New superheros or old superheros?
- Thread starter Everin
- Start date
Recommended Videos
How about this for an awesome new superhero: Jazz [http://marvel.com/universe/Jazz]
Yep, thats right, he has the power to be blue, and only blue, all the time
Superhero comics/films - as any form of fiction - generally reflect the contemporary social and political situation. And I for one believe there's a limit to the amount of times you can remake an old superhero to appeal to new audiences. Some reboots have been successful, but as time progresses, a lot of canon becomes less and less appealing to audiences.
So I think the focus should be more on new IPs right now, because we're undergoing a true invasion of remakes.
So I think the focus should be more on new IPs right now, because we're undergoing a true invasion of remakes.
Are we talking about the movies or the actual comics here? Because the OP wasn't exactly clear.
In any case, both. Old Superheroe have been done a few (or many) times before for a reason, they have a classic "quality" about them, and as such fans like them, however old they are. Prime examples of this are Batman, Superman, Green Lantern (Hal Jordan version at least), Spider-man, and Iron Man.
New superheroes, while some can be innovative and well recieved, they tend to have much less "staying power" as their powers can be very gimmicky, or due to the new nature of the character, the writers don't know how to handle them. Another problem with new superheroes, that was especially prelevant during the early Nineties, is an attempt to be more extreme, and coming off as either a massive dick, or something of a joke.
Also, when do you count a character as being "new"? Deadpool and Hellboy have been around for nearly 20 years, but have only recently gained popularity. Do they class as "new" characters? Or it that characters such as X-23, ones created and published after 2000 only class as "new"?
In conclusion, while a mix of characters both old and new are good, the new ones will not have the same popularity as the older ones for at least 30 years after their first appearance.
/Comic geek
In any case, both. Old Superheroe have been done a few (or many) times before for a reason, they have a classic "quality" about them, and as such fans like them, however old they are. Prime examples of this are Batman, Superman, Green Lantern (Hal Jordan version at least), Spider-man, and Iron Man.
New superheroes, while some can be innovative and well recieved, they tend to have much less "staying power" as their powers can be very gimmicky, or due to the new nature of the character, the writers don't know how to handle them. Another problem with new superheroes, that was especially prelevant during the early Nineties, is an attempt to be more extreme, and coming off as either a massive dick, or something of a joke.
Also, when do you count a character as being "new"? Deadpool and Hellboy have been around for nearly 20 years, but have only recently gained popularity. Do they class as "new" characters? Or it that characters such as X-23, ones created and published after 2000 only class as "new"?
In conclusion, while a mix of characters both old and new are good, the new ones will not have the same popularity as the older ones for at least 30 years after their first appearance.
/Comic geek