill Kara Zor-El regardless, suggesting the writers involved weren't in the gig because they had faith in their ability to tell a decent story with any character they deemed expendable. At least some sense prevailed, and a few years later, they reincorporated Kara to the DCU, even if using a different approach, as with Matrix.
More recently, following the failure of the Green Lantern movie, Geoff Johns used that as an excuse to foist a Muslim character into the comics. Even earlier, following the Jonah Hex movie's failure, they used it as an excuse to change the series' title to All-Star Western, the title it originally began under in the Bronze Age. In a way, what Marvel's doing now with the Inhumans is the same thing, and it's pathetic. A movie/TV show's failure cannot be used as an excuse to get rid of characters because they're supposedly too much to deal with. Otherwise, even the most major will be next.
And above all, this is not a good approach C.B. Cebulski's taken to greenlight a project that irritates the senses with the notion characters could be killed off. They could've done far better by making it a self-contained adventure where Medusa and Black Bolt go on a justice-seeking mission. Instead, they're tossed into some idiocy with a poor idea for a title that does them more harm than good, and the title alone is reason enough to avoid buying it. It's a terrible shame Mark Gruenwald's argument about every character being somebody's favorite isn't being respected.
It looks like the story is ending for Marvel’s Inhumans.Whether or not they really intend to wipe out the Inhumans, this is not a good way to advertise a new book. Nor are the sites reporting it doing any better by not making the same point or complaining this mentality has to stop.
Marvel Comics today announced Death of the Inhumans, a new project from writer Donny Cates (Thanos, Doctor Strange) and artist Ariel Olivetti. [...]
While we can’t say for certain what this means for the future of the Inhumans in the Marvel Universe, Death of the Inhumans certainly sounds like a surprising change in direction for the Marvel franchise.
If killing the Inhuman is what they intend to do, you have to wonder if it's because the TV show was such a failure, even though an abortive adaptation is no excuse. Yet this may have precedent in a few other instances. For example, DC used the failure of the Supergirl movie in 1984 as an excuse to kill off the Maid of Might in Crisis on Infinite Earths, even as her male cousin was spared the same fate following the failure of Superman III a year prior. Certainly in a manner of speaking, because according to info I'd found once, they at least had second thoughts. But movie or no movie, it's a terrible shame in the end, they had to kill Kara Zor-El regardless, suggesting the writers involved weren't in the gig because they had faith in their ability to tell a decent story with any character they deemed expendable. At least some sense prevailed, and a few years later, they reincorporated Kara to the DCU, even if using a different approach, as with Matrix.
More recently, following the failure of the Green Lantern movie, Geoff Johns used that as an excuse to foist a Muslim character into the comics. Even earlier, following the Jonah Hex movie's failure, they used it as an excuse to change the series' title to All-Star Western, the title it originally began under in the Bronze Age. In a way, what Marvel's doing now with the Inhumans is the same thing, and it's pathetic. A movie/TV show's failure cannot be used as an excuse to get rid of characters because they're supposedly too much to deal with. Otherwise, even the most major will be next.
And above all, this is not a good approach C.B. Cebulski's taken to greenlight a project that irritates the senses with the notion characters could be killed off. They could've done far better by making it a self-contained adventure where Medusa and Black Bolt go on a justice-seeking mission. Instead, they're tossed into some idiocy with a poor idea for a title that does them more harm than good, and the title alone is reason enough to avoid buying it. It's a terrible shame Mark Gruenwald's argument about every character being somebody's favorite isn't being respected.
Labels: bad editors, dreadful writers, golden calf of death, marvel comics, msm propaganda
Seriously? Have you not been following superhero comics over the past four decades?
Posted by
Anonymous |
4:19 PM
Getting rid of Supergirl had nothing to do with the movie. It was an across the line decision to get rid of all the spin-off distaff and boy/sidekick versions of the characters, whether by killing them, crippling them or renaming them. They figured it would make the line seem less juvenile. So they eliminated Superboy and Supergirl, Batgirl, Kid Flash, Aqualad and Aquagirl, Element Girl, Wonder Girl, Superbaby and Wonder Tot and so on. They either became other characters or vanished entirely. But then the company needed them back for licensing and copyright purposes, so they brought them back.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:51 AM