Marvel Giving Thor's Hammer New Female Friendly Inscription
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm surprised it wasn't gender neutral, but hey - Thor IS a female, now, so it's only appropriate that Mjolnir should call for her specifically.
ggwp, Marvel.
ggwp, Marvel.
Him losing Mjolnir has just happened actually in the most recent issues of Original Sin. One of the closing images of the last issue is him on the Moon trying desperately to pull the hammer of the surface of the moon and it not budging.JimB said:
There's an established history of exactly this kind of thing happening with Thor.Machine Man 1992 said:
Dargo Ktor, Eric Masterson, Red Norvell...hell Simon Walterson pulls double duty as Thor and a Frog.
If you want to get picky there's also Beta Ray Bill and Thrr the Dog of Thunder.
I fail to see how suddenly assigning the mantle to a woman is somehow more disrespectful to the character or fans.
Thats because this was never about being gender neutral. they just wanted to slap more female superheroes, but since innovation wasnt an option they genderswapped the existing ones because "Thor" sells. Its the new gimmick - make everything female.Frozengale said:
Thank you, you said it for me. Very easy way to resolve that issue, also it sounds more classicy and theatrical to use they. Which, given the operatic and classic myth feel of Thor and the Asgard, would be very fitting.anthony87 said:
Do we know if the original Thor is going to still play a role in the Thor comic series? Or is he going to get some spinoff with him as a depowered god on the road to redemption? That would actually be pretty cool really. Having him have to re-earn his rightful place as Thor, and take up the hammer again down the line, but give the female Thor her own magic hammer like they did with Beta Ray Bill. Assuming she does well as a cash source, and the stories are good, I could easily see them giving her a spinoff Thor comic, like they've done with the various versions of the Spider-Man comics, which are all basically alternate universe takes on the same hero.JimB said:
I gotta admit, I'm almost compelled to start reading comics again, to see what they do with the female Thor, and the de-powered Thor on the side.
I do not personally know, but I have seen pictures of him running around in a new costume (looks like he's shirtless and and wearing brown leather pants) and swinging a big ol' axe, so he will be around. I just don't know in which book. I assume it will be Thor, since it would kind of screw up the attempt to save money if they made a new book.Happyninja42 said:
2000 year old? No, this Thor has absolutely nothing to do with the Norse god. He's a superhero, borrowing the Norse god's lore. They are absolutely nothing alike.Lightknight said:
I do however agree with you that they shouldn't just make 'female Thor' but either make an original character with an original name or take an already existing woman from the canon and use her. This is just lazy.
Also, what Sigmund Av Volsung said - why not just change the inscription to 'they'? Changing is to she seems silly when Thor, obviously a he, has been carrying this thing around for ages.
True, I just personally see Thor's road to redemption story as being potentially awesome enough in it's own right to warrant a comic series of it's own. xDJimB said:
But that's just me and my love of stories like that, someone fighting against odds and threats to reclaim their glory and grace, after being a deuche at some point in the past.
You're very likely right that it wouldn't be a good idea from a marketing standpoint, but I'm looking at it from the fan/reader angle. xD
It's not lazy; it's a business decision. The comic book industry is remarkably stagnant and resistant to change. New characters have the best opportunity to survive if they are attached to an established hero and allowed to branch out after their popularity has been proven with the safety net of a big hero's name.Anja Bech said:
Wait, why is changing it to "she" silly but changing it to "they" isn't? Yeah, Thor was carrying Mjolnir for ages, but he ain't doing it now, is he?Anja Bech said:
Yeah, that's a really good one. But I'm referring to making her a legitimate mainstay in the Avengers or something mainstream. Hell, have her wielding Thor's hammer instead of this nameless being. Though, I'd hate for her not to have her sword. I'd prefer she just take his place amongst the avengers.Trishbot said:Sif actually has been the main leading heroine for some time in the "Journey into Mystery" series.
It's been a pretty entertaining read.
But don't just take an unknown, undeveloped female and stamp "Thor" on her like that's something new. That's even worse than "Super Girl" or "Batwoman". At least they're distinct albeit unoriginal. But indistinct and unoriginal? That's a step backwards and it also pisses off fans of Thor unnecessarily. Not that I'm a fan of Thor, he's very nearly in an Aquaman category for me. But Sif? Dayum gurl!
