Marvel Comics blabbery

Oh, is her aunt that "Agent Carter of SHIELD" from the TV show set in the 1940s?

yeah, she was in the first Captain America film

Great-aunt, I think.

Actually, Peggy is quite a bit more than incidental -- she's in The First Avenger as a possible romantic foil for Captain America but he "dies," she reappears in the Winter Soldier basically on her deathbed and in flashback to the origins of SHIELD (they made the tv miniseries take place in that time), and then in Civil War there's a scene with her funeral.

Yeah, she's been retconned to be age appropriate for whenever Captain America thaws out. The women stay the same age, but WW2 just gets further in the past every year.

war never changes iirc

https://media.giphy.com/media/OWrtdm1irskAE/giphy.gif

That's what I love about Carter girls, man. They get older, and I stay the same age and start dating their nieces at some point.

defrosted and confused

I think Sharon was Peggys sister to begin with, and it wasn't until Brubaker that she was changed to her niece. And it was pretty controversial at the time.

Yeah, she's been retconned to be age appropriate for whenever Captain America thaws out. The women stay the same age, but WW2 just gets further in the past every year.

This actually a part of larger problem that comes with the sliding timeline: Marvel may retcon the origins of some heroes that relate to real-world events (Ben and Reed aren't WWII veterans anymore, the origins of Iron Man and Punisher aren't tied to the Vietnam War any longer), but Cap, Peggy Carter Red Skull, Namor, the original Human Torch, etc, are so intricately tied to 2nd World War that it's very hard to retcon that, and they have never tried. But this raises the question, why haven't there been any superheroes in the gap between the 1940s and whenever the origin of the FF takes place in the ever-adjusting timeline? At the moment that gap must be something like 60 years, and it keeps getting bigger.

In the 1960s, the gap was less than two decades, and the recent emergence of mutants was explained by atomic testing that began in the 1940s, so the children of the atomic era were only then coming of age. But now we know mutants have been around for centuries, so where were they before the 00s, or whenever the X-Men started according to the current timeline? Why didn't the costumed heroes of the 1940s inspire a new generation of heroes until 60 years later, but after that new heroes start to pop up constantly?

baby boomers too self-absorbed to fight crime iirc

I sorta felt like Jonathan Hickman was going to try and explain this in S.H.I.E.L.D., but then he never finished it.

The members of Agents of Atlas are mostly from the '50s. Plus they've retconned plenty of characters into that era ('50s Avengers, Byrne's Lost Generation).

imo it's easier to gloss over the difficulties in how your near-ageless characters relate to humans when they're also the gorilla man

Isn't it, Captain America is perpetually World War II guy, and that's fine, you just update his defrost date, then at some point Sharon will have to be Peggy's grandchild or whatnot.

only one solution: freeze Sharon

seriously though, Agents of Atlas did some smart moves on the ageless character front. a robot, a guy from uranus, a goddess, gorilla dude, all of them are divorced enough from humanity it all just works

I'm sorry, a guy from where

oh, you know

fwiw he was Marvel's original "Marvel Boy" and he now goes by... The Uranian

http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Robert_Grayson_(Earth-616)

Uranian? Hallelujah.

Was not aware of this fellow, but sounds like a respectful "R.I.P." is in order: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/james-galton-dead-marvel-president-ceo-was-92-1012944

Nah, corporate hack who appears to have had little or no creative/aesthetic vision, did zilch for creator's rights during his time at Marvel and presided over the artistic decline of the Shooter era.

the direct market was an idea that worked really well for a while, until it completely wrecked so many things

as far as release day comics go...

I have the feeling that Jason Aaron is having a lot of fun with this Star Wars book

I didn't know Aaron was doing Star Wars.... he's so great with Thor. I've never read an SW comic, even tho I enjoy the motion picture property (like the rest of Gen-X humanity).

Star Wars is quite good - Kieron Gillen's Darth Vader is excellent though.

I think out of the half dozen or so series maybe only one has been mediocre. I have Charles Soule some flack before but combined with the right artist (Alex Maleev) on Lando he's ok!

Really I think the really middling to bad art on the Dark Horse stuff is what kept me away from Star Wars comics in the past

I'm told that none of that old stuff is SW "canon" any longer, anyway... (for what that's worth, probably not much).

quite a bit, actually! they're doing really well with keeping things in line with all the nu-canon, and while some of the material released (looking at a certain book series here) feels a little like it's connecting dots between dictated points, there are references between the books, comics, television and movies that make sense

I think a couple of the main departures have been Luke seeking out Jedi ephemera in the space between the original films, and the post-original trilogy lack of Jedi that leads in well to the new films

all stuff for the Star Wars threads, though. just pick up that Vader book and watch him taking down entire groups of rebels

The photo-referencing on Larocca's art is getting out of hand. Every panel looks like a bad papaerback. it's like he's a whole new, much worse artist since Dath Vader ended.

Also for some reason the redhead baddie has exactly the same facial features as an ex and it's freaking me out.

it's because salvador is "referencing" your ex if you get my drift ;)

kudos to Jason Aaron on taking Thor back up another notch

Thanks for the cue. Best issue in a long while. Feel like it's been a bit snoozy since Secret Wars.

