|
Post by Nowhere Man on Nov 28, 2021 20:52:46 GMT -5
Having read Kirby’s Eternals and New Gods it’s clear that both concepts were devised by Kirby as if they existed in a creative vacuum even if he knew he’d be forced to place them in the Marvel and DC universe and that’s the problem with both. It’s not that both can’t work in those contexts, superhero universes are big genre stews, it’s that Kirby’s vision was so unique that only consistent maintenance and care would have given them the attention they needed long term. Going years mining them for ideas and supporting roles and trying to fully revive them every decade or so hasn’t worked. As it stands, arguably only the Celestials, Darkseid and Thanos (who wasn’t even part of Kirby’s original vision) has had a lasting impact in a general sense.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 29, 2021 2:39:46 GMT -5
Having read Kirby’s Eternals and New Gods it’s clear that both concepts were devised by Kirby as if they existed in a creative vacuum even if he knew he’d be forced to place them in the Marvel and DC universe and that’s the problem with both. It’s not that both can’t work in those contexts, superhero universes are big genre stews, it’s that Kirby’s vision was so unique that only consistent maintenance and care would have given them the attention they needed long term. Going years mining them for ideas and supporting roles and trying to fully revive them every decade or so hasn’t worked. As it stands, arguably only the Celestials, Darkseid and Thanos (who wasn’t even part of Kirby’s original vision) has had a lasting impact in a general sense.
Yes, and I see that the latest development in Gillen's series is that Thanos kills Zuras with contemptuous ease and is now Prime Eternal. IOW, the best rôle Gillen can think of for the Eternals is to make them followers of a non-Kirby character that as you say, was never part of Kirby's vision, has nothing to do with Kirby or his creations, and for me should not even be part of the conversation. But when you read the Gillen series it's obvious from how the dialogue suddenly comes to life whenever Thanos makes an appearance that that's the character he really wants to write - and not the Eternals, who are mis-characterised, downplayed, and degraded at every turn. The ridiculous ease with which an important character like Zuras is swept from the stage tells me what Gillen thinks of the whole thing.
For me, hiring someone like Gillen or Gaiman before him to do the Eternals is like hiring someone who's never heard of Sherlock Holmes - and doesn't like the character much when they do read it - to write a Sherlock Holmes book. Maybe he or she's the best writer in the world, but if they're uninterested in the subject matter they aren't likely to produce anything much of value.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Nov 29, 2021 11:28:07 GMT -5
Having read Kirby’s Eternals and New Gods it’s clear that both concepts were devised by Kirby as if they existed in a creative vacuum even if he knew he’d be forced to place them in the Marvel and DC universe and that’s the problem with both. It’s not that both can’t work in those contexts, superhero universes are big genre stews, it’s that Kirby’s vision was so unique that only consistent maintenance and care would have given them the attention they needed long term. Going years mining them for ideas and supporting roles and trying to fully revive them every decade or so hasn’t worked. As it stands, arguably only the Celestials, Darkseid and Thanos (who wasn’t even part of Kirby’s original vision) has had a lasting impact in a general sense.
Yes, and I see that the latest development in Gillen's series is that Thanos kills Zuras with contemptuous ease and is now Prime Eternal. IOW, the best rôle Gillen can think of for the Eternals is to make them followers of a non-Kirby character that as you say, was never part of Kirby's vision, has nothing to do with Kirby or his creations, and for me should not even be part of the conversation. But when you read the Gillen series it's obvious from how the dialogue suddenly comes to life whenever Thanos makes an appearance that that's the character he really wants to write - and not the Eternals, who are mis-characterised, downplayed, and degraded at every turn. The ridiculous ease with which an important character like Zuras is swept from the stage tells me what Gillen thinks of the whole thing.
For me, hiring someone like Gillen or Gaiman before him to do the Eternals is like hiring someone who's never heard of Sherlock Holmes - and doesn't like the character much when they do read it - to write a Sherlock Holmes book. Maybe he or she's the best writer in the world, but if they're uninterested in the subject matter they aren't likely to produce anything much of value.
I’m trying to remember the last time Thanos was a good character. Marvel Two-In-One Annual #2 maybe?
|
|
|
Post by dabellwrites on Nov 29, 2021 14:17:28 GMT -5
I'm on issue 17 of Kibry's epic. And wow! What a book. It's in every sense epic. Kirby is true visionary who was stuck telling a story that should've been a graphic novel. The Etenals will probably never get the true praise it deserves. I'll probably finish the series today and go see the movie tomorrow. Then maybe read Gaiman's story and wait for Gillen's on MU (Marvel Unlimited). Yes, I stated Kirby is, because his legacy lives on and he is probably more popular than ever. Anyways, the uni-mind pages was chef's kiss.
