The Thor Message Board >> View Post
Post By

In Reply To
Would be Watcher

Location: Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Yes, characters evolve...but why can't Thor evolve with the rest of them? Seems like he devolved, somewhat.
Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 at 11:27:39 am EST (Viewed 22 times)
Reply Subj: Re: The Problem Marvel has with Thor
Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 at 09:46:08 am EST (Viewed 146 times)

Previous Post

    Is this, they really don't have anyone who can truly stand up to him in terms of pure strength or even just raw power without them augmenting said opponent and thus reneging on what was previously cannonized.

I don't know how anyone can say that by looking at the last 30 years of comics. The number of character who can and have stand up to Thor without any plot devices are numerous. What you call "cannon" isn't some stone tablet upon which laws are written. There is fluidity.

    For instance, its a known fact that Loki had to augment The Silver Surfer to bring him even close to Thor's abilities, but Marvel now attempts to try and make it look like The Surfer is actually greater in terms of power than Thor.

Talk about living in the past. Yes, that is true, Surfer once was a far cry from what he became relatively speaking. The problem is, comics are by nature always in evolution. That it is "official", natural, or implicit, changes happens all the time. It's painfully clear surfer's place relative to Thor has evolved. Time did it's job.

    This is strictly the writers who chose to change what has already been established to fit their own will(and its also why Wolverine has like 13 origins). The easiest thing for Marvel to do would be to remember why Thor was originally created by Stan Lee,.. To be stronger than the hulk. Period. Point Blank. End of story. One day they'll get it right again.

It's also strictly the reader who chose to refuse the changes that were made over time. That too is a problem. Sure I think it's a big problem to have 13 origins and almost no continuity whatsoever. They should pick an origin and go with it for as long as they can and build upon what the previous writer did instead of retconing all they want all the time. That being said, asking for no change in origin ever is unreasonable. Characters need them from time to time whether officially, naturally or implicitly. It's not because there was no Crisis on infinite earth that changes for Thor, or other characters around Thor, aren't valid. The habit of calling something "right" because we like it more is typical among comic book fans. Some times what we like also make short work of continuity or no longer make any sense in the evolved version of the world the character now live in.

As for Thor being stronger than Hulk period, I think it's the worst possible thing to do ever considering the rivalry that has evolved out of their years of interaction. Stan-Lee most likely didn't anticipate how things would go, and I bet that if he knew how great the Thor/Hulk rivalry would have become he would have encourage it not kill it like you so desperately seem to want it. Doubly so since it's all Hulk has to play with figuratively speaking. Anyway, today, I don't think making Thor better than everybody under abstracts could be called "right". Even moreso if you happen to think one of the charm of Marvel use to be the lack of a clear top guy.

I don't think anyone is disputing that comicbook characters evolve.  But the problem with a few fans have with regards to Thor, he was originally intended to be stronger than the strongest mortal.  And like what you already agreed to, Silver Surfer was, originally, not as powerful as Thor.  Things are different now, no arguments there.  But, why amp up Silver Surfer, but keep Thor's powers in check.  I am sure you have read sometime in the battle boards how Thor, Odin and the Asgardians were beasts during the Silver-Age...right?  Things are very different now, they are noticeably less awesome.  Back then, it would be unthinkable to have an Asgardian be killed and be subject to a macabre autopsy (even if it's by Dr. Doom).
Superman is the most powerful among the DC heroes, correct?  How would you feel (and please be honest with yourself) if all of a sudden Mon-El or Captain Marvel are suddenly far more powerful than the last son of Krypton?  Let's take a trip down memory lane....back in the late 80s and early 90s, Daxamites were officially a notch more powerful (overall) than Kryptonians...that's not subject to discussion, it was official, even repeated several times in the loose-leaf Who's Who (which i had a complete set of) magazine...and referenced in various major story arcs....but what's great with DC's treatment of Superman, they always come up with a way to make him look great.  Back when Daxamites invaded earth, Superman fought them (supposedly they were more powerful) and held his own for a bit, until they died with lead poisoning.  Then, when eclipso eclipsed Superman, no one could stop him, not Lobo (punched him repeatedly in super-speed until Lobo passed out), not Captain Marvel (Billy looked roughed up after their encounter)...Superman was awesome.  Then, when Mon-el, supposed to be more powerful than Superman (said so several times in that very crossover event), but when Lar-Gand was eclipsed (which suppose to make the host much more powerful...check out Batman vs eclipsed joker) Superman fought him one-on-one and even managed to knock him out.  So, in DC, even if they somehow make other characters more powerful than Superman, he always come out looking great...and his victories are explained due to his indominable will and courage.  Great, fine and dandy for Superman.  With Thor over at Marvel, it's a

Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 4.0; on Windows 7
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