Atleast it is a different person and not pulling a 'fem' Loki again.
Meh, Marvel already fucked Thor up by making him a blonde rather than a redhead so I'm not too bummed out
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45398494]Breast shaped breastplates don't give me boner but if that's how you roll.[/QUOTE]
Direct character attacks are a bad argument
If it's not there for sex appeal(it is though), what's wrong with making it actually practical?
Even lorewise, sex appeal on an [I]Asgardian warrior[/I] is a dumb idea
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;45398536]Direct character attacks are a bad argument
If it's not there for sex appeal(it is though), what's wrong with making it actually practical?
Even lorewise, sex appeal on an [I]Asgardian warrior[/I] is a dumb idea[/QUOTE]
Because not everything about lore, it's about what people who read comic books want to see.
the best part of this is that a black woman finds the hammer and turns into white lady thor
so clearly the most powerful version of a black woman is a white woman
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;45398552]Because not everything about lore, it's about what people who read comic books want to see.[/QUOTE]
If you want to see sex appeal, watch porn. I don't understand why objectification should leak into every form of media.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;45398536]Direct character attacks are a bad argument
If it's not there for sex appeal(it is though), what's wrong with making it actually practical?
Even lorewise, sex appeal on an [I]Asgardian warrior[/I] is a dumb idea[/QUOTE]
I see nothing wrong with it being either practical or impractical. Designers chose tit shape plate and I am okay with their decision because I do not get awkward boner while reading comics unlike some seem to.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;45398571]If you want to see sex appeal, watch porn. I don't understand why objectification should leak into every form of media.[/QUOTE]
Uh, not everything is so black and white. Some people obviously want to see sexually objectified women without having to watch porn.
Spiderman did this briefly right before a more important sequel came out, so realistically it's probably them pandering to fans. (Case in point, they announced this on the View). Whenever Age of Ultron drops they'll make him manThor (if it hasn't happened by then)
It does have potential to be pretty cool, though. What if there was a concurrent series going on where we followed a now (more or less) homeless Thor who doesn't have his hammer or really any claim that he's actually THOR. Would he still be an Avenger? Who knows.
People have passed themselves off as Thor before. Stormstrike went by Thor while the real Thor was fucking around doing god knows what, so it's possible.
Either way it's really fucking dumb but it's probably a gimmick and they'll be done with it in a month or two, this has happened before.
but... Chris Hemsworth.
Why can't they use Valkyrie or someone else from Norse mythology to focus on. It doesn't always have to be Thor.
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;45398582]Uh, not everything is so black and white. Some people obviously want to see sexually objectified women without having to watch porn.[/QUOTE]
I totally understand why in a business sense it's okay but morally it seems pretty gross to cater to that kind of person (to me, at least)
[QUOTE=Domokun;45398590]Why can't they use Valkyrie or someone else from Norse mythology to focus on. It doesn't always have to be Thor.[/QUOTE]
Because name sells. Who the hell is Valkyrie? Everyone knows Thor.
Regardless of boob-cupping armor and SJW accusations, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just make a new character, or use an old one. It's not like there's a shortage of underused female characters that could be awesome if well-written. Writing a good new one couldn't be that hard either.
I think the only logical reason they wouldn't just make a new character/reuse and old one that's female instead of gender-swapping Thor, is because they're afraid to take a risk with a new character. Of course, that logic falls through a bit when you notice that they're willing to take the risk of disregarding the ancient Norse mythology Thor originates from by making him female.
Besides, from what I know as a somewhat-educated layman, I don't think it's really that damn hard to write a good, original female character. Just write a well-rounded and dynamic character, and then only factor in gender into their personality/story/backstory if it has strong significance.
You can make a female character effeminate, kind and possibly even sexually-minded without turning them into helpless T&A attached to a latex-wrapped coat rack. Likewise, you can make them strong, intelligent and self-sufficient without making them look and act like men in wigs.
It's not that difficult. Just write people, neither predominantly male nor blatantly female, and then factor in gender only when it's important and significant to the character and story. If you try to make it all about the gender first and foremost, you get Schwarzenegger-esque hulking idiot men and sex-obsessed eye candy women. It just doesn't work well, mainly because most people in reality are defined by their personality and history, rather than what anatomical bits do or don't wobble/hang low.
[QUOTE=TurboSax;45398604]
You can make a female character effeminate, kind and possibly even sexually-minded without turning them into helpless T&A attached to a latex-wrapped coat rack. Likewise, you can make them strong, intelligent and self-sufficient without making them look and act like men in wigs.
[/QUOTE]
Why even make them effeminate? Is it now wrong to be feminine?
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;45398029]To make sure people know she's a girl[/QUOTE]
Actually because viking women have always been portrayed with the breasts actually being pronounced on their body because they're fucking gods and goddess. They're supposed to be the epitome of the human form.
Its the same issue Smite had when they first released their characters and everyone blew the horn that the women were too sexualized when half of the art depicting them was either naked or nearly naked.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/VdbBm7t.jpg[/IMG]
the [I]unworthy[/I] thor
These images were drawn by the same guy who also drew these (Esad Ribic)
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/us2m6As.jpg4[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/rgSs7XR.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MmQERHD.jpg[/IMG]
My primary beef here though isn't that its a chick weilding the hammer, its that she's still being called Thor. Thor wasn't a title, it was his fucking given-at-birth name.
boob armor just looks so bad ugh
[QUOTE=itisjuly;45398623]Why even make them effeminate? Is it now wrong to be feminine?[/QUOTE]
..What? Unless I phrased something wrong, which is entirely possible because I'm an idiot 95% of the time, I don't think I implied there's anything wrong with femininity.
I'm just trying say it's fine to make well-written female characters effeminate, without turning them into overly-sexualized eye candy. Likewise, I'm pretty sure I said it's fine to make them tough and intelligent, as well as non-effeminate, without making them into what are basically men in wigs.
Once again, disclaimer, I tend to word things badly by pure accident, sorry if I did.
I really don't see why people have a problem with this
hey guys
don't be picking on my beta ray bill!
[QUOTE=TurboSax;45398745]
Once again, disclaimer, I tend to word things badly by pure accident, sorry if I did.[/QUOTE]
Nah I get it now. I thought you were implying things you were not.
[QUOTE=TurboSax;45398604]Regardless of boob-cupping armor and SJW accusations, I can't help but wonder why they didn't just make a new character, or use an old one. It's not like there's a shortage of underused female characters that could be awesome if well-written. Writing a good new one couldn't be that hard either.
I think the only logical reason they wouldn't just make a new character/reuse and old one that's female instead of gender-swapping Thor, is because they're afraid to take a risk with a new character. Of course, that logic falls through a bit when you notice that they're willing to take the risk of disregarding the ancient Norse mythology Thor originates from by making him female.
Besides, from what I know as a somewhat-educated layman, I don't think it's really that damn hard to write a good, original female character. Just write a well-rounded and dynamic character, and then only factor in gender into their personality/story/backstory if it has strong significance.
You can make a female character effeminate, kind and possibly even sexually-minded without turning them into helpless T&A attached to a latex-wrapped coat rack. Likewise, you can make them strong, intelligent and self-sufficient without making them look and act like men in wigs.
It's not that difficult. Just write people, neither predominantly male nor blatantly female, and then factor in gender only when it's important and significant to the character and story. If you try to make it all about the gender first and foremost, you get Schwarzenegger-esque hulking idiot men and sex-obsessed eye candy women. It just doesn't work well, mainly because most people in reality are defined by their personality and history, rather than what anatomical bits do or don't wobble/hang low.[/QUOTE]
Instead of chalking up a random woman hero, they're taking a well-respected and adored male hero and making him a woman, mainly to show that there's absolutely no reason to value female heroes less than male ones. If they made yet [I]another[/I] powerful female superhero no one would bat an eyelid, she'd be largely ignored. But by taking an existing (and pretty fucking huge) hero and making him female, it brings more attention to the idea and any nerds who hate the change can be called out properly for their sexism (more or less, since there's a fine line in this case between sexism and not liking the sudden change).
They're saying that anyone, even a woman, can be worthy of the power to wield Mjolnir
[editline]15th July 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;45398694]My primary beef here though isn't that its a chick weilding the hammer, its that she's still being called Thor. Thor wasn't a title, it was his fucking given-at-birth name.[/QUOTE]
The inscription reads "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor"
So, in this case, Thor is being used as a title rather than a literal name.
[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;45398949]Instead of chalking up a random woman hero, they're taking a well-respected and adored male hero and making him a woman, mainly to show that there's absolutely no reason to value female heroes less than male ones. If they made yet [I]another[/I] powerful female superhero no one would bat an eyelid, she'd be largely ignored. But by taking an existing (and pretty fucking huge) hero and making him female, it brings more attention to the idea and any nerds who hate the change can be called out properly for their sexism (more or less, since there's a fine line in this case between sexism and not liking the sudden change).
They're saying that anyone, even a woman, can be worthy of the power to wield Mjolnir
[/QUOTE]
but muh mythological 100% accurate comic books
[QUOTE=Daemon White;45397744]....And this is a real thing.
I feel disappointed though. At least it's not a genderbend / genderswap. It's a new person wielding the hammer, but what the fuck happened that the original Thor couldn't use it anymore?
[editline]adbnjksaea[/editline]
I mean, Thor is male. Viking traditions and legends have always shown Thor as male. The comic book character has been male for over 50 years now. We already have a female lightning character (Storm, X-men)! I really hope this is a joke...[/QUOTE]
I don't really think they've ever given a shit about Norse traditions. They depicted Asgard as some kind of techno-heaven, and then it gets invaded by spaceships and they defend it with spaceships. They also have energy shield doors, so on.
Norse mythology has always been a very loose theme for Thor :v:
[QUOTE=BigJoeyLemons;45398949]
The inscription reads "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor"
So, in this case, Thor is being used as a title rather than a literal name.[/QUOTE]
Which is what bugs me. They never took his name before, why now?
[QUOTE=Gentry;45398796]I really don't see why people have a problem with this[/QUOTE]
Thor is based on a male character.
Thor is a male name.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;45398014]I think her shattering her sternum with the first attack to hit her armor is a big price to pay to let dudes objectify her tbh
[url]http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/05/boob-plate-armor-would-kill-you[/url][/QUOTE]
Something shaped like Samus Aran's armor could do the trick
[img]http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/937/937335/hero-showdown-samus-aran-vs-lara-croft-20081210010401141-000.jpg[/img]
Does this affect the movies in any way? :suicide:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.