Correct me if I am wrong, but would you guys say that the main theme of the book is unity? It read like that was Kirby was telling us. We need to come together despite our differences. Kro and Thena's storyline mirrors Johnny Storm and Crystal. A forbidden love. We had the monster who wasn't a monster. A man who was beautiful but was actually a monster. Both are Deviants creations living in Olympia. Seems to me he was placing the pieces together for a much grander storyline. Sadly, we'll never see it come to fruition.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 29, 2021 14:39:19 GMT -5
Yes, and I see that the latest development in Gillen's series is that Thanos kills Zuras with contemptuous ease and is now Prime Eternal. IOW, the best rôle Gillen can think of for the Eternals is to make them followers of a non-Kirby character that as you say, was never part of Kirby's vision, has nothing to do with Kirby or his creations, and for me should not even be part of the conversation. But when you read the Gillen series it's obvious from how the dialogue suddenly comes to life whenever Thanos makes an appearance that that's the character he really wants to write - and not the Eternals, who are mis-characterised, downplayed, and degraded at every turn. The ridiculous ease with which an important character like Zuras is swept from the stage tells me what Gillen thinks of the whole thing.
For me, hiring someone like Gillen or Gaiman before him to do the Eternals is like hiring someone who's never heard of Sherlock Holmes - and doesn't like the character much when they do read it - to write a Sherlock Holmes book. Maybe he or she's the best writer in the world, but if they're uninterested in the subject matter they aren't likely to produce anything much of value.
I’m trying to remember the last time Thanos was a good character. Marvel Two-In-One Annual #2 maybe? Sounds about right, although he was all right in The Death of Captain Marvel, too.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Nov 29, 2021 14:55:52 GMT -5
I’m trying to remember the last time Thanos was a good character. Marvel Two-In-One Annual #2 maybe? You know, it's always struck me as remarkable, that, although Thanos is a corporate-owned character... after Jim Starlin (his creator) KILLED him off in MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE ANNUAL #2, that, for about 15 years, NOBODY brought him back. It was a really rare example of creator respect... or something.
And then, when Thanos finally was brought back from the dead, it was Jim Starlin who did it, in his very first issue of SILVER SURFER, following a long and I daresay "classic" run by Steve Englehart. (Well, it started out great, after a year, due to editorial interference, it dipped a bit, but NOWHERE NEAR as far down as other books Englehart was doing at the same time.)
I followed that all the way with Starlin, as he spawned what was, frankly, an insanely-overlong storyline that, eventually, led to no less than 3 separate but inter-connected COMPANY-WIDE CROSSOVERS. I couldn't shake the feeling that, while it wasn't terrible, the fact that it went on and on and ON so long over so many issues and loosely-related crossover books, that it was all just about THE MONEY. Starlin wasn't really interested in writing Silver Surfer... it was always Thanos.
After the 3rd "Infinity" crossover, I gave up. Over the years since, I've repeatedly heard stories about Starlin having falling-outs with Marvel, then patching things up, then falling out again, and along the line, other writers doing Thanos.
I suppose my feeling is similar to how I felt about DAREDEVIL, in the wake of Frank Miller writing the gut-wrenching "BORN AGAIN" 8-parter. Which was... I could just about barely put up with Frank Miller TOTALLY DESTROYING Matt Murdock's life and putting it back together again, but only because it was Frank Miller. The moment he left the book, I stopped buying... and HAVE NOT bought an issue of DAREDEVIL since. (And boy, that's a LONG time ago now.) I put up with Miller. I WASN'T going to put up with anybody else doing that.
Regarding Thanos and The Eternals... well, Thanos was originally part of the GREEK GOD pantheon. I kinda liked that. Given that Jack Kirby's THOR mixed mythology and SCIENCE-FICTION, it was kinda cool in a bizarre way to have the Greek gods treated similarly. Why NOT have a purely sci-fi "branch" of the Greek pantheon?
Whoever decided that Thanos and his relatives were ETERNALS, it somehow was a slap in the face to both Jim Starlin AND Jack Kirby at the same time.
Never mind that, to almost anyone who's paying attention, from the start, Thanos was a SWIPE of Darkseid. Now there's a character that has, in my opinion, NEVER-- NEVER!!-- been written properly, since Kirby.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Nov 29, 2021 19:41:16 GMT -5
Thanos was excellent in Starlin's Thanos Quest and the Infinity Gauntlet (NOT the crossovers in other series), but it all became a cash grab after that, I agree. In retrospect as much as I love Starlin's Surfer run, it was merely a vehicle for Thanos and to a lesser extent Adam Warlock. To his credit Starlin did some excellent character work on the Surfer in the issue that delved into detail about his past, particularly the tragic end of his father.
I think the Eternals being modeled after the Greek gods, while interesting, has led some writers to view them as disposable and cheap knock offs.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 29, 2021 20:42:21 GMT -5
Personally, I think the Thena-Kro "romance" is misunderstood: the whole point to me is that she rejects it and assumes guardianship of the Reject and Karkas. But everyone loves the idea so much that they ignore what actually happens in the story and build this great romance that never actually took place, that was in fact explicitly cut off by Thena - and not to chase after some other romance with someone else, which is what Gillen's Thena does over and over again: to him it's her sole raison d'être. This is a problem, since her character is central to the whole Eternals scheme of things.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Nov 29, 2021 21:06:59 GMT -5
Personally, I think the Thena-Kro "romance" is misunderstood: the whole point to me is that she rejects it and assumes guardianship of the Reject and Karkas. But everyone loves the idea so much that they ignore what actually happens in the story and build this great romance that never actually took place, that was in fact explicitly cut off by Thena - and not to chase after some other romance with someone else, which is what Gillen's Thena does over and over again: to him it's her sole raison d'être. This is a problem, since her character is central to the whole Eternals scheme of things. Personally I see Thena/Kro as a kind of reverse doomed romance. Kro is the eternal tempter, always grasping for what he WANTS but can't have in his desire to POSSESS and OWN without understanding Love must be GIVEN and not taken. Thena rejects Kro realizing all the above while still being tantalized and intrigued with him. Thena then takes on the ultimate mother and mentor role with the hope of turning the beautiful yet horrific Reject and monstrous yet soulful Karkas into true brothers for releasing their truest, brightest and most spiritual potential. To grow BEYOND their physical and emotional limitations so their growth proves the Celestial experiment worthwhile. Therefore saving Earth and ALL her inhabitants. Possibly to even showing Kro he is wrong about Deviant heritage and showing him the pathway for personal growth and change of. That he may accept, expand and embrace all HE can be and thereby becoming a Love she can allow herself to finally know.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Nov 29, 2021 21:12:25 GMT -5
Ugh. It sounds like Kirby’s successors seldom failed to pick the least interesting option.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 29, 2021 21:53:17 GMT -5
Personally, I think the Thena-Kro "romance" is misunderstood: the whole point to me is that she rejects it and assumes guardianship of the Reject and Karkas. But everyone loves the idea so much that they ignore what actually happens in the story and build this great romance that never actually took place, that was in fact explicitly cut off by Thena - and not to chase after some other romance with someone else, which is what Gillen's Thena does over and over again: to him it's her sole raison d'être. This is a problem, since her character is central to the whole Eternals scheme of things. Personally I see Thena/Kro as a kind of reverse doomed romance. Kro is the eternal tempter, always grasping for what he WANTS but can't have in his desire to POSSESS and OWN without understanding Love must be GIVEN and not taken. Thena rejects Kro realizing all the above while still being tantalized and intrigued with him. Thena then takes on the ultimate mother and mentor role with the hope of turning the beautiful yet horrific Reject and monstrous yet soulful Karkas into true brothers for releasing their truest, brightest and most spiritual potential. To grow BEYOND their physical and emotional limitations so their growth proves the Celestial experiment worthwhile. Therefore saving Earth and ALL her inhabitants. Possibly to even showing Kro he is wrong about Deviant heritage and showing him the pathway for personal growth and change of. That he may accept, expand and embrace all HE can be and thereby becoming a Love she can allow herself to finally know. Yeah, I think that's basically the idea: the Reject and Karkas are the future, the potential for the Debiants to become something more and better than they have been. Kro has shown signs of that potential as well, which is why Thena was interested in him: but he blows it because he's still too invested in the old Deviant ways as reflected and embodied in the Deviant political structure, the overblown royal hierarchy, and especially the system that labels some Deviants "Rejects" - and then kills them in the arena or simply has them hauled off to something that feels disturbingly similar to the Nazi gas chambers.
Kro is part of all that - and not reluctantly: he believes in it, at some level, even if he is at bottom most likely quite cynical about certain things, e.g. kowtowing to Great Tode. But the very worst of it, the Arena, the Reject system, etc, that he beleives in. So it's pretty vital to the entire concept that Thena does reject Kro - and thus it's all the more depressing that Gillen's Thena would almost certainly not do so: Gillen's version would be blinded by love and fail to see what needs to be done, IOW the exact opposite of Kirby's character, one of whose defining characterisitcs is that of all the Eternals - in fact, or all the characters period - she is the only one who sees what needs to be done - and does it. How on earth Gillen managed to miss all this boggles the mind.
I suppose it wouldn't be outside the bounds of possibility that much later on there might have been an arc for Kro to redeem himself and rekindle the romance that never was, but for myself, I don't see it as a good fit for Thena's character, notwithstanding how popular the idea has been with fans and writers to give her a romance or marriage of some kind or other.
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Dec 1, 2021 12:33:21 GMT -5
Regarding Thanos and The Eternals... well, Thanos was originally part of the GREEK GOD pantheon. I kinda liked that. Given that Jack Kirby's THOR mixed mythology and SCIENCE-FICTION, it was kinda cool in a bizarre way to have the Greek gods treated similarly. Why NOT have a purely sci-fi "branch" of the Greek pantheon? Whoever decided that Thanos and his relatives were ETERNALS, it somehow was a slap in the face to both Jim Starlin AND Jack Kirby at the same time.
I liked it too, and for precisely that reason: the Asgardians had been modernised and updated by Lee & Kirby, while the Olympians always seemed frozen in time. This was an opportunity to update the Greek pantheon without doing so in a way which contradicted Marvel continuity (aside from the possibility that Eros was .. well … Eros … which was never gone into).
Mark Gruenwald trashed all that.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 5, 2021 1:22:35 GMT -5
Regarding Thanos and The Eternals... well, Thanos was originally part of the GREEK GOD pantheon. I kinda liked that. Given that Jack Kirby's THOR mixed mythology and SCIENCE-FICTION, it was kinda cool in a bizarre way to have the Greek gods treated similarly. Why NOT have a purely sci-fi "branch" of the Greek pantheon? Whoever decided that Thanos and his relatives were ETERNALS, it somehow was a slap in the face to both Jim Starlin AND Jack Kirby at the same time.
I liked it too, and for precisely that reason: the Asgardians had been modernised and updated by Lee & Kirby, while the Olympians always seemed frozen in time. This was an opportunity to update the Greek pantheon without doing so in a way which contradicted Marvel continuity (aside from the possibility that Eros was .. well … Eros … which was never gone into).
Mark Gruenwald trashed all that.
I suppose that if Marvel had taken that route and said that the Eternals were the ancient Greek Gods of the MU it wouldn't be too far off what the MCU has done with the Asgardians. I thnk it would take some highly creative thinking to make it work, and it would also kill the idea that the MU gods were actual gods in some sense, not just super-powered immortals or near-immortal aliens or what have you - and one could argue that this was kind of what happened to the Asgardians in Roy Thomas's Celestials saga in Thor, so perhaps it's an inevitable outcome of bringing a strong version of the Eternals concept into the MU: the pantheons are something less than they had been previously. And in Thor, it was really only a strong version of one element of the concept, the Celestials, since in hindsight the Eternals themelves weren't given much to do and didn't seem particularly impressive, even if they weren't actively degraded as they have been in other MU versions.
This may make it sound as if something, either the Eternals or the MU, has to suffer if the two are brought together, and that therefore MU writers have no choice but to downgrade the Eternals, but if there's any truth to this idea, I think it's been taken to crazy extremes in every MU-Eternals appearance I've seen since the Kirby series, and always, with the partial exception of Thomas's Celestials in Thor, at the expense of the Eternals.
|
|
|
Post by dabellwrites on Dec 5, 2021 3:18:57 GMT -5
Thanos was excellent in Starlin's Thanos Quest and the Infinity Gauntlet (NOT the crossovers in other series), but it all became a cash grab after that, I agree. In retrospect as much as I love Starlin's Surfer run, it was merely a vehicle for Thanos and to a lesser extent Adam Warlock. To his credit Starlin did some excellent character work on the Surfer in the issue that delved into detail about his past, particularly the tragic end of his father. I think the Eternals being modeled after the Greek gods, while interesting, has led some writers to view them as disposable and cheap knock offs. The only Eternals modeled after the Greek Gods are Zuras, Thena, Markkari, and Sersi. During the Uni-Mind pages, we learned the Eternals are all over the world. They're like men, they're diverse. African Eternals, Japanese Eternals, and Norse. Ikaris is related to the Norse Eternals (Kirby once again combining his love of Greek and Norse).
Now, this begs the question: How do they mate? Kirby never once mentioned how they were born. I remember a page mentioning that Zuras is father of them all, but only Thena is considered his child. Zuras is the oldest Eternal after all, so that would make some sense? But, there's no mention of Zuras being a husband.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Dec 9, 2021 12:32:01 GMT -5
What's WORSE that trying to FORCE-FIT Jack Kirby's THE ETERNALS into the MU?
Simple-- trying to FORCE-FIT a REALLY AWFUL version of "The Eternals" into the MCU, one that has nearly-nothing in common with the EPIC story that Jack Kirby wrote so well in the mid-1970s.
"The Critical Drinker" does his usual spot-on thing:
|
|