The Thor Message Board >> View Post
·
Post By
Upper_Krust

In Reply To
seeker

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,976
Subj: Re: To JMS its almost as if action is a dirty word...
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 at 09:04:40 am EDT (Viewed 4 times)
Reply Subj: Re: To JMS its almost as if action is a dirty word...
Posted: Fri May 22, 2009 at 02:01:01 pm EDT (Viewed 77 times)


Hey there seeker! \:\-\)


    Quote:
    I do agree the character Thor himself is definitely action oriented.


So you agree that JMS is going against type?


    Quote:
    His key method to solve problems is to smash whatever is bothering him which in most cases works. I would counter however that one of Thor's strongest aspects has always been the supporting cast which the series is focusing on. I suppose the title "Tales of Asgard" might be more appropriate than "Thor."


I like a good supporting cast as much as the next guy, but when the supporting cast get more to do than the 'star' you have to consider it an ensemble piece.


    Quote:
    I was focusing on the action part where some people want fight after fight after fight. I think JMS is just taking a while to put everything into place other than have Thor battling frost giants ever other issue.


Other than JMS run I can't think of two consecutive Thor issues that haven't had some kind of action in them. I tell a lie, Jurgens Reigning storyline probably has something like that...and we know how well received that is around here.


    Quote:
    I don't think so. I think just for him (as he has admitted) it is a weak point. But of all the weak points the strong story telling to me makes up for it.


I'll list a few more weak points for him.

1. His overtly decompressed style.
2. His seeming allergy to creating new villains.
3. His inability to hit the deadlines.

For all that, I still admire JMS and I still enjoy the title, and I'll keep buying, but if you honestly asked me could I do better, then the answer would be yes. Not that a 'no-name' would likely bring in the same sales figures, but a far better 'all-round' comic it would be.


    Quote:
    I suppose exciting in a different sense.


No. Its either exciting or not, in this case not. Its interesting, but not exciting. There are no edge of the seat moments, no cliffhangars between issues, virtually no new villains. Stan Lee would be tr=urning over in his grave except for the fact he's still alive and well.


    Quote:
    Thor is having to deal with things that brute force won't solve.


I've seen this film, its called Superman Returns...didn't do too well at the box office.


    Quote:
    And if it is a choice between this type story or Thor appearing in other titles like RHulk I will take this.


Each to their own amigo. \:\-\)


    Quote:
    Well, at least you have the Mighty Thorcules to look forward to. \:\)


I shouldn't need to look to other comics to make up for the inadequacies of Thor.


    Quote:
    I've tried reading some of Loeb's hulk and I can't stand it. I admit I hate characters who go issue after issue steamrolling over everything they fight.


Rulk did just get pimp-slapped by Galactus if thats any consolation? \:\-D


    Quote:
    To me the difference is like this if you compare them to food. Thor is the full-course, expensive meal that might take a while to cook, but is throughly enjoyed. Loeb's Hulk is a happy meal from McDonald's or pure sugar that gives you a rush, but is ultimately empty calories.


One thing you missed about the Thor meal, it doesn't fill you. It might be expensive and taste nice, but theres not enough on the plate to satisfy you, so on the way home you need to stop into McDonald's.


    Quote:
    I think JMS is different from what most comic readers are used too. Most I think do enjoy the action aspect more which is why Loeb's hulk sales so well despite it recieving the most negative complaints I have heard in a long time.


I think Loeb is starting to win around a lot of people; while JMS is starting to lose fans.


    Quote:
    With Thor you think action start and superhero, but JMS is treating Thor more like a Shakespearean play that takes awhile to get to the action and put everything into place, but once it does the pay off is really worth it. A lot of people find Shakespear boring. I wonder if I'm just getting old (by the way I am less than thirty).


I'm sorry, but Shakespeare had a lot more action than what we are seeing in Thor.




Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software