I've never had this with an artist before - I love Dauterman's art, and he's a good storyteller, but his panel layouts are fucking annoying.

I'm not a fan of the "bokeh" effect employed sometimes in the "Thor" artwork -- but I assume that is more likely the work of the "color artist," Matthew Wilson (rather than Dauterman).

i wondered if that had a term for it. thought of it as cheesy motion blur

Guess that is how it manifests on the most recent cover (blur of hammer in downward motion). Thought I noticed it before more as a "depth of field" / camera-out-of-focus effect. Either way, it looks fake and, indeed, cheesy.

This was a very good issue, btw (#20). The parallels being drawn with the war in Syria were clear, but effective (and affecting) -- not always the case with such "torn from the headlines" maneuvers.

One other note -- I actually agree with sentiments of the final letter in the letterpage (from "Kevin in Columbus, OH"): as great as this series has been, Thor/Foster is not as richly developed a character as the hero of a series usually is. (Think I said something similar above.) The assoc. editor sort of brushes it off, saying "Jane's cancer has been a theme since issue #1"... I assume she's not suggesting that giving a character cancer is a substitute for depth/complexity(!), but is rather saying that Jane's struggle against her disease should be providing what Kevin is asking for (character development via "overcoming an adversary"). Regardless, I just wish Jane's personality came through more strongly. Especially in a book with so many strong (Asgardian) personalities, Thor tends to fade into the background of her own book.

Yep agree. Aaron doesn't write Jane as well as he writes regular Thor, or even Roz.

imo Jane-as-Jane is harder to write -- Roz is the charismatic, sarcastic secret agent, Jane is holding on for dear life to that hammer and thinks, for some reason, that she needs to have both human frailty and act as Thor, and I feel like that's been leaned on a little heavily

the whole ongoing bit with the history of mjolnir and her special relationship with the hammer has been pretty good

imo the letter you mentioned (and to an extent, the response) are kind of garbage in that the response just mentions the cancer, and the letter itself never directly states it but has the implication "hey, I like this, but if Jason Aaron wants to sell why a WOMAN is Thor then he's doing a disservice by not making her character more compelling"

as if a woman has to be twice as enigmatic as a main character in order to sell the fact there's a female lead, and to justify it. no one's going to say "why does <censored> get to be the War Thor?"

the reason Jane Foster is Thor is pretty simple -- Thor lost the hammer because deep down, he believed the enemy in that Godkiller storyline was right -- the gods do not deserve their status because they can't fulfill their responsibilities

Jane deserves the hammer because she's completely devoted to the job, and does it with humility. it's lot of fun to be Thor, boast and preen, but she's the anti-hubris Thor

I read the letter more as saying, "When this particular woman character is only *half* as charismatic as a typical lead (male or female), you guys run the risk of seeming like you just 'checked a box' by making her Thor, and didn't feel the need to do the usual work of developing her personality...."

But I don't want to put words in "Kevin's" mouth, or really argue this particular point. I don't think Aaron is sexist or anything; and Jane as Thor is great, without any need for "justification." I just wish I "knew her better"...

(But I do also get the logic of the retort, "Would you be saying the same thing if it were a male 'replacement' character with an allegedly underdeveloped personality?")

they should give her an angry dad

Or, in the Mighty Marvel tradition, a Troubled Past that she is Working To Leave Behind Her...

I'm reading THE SAVAGE SHE-HULK #1 (Feb. 1979)... Stan the Man (and an uncredited letterer) get things off a crackling start by doubling up on the "(UN)TIL TODAY" schtick in the first panel of pg. 1:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEBm_5jWsAIfS_e.jpg:small

(Also -- "a monster a'borning!"? Stan must have been eating a ham salad sandwich with one hand, and approving promo Spidey merch with the other, as he scribbled this script between bites. Not long afterward, Banner gives Jessica a blood transfusion at her kitchen table; which is pretty badass of Dr. David/Bruce/Bob.)

(Sorry, *Jennifer* -- I tend to get her name mixed up with Lucille Bluth's)

several years late, but damn, Unbeatable Squirrel Girl is the bee's knees

You guys, I must correct the record -- Bruce doesn't perform the self-to-cousin transfusion in Jennifer's kitchen. I cleared failed to read the text with Talmudic attention. Instead, he observes a "doctor's shingle" at the house next door, and breaks in to find the necessary equipment. (For a sort of Self-No-Prize, the doctor next door does remain a plot point in subsequent issues.)

Issue #2 finds the series' permanent creative team coming on board - David Anthony Kraft (w) / Mike Vosburg (p). The plot of said issue is absolutely gonzo; one of those "Whatever, the kids won't notice" '70s storylines driven by absurd coincidences, impossible events, and improbable character choices. It is fun, though!

Flipping ahead in this fat collection (Essential Savage She-Hulk, Vol. 1), I am struck by how radically Vosburg's art appears to change over the next few years... his line seems to become much more "mature" / refined. Stay tuned for (hopefully no further) updates!