Her book is a side series. I want them to have a mainstream Avenger's female that is kickass as a character on her own merits and isn't just a [HeroName]-[Female designation]. Don't get me wrong, many of those female versions of previously established male characters end up evolving into unique characters with interesting situations.Fappy said:
I don't particularly care about them being motivated by money. What's frustrating about this is that this will be temporary, almost certainly. Then what happens to the female character? This could have been an opportunity to bring a sidelined female hero into the spotlight and core group. Take the avengers movie, for example, we have exactly one female and she's not even a superhero. Black-widow is just a spy. Some alterations have given her lame internal powers like "slowed aging" "mind-control resistance" and "enhanced immune system" which aren't exactly powers. Hawkeye is at least a tech superhero with his arrows but is certainly borderline not superhero unless you believe he has superaim and not just peak human aim. But these are the support heroes. The ones from a distance or sneaking. Usually the ones on the computer away from the super powered action.
The comics have some female heroines passing through here and there. Some are better than others and quite a few are just rehashes of the deadly assassin that isn't actually superhuman which is ridiculous to have in such numbers. Why do women get cast in the deadly assassin role so often in these comics? Echo's ability, for example, is photographic reflexes. Not superhuman, just she can copy what she sees someone else do. Not lift a car or anything requiring powers. But things like play the piano or martial arts. She's also deaf which puts her at a further disadvantage. Then Sharon Carter who is just a spy type.
Now, Sif just happens to be my #1 choice. There are other options that stand on their own right. But Sif is sexy without being overtly sexualized and completely badass without being dumb and actually has superpowers.
Sersi was made a member of the Avengers for awhile. That was interesting but she's honestly a bit too powerful as an eternal. Heroes that are just too powerful are hard to write for. She can manipulate all matter with her mind. Organic and inorganic. She merely has a bit of trouble on the subatomic bit. I think they dropped the ball a bit by making her a shameless flirt with the Captain but it was kind of nice seeing him get embarrassed. She may be a decent choice to try to bring to the spotlight but they've really gone off the deep-end with sexualizing her character. It's the same reason why I find wonderwoman a terrible character in the DC universe with her bondage origins.
Power Woman is one I'm still unsure about. She just doesn't seem to stick as a character for a lot of people.
Ms. Marvel could become interesting. They may be trying to make this person into a mainstay... maybe. It's kind of weird to associate a hero's main differentiation with being religion. Her name is also literally a Ms. [heroname]
But really? I'm mostly ok with ANYTHING other than what they're doing. It's not even a new hero they're creating. It's literally a temporary Thor stamp with breasts and I'm completely unsure why this is viewed as progressive when it's even less work than the stuff they'd been doing before which was viewed as not good enough.
Is it just because it's making fans of Thor upset so it makes people feel like it's progressive for feminists? That doesn't sound right. I may not be a fan but I understand. On the other hand, since Thor Odinson still exists they could do something really interesting with his storyline. Will have to wait and see if I'm going to spend any time on it.
It's not the change I think is silly, it's the fact that they changed it to be gender specific. It's a teeny tiny thing, I know, and it doesn't really matter, but I still feel it would have made a bit more sense to make the pronoun gender neutral.JimB said:
Thor is both a modern comic book character and a 2,000 year old human lore character. It's not one or the other. Comic Thor is literally a retcon of human lore in which he is purported to be the same Thor that humans referenced 2,000 years ago freshly returned to Earth.Anja Bech said:
Yes, he isn't exactly the same, but it is still a direct representation of the Norse God. So all I really mean is that of all superhero Marvel characters, this is the one that has been around for thousands of years. Do you really think the Thor of Norse Mythology is all that different from a superhero story?
Maybe someone will get mad at a Ms. Jesus hero with matter manipulation powers in a comic 100 years from now? Same thing. Just Thor may be even older.
Exactly! And they have legitimate existing characters which makes this even worse. They literally have excellent Asguardians to take up the hammer too.
Right, they've gone from sexism to sexism in the name of not-sexism. The pendulum often swings too far in the name of equality before swinging back to equality's rightful place.
Now that I think about it, I hope this lady Thor doesn't just become a Valkyrie clone when she gives up the hammer. Actually, this whole thing would be a lot more interesting if it was Valkyrie herself that picks up Mjolnir in the first place. She's a pretty unique character in her own right, and taking up Thor's mantle temporarily may get people to pay attention to her for the first time in.... 30 years.Lightknight said: