Reed Richards was a Skrull all along?

Holy fuck... this is pretty amazing, it kind of reminds me of that whole star wars fan theory on jar-jar binks. It's pretty intense, nice find, OP.

>>87944442
That entire site makes me want to read the entire FF that he claims is "real" (basically from Lee/Kirby to Englehart, then FF: The End by Lee and Romita Jr)

>>87944501
Yeah, I'm not even much of a Fantastic four guy, but this site is getting me interested.

Everything I know about Marvel is a lie even by the standards of fiction

Yeah that's cool but don't you think they're grasping at straws?

>>87944501
>>87944577

Theres definitely some neat stuff in there. Dude's a bit of a crackpot and seems to worship the concept of the no-prize above all else but he's very well-read and observant.

Still, the most interesting thing about it to me is that the "death" of the "original marvel universe" (read: the abandonment of any degree of believable continuity, despite Marvel's insistence otherwise) coincides perfectly with the endpoint of Marvels: Eye of the Camera, around 1989-1990. Fast-forward 10 years and you hit 1999-2000, which saw the release of Earth X. Earth X of course is set ten years after the end of the "heroic age," and deals with a Marvel universe that has become engulfed by a dark age of careless mutants running amok.

Basically what I'm getting at is that Marvels, Eye of the Camera, and Earth X form a pretty comprehensive overview of the Marvel universe that matters. The Marvels books are an exquisite retelling of the silver and bronze ages, while Earth X is an alternate take on the dark age had it been applied to a Marvel Universe that retained a semblance of continuity. It also serves to tie practically everything (especially Kirby's work) together. Great food for thought.

>>87945243

Shame Earth X was so poorly executed. Cool ideas but Ross and his co-writer definitely are idea men, not writers.

>>87944011
As crazy theories go, I prefer the one about Sue being Johnny's mother.

>>87945338
Earth X is certainly no Marvels (though frankly neither is Eye of the Canera for that matter) but I consider it a rare instance of the top-down approach actually working out. The excessive attention to detail does indeed big down what is ultimately a basic plot. At the same time, I find all the details and connections are also half the fun. Using X-51 and Uatu as the framing device helps to alleviate this, at least for me.

>>87945425
>I prefer the one about Sue being Johnny's mother.
Explain further.
Also post more crazy, but believable, theories

this guy rocks just because of how into it he goes. no idea if i agree or not

>>87945139
Sure. But at the same time I think there's something impressive about this. It's strange cause I usually have disdain for some of the kind of fan theories you see on Cracked or whatever.

But this guy seems to put forth a good argument where Marvel went wrong, as seen in http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/realtime_marvel_universe.html

>>87945541
I feel that way about a lot of his stuff.

The idea that Stan Lee accidentally the Great American Novel is either profoundly hilarious or hilariously profound.

File: Johnny Storm02.jpg (126KB, 800x446px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 800x446px

>>87945508
Here is the one I mentioned: http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-act4-FF274.html#FF291

And here are a bunch more theories from that site: http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff_theories.html

Most of what I've read from that site was just a close reading of the FF comics, but some crazy shit is there, too.

File: lol titans.png (436KB, 534x529px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 534x529px

>Occam's razor
>I love this theory because, unlike any other comic book theory, it only requires one element to explain everything, and that element (Skrulls) probably exists in the real world. Occam would be proud.


>>87945575

And Jack Kirby!!!

>>87945663
>And Jack Kirby!!!

Of course, and all there's. But I singled Stan out because there's a particularly salient quote in which he confesses to using a pseudonym on his comic work because he hoped to one day attach his real name to the Great American Novel.

You just can't make up that kind of pottery.

He's definitely an interesting individual, and some of his comments on the state of the Marvel Universe are pretty profound. As an oldfag, you could definitely see a systematic change in the comics around the time Shooter became EiC, when Marvel was firmly settling into the concept that they were a multimedia legend and that they weren't going away soon. In the sixties and seventies there was always a sense of urgency, of not knowing when and how the superhero fad would vanish and knock out the feet from underneath marvel again as it had in the golden age. So the frantic experimentation of the seventies sought out new avenues for the company, be it horror, blaxploitation, martial arts comics, black and white "mature" comics or humor stuff in line with MAD. By the eighties and especially under Shooter, there was a feeling of immense stability and the company fully settled, no longer afraid that it would suddenly vanish in a puff of smoke. It's also when they began doing the Marvel Handbooks, which I believe are symptomatic of when marvel really changed.

But on the other hand, again as an oldfag, I feel that this guy is just taking "I like these comics" and putting an excessive weight on them as if they were more significant. He intentionally plays down the post-Stan, pre-Byrne era of FF, although he mentions it, which was every bit as scattered, incoherent and non-progressive as the stuff that followed Englehart. I personally don't like what Englehart was going for with the series either, and don't consider it a "worthy" (whatever that means) sequel to either Lee/Kirby or Byrne's run. I guess what I'm saying is that this guy selects things he thinks supports his theory, and then plays down everything else, simply because he likes these runs and dislikes the rest.

Of course not to say that the DeFalco years weren't fucking awful, mostly. The man should have stayed an editor, or at the very least not touched the FF.

Fuck this theory can we talk about Aunt May and Uncle Ben watching over a girl who turned into a mermaid?!?!?

File: table_flip.jpg (27KB, 480x252px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x252px

>The only thing we know for sure about Reed in the 1930s is that his mentor is called Nathaniel, and claims to be his father. This could be Nathaniel Essex, Mr Sinister.

>>87945744

man that's some Morrison Hypercrisis shit. love it

This website is a rabbit hole.
The deeper you go the more crazier it gets.

>>87945773
I picked up on that as well. He a good writer, very adept at drawing you into his rambling musings with convincing language and attention to detail. But like you, I found myself noticing things he conveniently skipped over, or conveniently made out to be a much bigger deal than face value would suggest. That holds true for pretty much all of the opinion pieces I read.

The one about unstable molecules is nothing short of brilliant though. It's the be-all/end-all to any and all faux-science-wanking where superpowers are concerned.

>>87945948
Yeah, I'm reading this one right now:

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-act4-FF219.html#FFA15

>As we learned when Doom returned in FF 10, Doom met an advanced race called Ovoids. They were experts at possessing mechanical bodies. They were probably attracted to Doom by his existing much cruder experience with the same principle. They taught him how to refine his art. They showed him how a person could occupy any number of mechanical bodies when needed. In effect, they showed him how to be "a thing less than clay." They introduced the idea of artificial clones: what would later be called Doombots.

>Proof that a Doombot IS Doom
>Doombots are robots that:

>are indistinguishable from Doom: even a mind reader cannot tel the difference.
>believe themselves to be Doom,

>So from a scientific and philosophical viewpoint, they are Doom himself.
>Or from a religious viewpoint, they contain his spirit.
>In every conceivable way, a Doombot is Doom: it has Doom's mind transferred into it.
>Every Doombot is Doom.

Holy fucking shit

>>87945575
>The idea that Stan Lee accidentally the Great American Novel

He Accidentally WHAT the Great American novel? Wrote? Screwed up? Youre leaving out a pretty crucial verb there.

>>87945958

Don't get me wrong, I really admire his work and that he can put this kind of dedication into his fandom. He clearly loves the FF (and Marvel) very deeply and intensely. And being able to write this much on the topics is nothing short of astounding for someone like me who flitters between subject and subject constantly.

But yeah, this is how you write history to suit your own likes and dislikes. Purism has always existed in comics, probably even back in the golden age (Solshevsky's theory on the popularity of superheroes in the golden age is b brilliant to me) but I don't think there's honestly enough to claim that Englehart is more of a "true" spiritual successor to Kirby/Lee than any of the other lesser runs of FF. But maybe it's because of my personal bias, as I've never been an Englehart fan. Kurt Busiek believes Englehart's Avengers is still a true successor to Lee's run, which I would also dispute on degrees of thematic difference. But that's neither here nor there.

What I do agree with him on is that the Marvel Universe changed enormously from the start of the 80s to the end of that decade, and not just in terms of characters and titles, but the role of the creator and the general mindset underpinning the universe. Chris Claremont's X-Men is also a great example of this.

>>87946157
Welcome, newfriend.

>>87946131
it's amazing how he can support his crazy theories with extreme details.

>>87946181

>Chris Claremont's X-Men is also a great example of this

i really wanna see someone go autistic on that stuff like this. it's just as huge and creator driven as FF. and he gets to play around and jump through hoops with the X-Factor disaster.

>>87946241

Yeah, and Claremont's career took a sharp downturn when he realized he was just one writer in a long line, and in the end his changes and character development would just be leaves in the wind.

I'm pretty happy Claremont has had a bit of a restoration in popularity recently.

>>87946202

Thank you

Now answer the question.

>Occam's razor says we should not assume that multiple magical liquids exist when just one will explain everything.

No, Occam's razor says we should not assume a more complex explanation when a simpler explanation exists. Which explanation is more complex?

>Skrull Milk can do literally anything
>Multiple magical liquids each can do one specific thing

That's up for debate.

>>87946334
>I'm pretty happy Claremont has had a bit of a restoration in popularity recently.

I think a part of his popularity loss was that he was starting to repeat himself in a way and another part of it was that he was getting taken for granted because his style was seen as old-fashioned and clunky. (I'll even admit this; I took him for granted like a decade and a half ago until I sat down and read his entire first run some years ago.) His X-Men is kind of like Seinfeld in that a lot of stuff that it did ended up getting imitated and applied a lot inside and outside of X-Men.

And now that we've seen where a lot of the 00's writers (that people claimed were better than Claremont) are now, I think I can see why he'd get a restoration in popularity.

>>87946531

Oh yeah, definitely. I would never claim that the last few years of his consecutive run on the X-titles are his best, nor can I defend a lot of his 1990s and early 00s projects. I storytimed every issue of Sovereign Seven here and that series hurts as a Claremont fan because it's him taking every negative aspect of his writing and enhancing it and focusing on it, which I feel he did a lot during that period. I think he was honestly burned out. He'd used his best ideas, some of his other ones had been very brusquely nixed by editorial (original Phoenix saga, original Fall of the Mutants, original Mutant Massacre, etc) and he didn't have a lot left to give. But those first ten+ years were glorious, and I feel he has to a degree gotten back into the right kind of groove lately, even though he has yet to produce anything approaching the old days.

Oh, and lest I forget he was also a great guiding hand for a lot of lesser titles which a lot of people either don't know or forget about, like lifting Ms Marvel out of obscurity or giving Spider-Woman a really good run.

File: jrjr xmen.jpg (585KB, 1280x973px)

585KB, 1280x973px

>>87946334
>>87946531

The 90s action aesthetic was also like the complete opposite of Claremont's style.

I think it's crazy how the Byrne stuff is lionized so much. Cockrum 2, JrJr, Silvestri, there's so much good stuff in the second half.

>>87946794

there's also a great study in how editorial can guide a book which i think would be lost in a just the text reading like FF here. Dark Phoenix and Jean coming back show the total range of how editorial hits a story.

new mutants with Sienkiewicz is greatest all time comics

>>87946131
didnt Ewing confirm that theory in Loki: Agent of Asgard?

Doom is everywhere eternal and immortal all thanks to his doombots.

File: marvel_universe.gif (17KB, 591x387px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 591x387px

How do we save the Marvel Universe?

>>87947417
Yeah, the site even brings that issue up, too.

>>87947634
>A. Yeah. It amounts to a vain and futile attempt to recapture past glories. Nova is an example. Nova was supposed to be cast in the old mold of the early 1960s Marvel Comics, and it bears no resemblance whatsoever to those books. It's basically a fan's interpretation of what those books were like. To compare Nova with the early Ditko or Romita Spider-Man is fatuous. All the evocative elements are completely lost. It's an attempt, again, to formularize what was done in the early '60s. Every attempt at that has fallen just short of pathetic. What can I tell you? Nova is one particular book; there are others. Nova, strangely, when it first appeared, had its own interesting charm about it. I liked the first couple of issues. And then the degeneration was rampant and apparently irreversible. It didn't fool anybody."

DICK RIDERS ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>87947513
I don't think it can be saved. The problems he discusses are ingrained into too many generations of mostly mediocre writers at this point. And readers too. That quote Alan Moore shits on, about the illusion of change? I feel like that's 100% true. Modern readers say they want things to matter but if you push it even slightly too far, they turn on it for straying too far from whatever they feel the idea of the character is. It's a fucking mess.

All you can do is enjoy the good modern stuff you find for what it is. Fringe characters typically produce better results as they're under less scrutiny.

Wait. If he thinks the FF is the Great American Novel then what does it mean when there's no FF comic while Ben is with the GOTG, Johnny is with the Inhumans, and Reed and Sue are outside the multiverse?

>Byrne's legendary run (FF232-294) is regarded by many fans as second only to Lee and Kirby. My view is a little different, though I still rate these issues highly. The first American comic I ever subscribed to was the FF,and my first new issue was 251: the image of Ben staring into the abyss is etched on my mind. But I also remember being a tiny bit disappointed: I had impossibly high expectations. My previous FF experience was dominated by Kirby and Perez, and really nothing could beat those. The other problems I have with Byrne's run are:

>He ignores the previous 20 yeas - he tried to destroy the big story that had been building up.
>He changes the characters beyond recognition. Reed, Sue and Johnny changes personality, Ben is left in limbo, development wise (though to be fair he had played a supporting role in Moench's run).
>He does nothing of any lasting significance. It's all smoke and mirrors. This is not just an observation, it was his intention: he has always been an "illusion of change, not real change, it's only comics" guy, and I am the opposite. For me the FF is at its best when there is real change.
>Byrne's run is all small stories. Even the "big" stories (a small loss, hero, etc.) are made small because they are designed to have zero long term effect.

>>87948239
So in a different world the Ultimate Universe could have been a solution but simply became aggravation of the problem.
>>87948261
You are looking at a work drawing influence from previous existing ones but is not actually related to it and is less likely to be retained into the future.

>>87948363
>In short, Byrne set out to kill the big story.

>And yet he put so much effort into it that he ended up moving the story forwards despite himself. In his "comic creators on the FF" interview he says how he had particular plans, but the team seemed to have their own ideas and the story wrote itself in directions he did not intend. His run does end up fitting perfectly as a development of what went before, despite his intention to reboot. I see Byrne's run as the proof that comics can be high art of lasting significance: the method of production can lead to something much greater than its parts. Comics at their best write themselves against an author's intent. All we ask is that the authors really care. And Byrne in his FF run really cared.

I liked Byrne's FF run a lot but I kinda get what he's saying here; I feel about the same way with Spider-Man when they went and did the whole OMD/BND thing.

File: FF-X-Men-self-doubt2.jpg (60KB, 700x341px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 700x341px

Man this is fucking great.

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-act4-FF274.html#FF288

>Reed's decision in FF205 may not seem earth shattering. Is this really such a momentous change? After all, the clues are subtle: a word here, a look there. Is this really a fundamental change of heart and change of direction that changes everything? The answer is yes. For evidence, read the highly acclaimed 1987 limited series by Chris Claremont: the Fantastic Four versus the X-Men.

>In that series Sue discovers a book indicating that Reed planned the space flight deliberately to give the team powers, even though it might hurt them (as it did with Ben). Of course, Reed's early memory had been wiped in key areas in issue 255 (see FF272) so all he could go on was the evidence, and the evidence appeared to be damning.

>In the end it is suggested that Doom forged the document. Perhaps he did. But the point of the story was it was sufficiently believable that Reed thought it might be genuine.

File: FF-X-men-Doom2.jpg (71KB, 900x335px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 900x335px

>>87948617
>A footnote: did Doom really alter the diary?
>Reed says that every word was his, and only the order of events is wrong. So anything Doom did was very subtle. But did he do anything? Here is the evidence:

The he posts this pic here and continues:

>On the surface, of course he did... except he never said so. Usually Sue's intuition is reliable, but we saw at the end of act 4 that even that was in question. Perhaps the strongest evidence for Doom being innocent is his intense relaxed pleasure. That is the closest to a smile we have ever seen: he is almost laughing. Yet if he changed the diary then he has just been defeated, which would hurt his ego. Why is he so relaxed and intensely happy?

>If Doom tells the truth then he has the infinite satisfaction of knowing that he has the moral high ground over his greatest enemy. Nothing gives him greater pleasure. This is all part of Doom's growth as a character. being right is more satisfying than humiliating others (who then inevitably come back to defeat him). Doom has grown since issue 200 and before.

>Then why not simply say "you are wrong, Susan?" Because his ego does not need anybody's approval. Simply knowing that he is right is enough. Having Susan get it wrong merely adds to his self satisfaction: these people are wrong and cannot face the truth: he, Doom, is vindicated. Plus, having your enemies confused is always useful for later.

>That is all just speculation of course. The story also works if Doom changed the order of events: the significance of the story is simply that Reed could believe it now. Reed is finally able to see that he is not always right.

>>87944442
>it kind of reminds me of that whole star wars fan theory on jar-jar binks

That was fucking stupid, and it would never have a decent payoff under Lucas.

>>87946131
>87946131
But can robots do magic.

>>87948652
>Psylocke
>Chink
This can't be real.

>>87945338
Nah, Earth X was great. The sequels were bad.

>>87948827
>Every good comic AU

>>87948786
It came from the 15th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chink_in_one's_armor

>>87948741
Doom wills it to be so

>>87948786

That was when she was British

>>87948827
It gets really weird when you remember that Nextwave Aaron and X-51 are different incarnations of the same being. The one that learns under the Watcher to replace him against his will, falls into despair of the world when made to see it, and then determines to help his fellow Earthlings. Main continuity Aaron is one that is also burned out on humanity, but his rebound is still mid-process.

>>87949022

*anglo-british

>>87948786
She didn't swap bodies with a ninja assassin yet.

>>87949027
Doesn't everybody know that though? Earth X has never been canon, despite Marvel's recent obsession with alluding to it.

>>87944011
>Summary
>Skrulls (or something like them) may exist in the real universe.
I can barely get past the first line.

>>87949127

get the fuck outta here tripfag

>>87949127
They would be not detectable to Eathlings at current point based on what they would be able to do. At that point, does it matter to a human if Skrulls exist?

>>87949187
I wouldn't fuck a Skrull and I wouldn't fuck a red head. Eck eck eck!

>>87949214
No one is asking you do. What was the point of stating that?

>>87949274
>Does it matter blah blah blah
Well yes.

>>87949187
>>87949274
stop giving it attention

File: 1478220898922.gif (438KB, 239x282px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 239x282px

>>87944011
>Skrull is now in charge of rebuilding the omniverse

>>87949346
The "you" which composes all that you are was caused by viral Skrull DNA and current self has existed only under Skrull modifications since the before points did not exist, simply is remembered as happening.

>Follow links and end up Englehart's website.
>His descriptions of his works heavy focus on Mantis
It wasn't just a meme.

>>87949738
I WARNED YOU BRO
I WARNED YOU ABOUT THE MANTIS

>>87949815
And now she is going to be stuck everywhere because of being in a movie unless she gets killed off early and is a fakeout

>>87946181
>>87945958
>>87945773
Yeah it does seem a bit depressing thinking that The Fantastic Four "ends" on Englehart's run (and not even the better Englehart of the 70's, this is late 80's Englehart where we got New Guardians from) but I'm willing to reread this stuff with that guy's POV in mind to see how it turns out.

I'm not a big FFfan, but this is an amazeballs thread, and I would love to see Marvel do that.

What's the play now that Secret Invasion has come and gone?
The Skrull-as-whoever can't be in it for the good of the Skrull Empire, if they gave a damn about that they would have helped out during Secret Invasion somehow.
So what's their motivation beyond enjoying the Earthling superhero lifestyle?
There's got to be some big reason.

>"AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #545: “ONE MORE DAY” PART 4: after this, nothing will be the same for Peter Parker! The stakes have never been higher."

>A fan comments: "How many f***ing times have we heard "Brace yourself, Spidey fans, after this, nothing will be the same for Peter Parker", in the past 5 years?! Seriously!! Enough!!"

>Another example, a quote from Joe Quesada, editor in chief:

>NRAMA: Now let’s get to probably the subject of the week - the FF. First of all, can you tell us about the just-solicited Death in the Family one-shot, promising the death of Sue Richards? It reads, and we quote, “Not a dream, not a hoax”...So this is truly “in continuity” and she really buys it?

>JQ - Karl Kesel has created one of the best told in one FF stories in a very long time, and yes, unfortunately, there will be a death in the FF family and it is all in continuity. But here’s some Joe Fridays breaking news that the solicits don’t tell ya, and remember, you heard it here first: two of the FF die, not just one. Gone, goodbye, nevermore.

>A comment on what actually happened: "Sue Richards from our reality died, and then Johnny saved her, and it created a parallel universe. So, while they died, it didn't matter."

>So Marvel said there would be change. Then there was no change. Result: we don't trust Marvel.

Hot damn.

>>87945826
Huh, never made that connections, could be neat.

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-howto.html

>The formula after 1968

>After 1968 less effort went into each issue, with the result that the pace of change slowed down. More seriously, fear of change and the stretching timescale ate away at realism. The story still progressed, but at a slower pace and more effort was required to extract the gold.

>John Byrne gave the title a sales boost, and this is usually attributed to going back to how the characters were in the early days. However, Byrne's characters were nothing like the early days: his Reed had lost confidence, his Sue was more assertive, his Ben was no longer in conflict with Reed, and of course Franklin was around. The big difference was that Byrne increased the quota of "down to earth realism." His team were often see outside in ordinary streets, they wore wrinkled clothing, dealt more often with ordinary people, and so on.

>In general though, nobody could combine the ordinary with the amazing like Jack Kirby, and the pace of change was slower after 1968 so sales were lower. Then in 1989 realism took another hit as long term character development ended, realism became a low priority (see Sue's costume for example), and stories were all variations on old comics rather than being drawn from literature and the real world.

>>87950559
This is the problem with comicbook deaths.
Of course they're not permanent for any character that actually matters.
(sorry, Punisher's anonymous victim #357)
But creators have found an end-run around that in recent decades: the trick is to change the character, not drastically - because that just invites retcons, but enough that limiting their appearances and writing them out seems like a logical next step for readers to accept.
But even then you can't just vanish them, their fans will still be their fans, so those characters get shuffled around in the books.
It's not dead, but it is just as dramatic a change that actually does last.

>>87950699

>Perhaps the boldest example of what not to do was Heroes Reborn: whatever its claims to "incredible exploits," "down-to-earth realism" was abandoned completely.

>Some later writers injected a little realism: Waid, for example, showed Sue and Ben taking Franklin to Coney Island and his Latveria seemed down to earth, but mainly the team was divorced from the reader's reality. Hickman's FF for example, while generally praised for intelligent writing and sensitive character portrayals, features a polished team of wealthy professionals, who spend most of their lives talking, and very seldom interact with any world that the readers would recognize. The Marvel Knights series was an attempt to increase the level of realism, but was only slightly better: it was good to see Reed and Sue driving a normal car, but they still sent their son to a private school with a humanoid robot companion. "Down-to-earth realism" only goes so far. Coupled with the lack of a long term story and high priced decompressed stories, the bang per buck of the average comic is too low to compete with other media, and the long term literary value is even lower.

>>87949346

Is Carol one of the few not Skrulls bc of the Captain Mar Vell connection?

>>87950775
She's not even safe, Mar Vell came back as a Skrull.

>>87944011
How do Skrulls tell each other apart? If an army of Skrulls disguised themselves as a different alien species and invaded a planet populated by disguised Skrulls, do they false flag each other into participating in a war against each respective species?

>>87944011
What are the chances that a Marvel writer could stumble upon this theory or coincidently come up with a similar theory and decide to make a story that is comparable to both Marvel X and Marvels combined. The story could be seen as both an official beginning and end to the Marvel universe titled, "The Secret History of the First Invasion" for the beginning and "The Secret Civil War" for the end?

>>87950872
If they can: by way of an extra-sensory perception evolved in their species for this purpose.
But in all likelihood they can be fooled like any other, the Skrulls in the Secret Invasion storyline that were so deep cover that didn't even know they were Skrulls couldn't spot the other infiltrators in their midst.

>>87950984
hypercrisis

File: britt jaw drop.gif (124KB, 140x197px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 140x197px

>>87950984

>>87946361
It's a meme, you stupid redditor.

Anyone else got any more fanwank headcanons that could/should be true?

>>87950984
That thread was golden. Highlights included Yoda and the Super Skull being outed

>>87951138
"Judge me by my size, mMMmmh?..."

- not that big a surprise.

>>87951138
Found it

http://desuarchive.org/co/thread/81828155/#81836452

File: origtimeline[1].jpg (303KB, 1200x866px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1200x866px

Uh... guys...

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-2010-reboot.html

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-howto.html

>A dangerous myth: the "defining element"

>One approach to writing is to ignore the formula (which asks "where are the characters right now") and instead ask where they should be. In other words, the editor has some idea of the "defining element" or "core characteristic" of a character and works from that. For example:

>Q. "Do you have a greater responsibility to your creative team or to the characters?"
>A. "To the characters. Always the characters! They're the Bread and Butter of Marvel Comics. The characters are the most important thing we have. Each character has certain core characteristics. If a writer wants to come in and ignore or violate those characteristics, it's the editor's job to stop him or her."
>- Ralph Macchio, "Comics Creators on Fantastic Four" page 177.

>There are several problems with this position.

>The best stories came from ignoring this advice.
>Marvel's most successful time is when it had no characters (the early 1960s), or characterization evolved (the mid 1960s), or it lets the characters change radically (the New X-Men).
>Every novel needs character development: that's kind of the point. The core character must change or nothing really matters.
>The 'core characteristics' idea leads to Marvel Time, arguably the the cause of all Marvel's problems.
>Finally, we often identify something superficial and unimportant. This is from Tom Brevoort's blog, January 2008:

>"Most of the best comic book series are about something--something that may not factor into every single last adventure, but which is the underpinning of the series as a whole. Fantastic Four is about family. X-Men is about prejudice. Batman is about revenge. And Spider-Man is about youth. Youth is the element that defined Spider-Man back in the days when he was created, the thing that separated him from all of the other competing superhuman crime-fighters and made him unique."

>And yet...

>>87951563

>According to the comics themselves, the defining feature of Spider-man's life was "great power brings great responsibility."
>Responsibility is the opposite of youth. If anything, this argues for an older character, as age brings more responsibilities (such as family). Perhaps Marvel editors are lucky and their lives grow easier with age, and perhaps they have marriages that make their lives easier, but that might not be true for superheroes.
>Batman is not always about "revenge." What about the 1960s TV series? The core changes. Sure, we can say the title was misguided for decades, but future generations might say the same about us.
>If the Fantastic Four is about "family" then it was a polygamous one. In the first issues Ben and Reed were rivals for Sue's love, and she seriously considered marrying Namor. It was also a highly dysfunctional family: Reed undermined a strong adult until he acted like a child, and Reed and Sue lived in separate houses during the period of the greatest growth in popularity. The team is like a family, and the central issue revolves around three families (Reed and Sue, Ben and Alicia, and Johnny and Crystal) but that is all.

>To simply say the Fantastic Four is "about family" is very dangerous. It leads to terrible stories. It implies that Ben, once the greatest fighter of all and a tragic hero, should live as either a man-child or a kindly uncle. It further implies that their lives revolve around having dinner together. Those are precisely the two weaknesses that have destroyed the title since 1989.

>Characters must be allowed to grow naturally, so the "defining element" is the enemy of the great story.

>>87951563
" Youth is what defined Spider-Man..."
Yeah, which is why passing the Spider-Man torch to Miles works.
(or at least will work once the stories improve.)

The crazy thing is that that rule isn't limited to books - it's true for characters as well: Tony Stark (Iron-Man) is the guy who gets whatever he wants, even if he has to build it himself. Wolverine is the killer trying to escape his own past nature, Ben Grimm (The Thing) is toughened by a hard life, The Hulk can't control himself, Bruce Banner can't control himself, Doctor Strange went looking for a magic cure because he knows that anything is possible.... etc...

Once you get a bead on what defines a character they're easy to predict.

>>87951563
>he's a characterfag
Abandon ship

>>87951583
Spider-Man's "great power" lesson is about the aspect of youth that is learning right from wrong, Peter still has trouble with that to this day.
Batman's revenge isn't about succumbing to it, if it was he would have started killing people in bulk years ago, he's using the motivation of revenge to a different end: the pursuit of justice.
(and every Bat-fan wants to forget the '60s)
Family in the FF is a trap for writers, but only if your definition of family is limited, modern families accept all kinds of people as they are and only destroy themselves when members are forced to conform to limiting roles, The Invisible Woman's redefining of herself from an invisible woman to the family's most powerful member is a role reversal in tune with changing social dynamics in the modern world, Johnny's brother/uncle/buddy nature has also changed to allow more maturity in his character without abandoning his core "hothead" nature.

It can still work.

>>87951745
That's right, you flee the ship, you rat!
I'll be busy rearranging the deckchairs...

>>87951828
>(and every Bat-fan wants to forget the '60s)

That's a myth.

>>87951745
He's got a point though. Quesada's Marvel decided to ditch continuity but people started confusing story logic with continuity and ignored that too. It worked for a while in the 00's, but cracks gradually showed. Cracks that are more noticable this year.

>>87951862
These are comic discussions, myths are what we trade in.

>>87951828
>Spider-Man's "great power" lesson is about the aspect of youth that is learning right from wrong, Peter still has trouble with that to this day.

I think that's the problem, because it implies that he can't learn from his mistakes. And all this focus on "youth" being the defining element of Spider-Man is probably one of the reasons why we keep getting High School Spider-Man even though he originally only was in high school for like the first three or four years of the comic.

>Family in the FF is a trap for writers, but only if your definition of family is limited, modern families accept all kinds of people as they are and only destroy themselves when members are forced to conform to limiting roles, The Invisible Woman's redefining of herself from an invisible woman to the family's most powerful member is a role reversal in tune with changing social dynamics in the modern world, Johnny's brother/uncle/buddy nature has also changed to allow more maturity in his character without abandoning his core "hothead" nature.

I don't think he denies that they're technically a family. He just doesn't believe that it's the "defining element." It's like if you focus too much on Youth for Spider-Man you get another fucking high school Spider-Man and if you focus too much on Family for the Fantastic Four you get writers who just reset the clock on Johnny Storm and forget that he ever matured because he has to be the immature one.

>>87951563
>>Marvel's most successful time is when it had no characters (the early 1960s), or characterization evolved (the mid 1960s), or it lets the characters change radically (the New X-Men).

"Most successful" by what standard? I guess if you unironically think the Lee/Kirby stuff is somehow dogmatically "better" than anything afterwards? Even then I would easily pick Kirby from the 70s over stuff like FF which feels rough and unrefined by comparison.

And let's not kid ourselves here. Kirby was great, but his storytelling is dated and hokey when you look back at it now. So is Lee's dialogue.

>a cape comic
>the Great American Novel
Someone never read a book in his life?

>>87948261
FF is only the Great American Novel from 1961 to Inferno in 1991.

>>87954681
You need to condense your site. Either I've gotten a bad impression through reading stand alone articles, or it is a stunted mess.
Brilliant attention to detail, I have to say. You truly are a beautiful mind. I like what your operalisation of continuity: the continuation of stories towards an end state (not regressing to the status quo). It was something I could certainly agree with but you really put the pieces together episodic/one shot-> serial-> continuity.

>>87953828
>dismissing a suggestion outright based on nothing more than the medium

That's dangerous territory anon.

>>87951367

>The Great Reboot is not just a random story: it is a key part of Marvel's grand vision of everything.

Aaaaaaand that's where I have to check out. Marvel doesn't have a grand vision of anything.

>>87954681
Sorry, >1989

>>87954816
I don't think he means that every little move is calculated, just that Marvel is aware enough of that "prophecy" to be sort of working toward it.

Gives us all something to look forward to anyway.

>>87954736
Thanks for sucking my cock, but I'm not the owner of the site

File: Future Timeline02.jpg (2MB, 2437x724px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2437x724px

>>87954816
>>87954976
They followed that pretty closely.

>>87955287
>The grand reboot happened and the universe was remade mostly the same as it was before, just with even more holes

>>87955412
I didn't read Secret Wars. Has the dreaming Celestial been mentioned lately?

I'm around issue 225. Since issue 1, l wait 10 issues then l go to this site to read his analisis. He makes it all better and cohesive. Really l have never seen an actual counter argument to vos theories and the FF are my favorite group... So l stick with him. The UK FF headquarters (another site) is another good material to read alongside the series.

>>87946181
He indicates the moment continuity errors start to appear, thats why he marks that point as the ending. Its not only a bias, read his fucking analisis. He has read every FF issue after that and he had to suffer through bad characterizations, contradictions, reboots... It can't be the same universe

>>87946531
I mean people also forget that Claremont had a team, too. His best years had a lot to do with his editor and, yeah, Bryne. They weren't quite Stan and Jack as far as perfect teams go but often countered each other's weaknesses in their creative process.

>>87950984
You heard the man anyone who gets dubs in this thread is a skrull

File: this will be bad.jpg (32KB, 493x342px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 493x342px

>>87947417
>Ewing

>>87957375

There's something admirable in the forcing a No Prize when most people accept that stuff as price of admission.

>>87957956

Based Nocenti

>>87958265
t. Nocenti

>>87948852
>implying every 1602 comic wasnt good
>Implying Spider-Girl was bad

>>87955412

The Grand Reboot happened and NuMarvel is the result.

This is the future they built.

>>87957956
>and, yeah, Bryne. They weren't quite Stan and Jack as far as perfect teams go

Byrne was firing cheap shots at Claremont even when he started writing FF, so I'd say their partnership was definitely less amicable. Kirby would never have returned to Marvel around 75 if he'd had the super hostile relation with Stan that Chris and John developed while working on X-Men.

http://zak-site.com/Great-American-Novel/ff-2010-reboot.html

So how much of this has come to pass?

Soooooo. Reed is a Skrull and through applications of Skrull milk and hypnotism is responsible for every superhero on earth.

Are the people who have absolutely shitty powers people who accidentally received skrull milk?

>>87945568
Yeah, I can definitely agree there's a certain something that separates this from the Darth Jar-Jar shit like this anon >>87948702 said. Putting aside all the ways in which the Jar-Jar thing was a retarded theory just on its own merit, it shouldn't even get the no-prize consideration since it doesn't actually address any plot holes and in fact creates plot holes I'd say even Lucas is smart enough to avoid.

>Cracked
Cracked isn't even trying anymore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T0M4nm94t0

>>87952218
Johnny and Ben really deserve some love in general. Ben's jobbed for decades at this point, and Johnny's lost tons of his creativity and power because We Need To Push Sue For Summer Slam.

>>87958660
Oh yeah Bryne was always an ass, I'm just saying they worked well together. Claremont tends to get his head up his ass and Bryne is too dogmatic, the two kept those poor tendencies in check.

>>87961748
That's all you can hope for out of a good creative team.

>>87961748
>Stumps are difficult to pull out of the ground!
>Not for Colossus, he is really strong!
>YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW TOUGH IT IS TO PULL OUT A STUMP
>COLOSSUS IS A BIG METAL COMMUNIST WHO CAN PICK UP ANYTHING!

>>87959447

>1996: They tried a big flashy Image style reboot: didn't work.
>2000: They put old favorite Chris Claremont on the book (with a superb artist): didn't work.
>2004: They listened to Mark Waid's manifesto and let him shake the book up: didn't work.
>2008: They put heavy hitter Mark Millar on the book: didn't work.
>2010: They tried a writer known for his respect for the past and big, carefully planned plots (Hickman): it got some praise, but any sales recovery was small and temporary.
>2012: So after that they rebooted and tried light and fun: didn't work.
>2014: So they put another big name team on, rebooted again, and tried to to write something Big and Important: didn't work.

This is kinda odd. I'd thought Waid's FF did well in sales but I skimmed through various months and it was always around the 40,000s to 50,000s. Which is not bad, but I always thought it did better.

>>87965899
Also I should mention that if we're going by sales, Heroes Reborn FF actually did sell more than 100,000 each.

Heroes Reborn FF #1: 313,980
Heroes Reborn FF #2: 162,475
Heroes Reborn FF #3: 154,609
Heroes Reborn FF #4: 153,255
Heroes Reborn FF #5: 152,651
Heroes Reborn FF #6: 155,710
Heroes Reborn FF #7: 153,457
Heroes Reborn FF #8: 154,912
Heroes Reborn FF #9: 142,321
Heroes Reborn FF #10: 143,952
Heroes Reborn FF #11: 136,545
Heroes Reborn FF #12: 137,192
Heroes Reborn FF #13: 130,090

>>87955877
The dreaming celestial was dead long before secret wars.

>>87944442
>that whole star wars fan theory on jar-jar binks

Never heard of that. Can someone give me a TLDR version please?

>>87946131
So Doom is basically Skynet?

>>87966386
Short version is that Jar Jar is really pretending to be clumsy the way Yoda pretended to be a crazy old hermit, and manipulated events to turn Anakin to the dark side.

>>87953828
I don't know, going by his site he seems to be pretty damn literate. And not in the fake way like Noah Berlatsky or some other clickbait journalist "intellectual" hack might be.

>>87948239
>mostly mediocre writers

Don't most writers today that get into comics just see it as a stepping stone to Hollywood? So even if they were good they wouldn't give their all when writing something they didn't really care about. As for the writers that tried that and are still there a decade or two later, they're just not that good when they give their all.

>>87950399
Invisible pussy.

>>87966942
But you can't even see your semen floating around in her because of how it works
No fun.

>>87966386
Jar Jar is more than he looked like, was in fact a fantastically powerful sith force user, some say over palpy, some say under.

Jar Jar can do things and move in ways other gungans cannot. One of the first things we see him do is strike a pose similar to a Jedi centering pose then do a standing fifty foot double somersault. We never see any other gungan do anything like that. Things move strangely around him, like in the battle against the clones, almost like using the force to sense and misdirect things around him.

He also makes strange motions around people: some times he almost seems to be parroting peoples lines BEFORE they say them, and making jedi mind trick gestures before people do what he wants or stop noticing him being horrible. In the scene where he convinces the senate his body language and hand gestures look A LOT like a very exagerated version of Jedi mind trick hand movements.

His rise to power was meteoric and had no real reason. By all accounts amidala barely new him and didn't see him fight, would have been more likely to make one of the "boss" gungans or gungan generals the gungan senator.

His name is Jar Jar. He was named by George Lucas who has no sense of subtlety in the case of sith names- maul the warrior, (in)sideous the hidden overlord, tyranis the count. Jar means an unsuspected shock.

George Lucas is a hack. A lot of star wars is pretty much ripped of from the french comic book Valerian and the City of One Thousand Planets and the scifi classic Foundation series by isaac Asimov. In Foundation there is a character called "The Mule", a background comedy sidekick everyone should hate, but gets everywhere, is always present despite being irelivent and shares a lot of commonality with Jar Jar- The Mule ends up being the ultimate enemy that destroys the capital planet-city of the Foundation Federation.

Jar Jar physically looks like a human with a mules head. Not only that but he has yellow eyes Sith eyes.

>>87951828
>(and every Bat-fan wants to forget the '60s)

Why would I want to forget the thing that introduced me to Batman and DC as a whole?

>>87967053
Sorry, in the second paragraph "battle against the clones" should be "battle against the droids".

Two other things- in the scene in Padme's apartment in the second(i think?) movie he knows Anakin and Obi-wan turn up, he knew they were there before they reached the door or even knocked.

Also he seems to act differently when alone, from his very first apearance to that very scene in Padme's apartment, when we see him completely separate from others he quitely and almost reservedly and with almost an entirely different basic walking style.

>>87966386
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yy3q9f84EA

>>87967053
>>87967317
That is some crazy shit.

It seems to me that it's more logical that the FF as a concept just doesn't appeal to the people getting into comics anymore. it was a very silver age idea, like Kirby's Challengers of the Unknown, and it just didn't translate well to the changing tastes of the public.

It seems a better explanation than "Every writer since has failed to capture some mystical element which made everyone love the FF"

>>87951745
if you are still alive twentyish hours later

please kys
characters acting a certain way and iconography are very important to cape comics
also development is why they stopped being for children and became the realm of manchildren

>>87967651
>>87967363
>>87967053
>>87966386
heck I think Robot Chicken did a sketch inspired by that theory

>>87968052
That's even less logical. What's so Silver Age about it that can't be successful today?

>>87968052
I personally feel it's a lack of the fantastical. Doing outlandish and fantastical sci-fi was much more unique/original in it's heyday. Fast forward to nowadays and such things are everywhere and it seems to be extraordinarily difficult to actually make some new ground to explore and shove them in. It's all a been there done that quality from science fiction and science in general booming for several decades. They explored dimensions to the up, down, negative and positive, time traveled, Galactus came about from Kirby being told make the FF meet God,started towards the hollow earth and beyond. We and the FF need a truly gifted individual to show us something new to explore that we'd never imagined and keep doing it.

>>87971887
Pretty much this. In the silver age the F4 were constantly on the bleeding edge and it reflected the time they were created now.

Now we're in a time of stagnation, the only scientific progress you hear about is relegated to how small/efficient we can make our consumer products, and of course the marvel universe is threatened every other week by some outlandish danger... It seems difficult to find a place for them in our modern world.

Maybe they should set up shop on Mars? If they brought in the Martians it could make for some interesting stories about exploration and colonization. Although, it's a pretty big downgrade from being Eternity.

Speaking of, when are Eternity-Reed and Tribunal-Warlock going to bump into each other?

>>87971547
I have never read any Challengers of the Unknown, but I get exactly what they're talking about.
If you every find some random old loose silver age comics, no matter what the title: read them. And reading them in random order is best.
It's this whole trippy warped worldview experimental children's story simplified off-the-cuff headtrip quality made by writers who truly didn't care that you can't possibly set out to create deliberately.
And from that mix you get some true avant-garde art.

>>87972144
But that's not even what the Silver Age Fantastic Four were about.

>>87971887
I think in the site the guy argued that it's neccesarily the lack of the fantastical that's the problem, it's more like missing a contrast between the fantastical and the real is a problem.

>>87945948

Dude is totally bugfuck.

File: Fantastic Four Annual 6-Kirby-Annihilus.jpg (32KB, 249x232px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 249x232px

>>87971887
>>87972136

>tfw most recent acclaimed FF is Hickman
>who's all cutting edge into the future looking
>only it's all absolute terror

I like reading that guy's F4 site but it's organized so badly, it's like an autistic Yvette's Bridal Formal.

>>87978684
I'd love to Discourse(tm) about Fantastic Four with him sometime, he seems like a really cool guy.

>Why did nobody see evidence of superheroes before the 1930s? (The first Skrulls arrived in the early 1930s: see FF 91.)

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

>>87977115
>>87972559
>>87972144
>>87972136
>>87971887
>>87971547

>I think in the site the guy argued that it's neccesarily the lack of the fantastical that's the problem, it's more like missing a contrast between the fantastical and the real is a problem.

The contrast between the fantastical and the mundane is the basic friction upon which all superhero stories are built. It's not an argument to say that the lack of it is why the FF fell out of favor because it's nothing unique to them. Spider-Man becoming huge is directly a result of abusing this trope, and doing it in a way which audiences found a lot more appealing than the way the FF did it. It's not the lack of contrast between the fantastical and real that's sinking the FF, it's the fact that the respective components making up that balance for the FF are not as appealing as those of other Marvel properties.

In the specific case of the FF the "fantastical" during Lee and Kirby's run comes in the form of science fiction concepts which appealed to the early 60s love for space exploration and general air of idealism and belief in human progress. As the 60s became more self-conscious and trust in human and scientific advance to better mankind was replaced by cynicism and protest against the system, the FF and many similar comics themed around that kind of thing began to lose interest with readers. I lament this change in attitude too, but there's a reason that people got more interested in Peter Parker dealing with Harry Osborn becoming a junkie or his girlfriend being murdered by the Green Goblin than by Reed and company traveling to a new planet or inner space or whatever.

>>87945243
The No-Prize is a thing of beauty.

It's a publishing get-out clause that excuses production errors and actively involves readers in creating the worlds they read about. It rewards research, depth of knowledge and creativity above all else.

>>87949027
Nextwave Aaron is the same as 2020 Aaron, he's just been running for longer.

>>87950559
The problem here is in the reading of solicits. Solicits are for people with no sense of self control.

That said, all the solicits really say is "not a dream, not a hoax, in continuity" and "one of the FF dies". Well, one of them - two of them - die. The story delivered everything it promised in the solicit. Even he admits this: "while they died, it didn't matter".

Nobody ever promised it would matter, none of the contemporary solicits would have given the impression that it was a permanent change affecting other titles, no funeral special was promised, and last but by no means least it was a comic book story. The FF no less, products of an era in which the fakeout plotline was a means of selling a single-issue story to increasingly jaded fans.

>>87957375
To be fair, haven't Marvel come out and said this by this point? That post-Secret Wars is actually the eighth interpretation of the universe, meaning they've given a reason for all the reboots, bad characterisations and so forth?

It's skrulls all the way down

>>87958176
>You heard the man anyone who gets dubs in this thread is a skrull
The OP of this thread got dubs too.

>>87978811
So should we have Reed and the FF going around trying to get people, and namely the reader, into trusting science again? That cynicism leads to shit like people not vaccinating their kids.

>>87951265

I went all the way thru that.

Goddamn you.

>>87979087

Anti-intellectualism has been a basic driving movement in human culture for most of its history. Scientists are regarded as basically black magicians and blamed for whatever downside of the things they discover/create, totally ignoring the positive aspects that have vastly improved our way of life. But it has intensified since World War II, probably kicked off by the revelation of the atom bomb to the public. It became even more entrenched during the counterculture movement of the sixties and seventies and is still there today. It's pretty telling that Reed is often cast as evil or very misguided in comics that feature him as a central character in the last few decades. Civil War and Ultimate Reed immediately spring to mind.

I don't know how to make science awesome and something people trust again, honestly. It seems like a deeper psychological issue with humans

>>87978964
Wouldn't surprise me

>>87945640
I just imagine the "it's always a sunny" theme playing in your picture

>>87977115
Our over familiarity with all of the high concepts means there is less contrast by default. Immortal alchemists, mad monkey maniacal mesmer scientists, godlike beings, outer space , the negative zone, trying to raise Anthony Fremont properly, and so forth are all business as usual for us and the FF by now.
There's little to know no contrast between the fantastic and the mundane if the fantastic has become mundane to us.

While this guy brought up some good points, and is obviously very well read on nearly 30 years of FF history, I just can't completely take seriously (inasmuch as you can take any fiction-based theories "seriously") yet another person saying that Franklin Richards is altering the universe to stay a kid forever.

I seriously hate that theory.

And the Nathaniel Richards is Mr. Sinister/Sinister is a splinter entity from Nathaniel thing really made me laugh in how contrived it is.

But, the guy has obviously read everything from 1961 to 1991, at least, and some stuff beyond.

>>87945773
>Of course not to say that the DeFalco years weren't fucking awful, mostly. The man should have stayed an editor, or at the very least not touched the FF.

I think possibly the latter if only because he was EIC at the time and had to also deal with upper management making completely stupid decisions that led to Marvel's bankruptcy. I mean you can debate his writing quality before he became EIC and after he left that position, but I think it's probably no coincidence that his weakest stuff was around his EIC time.

>>87945640
Man I forgot about when they changed the font for the text at Marvel.

>>87951981
honestly great rebuttal, but the bat-sixties were a good time

>>87983725
I mean the Franklin shit makes as much as sense as anything else.

He made me pro-talking Lockjaw so there's that.

>>87991223
For an in-universe explanation it works well enough. But ultimately it's purely because now the characters are brands, and any changes can negatively affect merchandising, licencing or what have you.
I personally love the theory, mainly because I want the FF to be more important to the overall universe.