Agents of SHIELD - Season 2 Discussion Threads. (Spoilers Likely)

[Turtletrekker]

I really enjoyed it too, and you are correct about the sales. IIRC, Hickman once said that his initial outline for the book was 60 issues, but he had to tell the story in 36 because of the sales.

SHIELD #7 was fun, but I had to chuckle at a few things. It seems that one of the major goals of the story was to bring the character "Daisy" from the comics to be more in line with the character "Skye" from the TV show. Aside from the aforementioned sudden resemblance between comics Cal and Kyle Maclachlan, Daisy is suddenly half-Inhuman and Coulson has given her the nickname "Skye" because...

Cal: "What did you call her a minute ago? 'Skye'?"

Coulson: "It's a nickname. She spends most of her mission time these days in outer space."

Cal: "You have a pet name for my daughter. How sweet."

I fully expect future issues to establish Daisy's mad computer skills, and that she will slowly but surely start to resemble Chloe Bennet.

Next issue: May and Mockingbird!

 

[JD]

I wonder how much people will complain about that?
Some of the comic sites I go to have done stories about how comic fans are getting frustrated by the movies and TV shows starting to influence the comics more and more.
I can kind of see some of the frustration, but at the same time I can kind of see Marvel wanting to give the people like me who come into the comics from the shows and movies more stuff that they will recognize.

 

[kirk55555]

The only problem is that, from what I've heard/read, movies/TV shows never raise the number of comic readers significantly, no matter how much the comics change to match the other stuff. I'm personally on the fence about changes. Sometimes its hilariously pointless (Spider-Man in the comics got organic powers for about a minute to match the Raimi movies, but it was poorly received and I don't think they even wrote them out, they just pretended it never happened).

I'm fine with new characters being added like Phil Coulson, and some D-list characters getting facelifts like Mister Hyde. Still, the Daisy Johnson "Skye" nickname was so completely shoehorned in it was actually pretty awkward, and in general movie/TV based changes aren't usually for the better (the current SHIELD book generally being an exception).

 

[Reverend]

I wonder how much people will complain about that?
Some of the comic sites I go to have done stories about how comic fans are getting frustrated by the movies and TV shows starting to influence the comics more and more.
I can kind of see some of the frustration, but at the same time I can kind of see Marvel wanting to give the people like me who come into the comics from the shows and movies more stuff that they will recognize.

It's not like it's a new phenomenon either. Though it took a little bit longer, DC started brought in a lot of elements from the Timm/Dini cartoons into continuity. Not just Harley Quinn, but Montoya, their version of Mr Freeze, Mercy and a bunch of villains (mostly female for some reason IIRC) from the Superman show. Suffice to say there's a whole slew of things about established characters in the comics that were changed as a reaction to their (more popular) animated versions.

I think I read somewhere a few years ago that they even introduced Chloe from Smallville of all things, though I have no idea if that was a one-off or if they've continued to use the characters.

So yeah, I'm sure Marvel are making a concerted effort to bring the comics more in-line with the IP's currently popular incarnation. Why wouldn't they? It's good business and from a creative standpoint, I gather the world of these giant comic book continuities is getting stilted as one might expect.

Not for the first time either. I gather this same problem was partly why they launched the "Ultimate" universe in the first place, which then went on to heavily influence the movies. In a way, this latest trend is just bringing things full circle.


....Also, wasn't Jimmy Olsen originally from the 40's radio show?

 

[Christopher]

Some of the comic sites I go to have done stories about how comic fans are getting frustrated by the movies and TV shows starting to influence the comics more and more.

"Starting?" It has always been thus. I mentioned how Jimmy Olsen and Perry White came from radio (along with kryptonite, Inspector Henderson, and Superman's iconic catchphrases -- while the Daily Planet came from the newspaper comic strip and Superman's power of flight came from the animated shorts). Comics have always borrowed from their mass-media adaptations, simply because those are more popular, and the comics want to appeal to the new readers that the shows and movies bring them.

The whole reason The Death of Superman and Reign of the Supermen happened was that Lois and Clark postponed the wedding of Clark and Lois on TV, and the comics editors wanted their wedding in the comics to happen around the same time, so they needed to come up with a storyline that would postpone the wedding. And before that, the reason Supergirl changed to curly hair and a headband in the early '80s (the look she had when she died in Crisis on Infinite Earths) is because the makers of the Supergirl movie experimented with that as a potential costume design and DC adopted it, assuming it was final.

And didn't The Incredible Hulk send Bruce Banner hitchhiking across the country while the Bill Bixby series was on the air? I'm not as sure about that one, but I have that impression.

 

[The Old Mixer]

The comic emphasized Banner as a vagabond in those days, but his travels tended to be more global, and initiated by the Hulk (Banner waking up in whatever part of the world the Hulk put him in).

 

[nx1701g]

I think I read somewhere a few years ago that they even introduced Chloe from Smallville of all things, though I have no idea if that was a one-off or if they've continued to use the characters.

That's true. They started trying to bring her in in 2008, but there were multiple issues and her debut in the comics wasn't until 2010. When she joined the comics she was Jimmy Olsen's girlfriend.

She hasn't been around recently to my knowledge.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I wonder how much people will complain about that?
Some of the comic sites I go to have done stories about how comic fans are getting frustrated by the movies and TV shows starting to influence the comics more and more.
I can kind of see some of the frustration, but at the same time I can kind of see Marvel wanting to give the people like me who come into the comics from the shows and movies more stuff that they will recognize.

As someone who can be annoyed at overhauls to match comics, I have no problem with Coulson calling Daisy Skye. Making her an Inhuman bothers me slightly, but not significantly. Daisy's not a significant enough of a character for me to be upset.

Let's keep in mind that Alfred became skinny because of the movie serials of the time and other changes have followed (Mr. Freeze being an example where I doubt anyone can disagree it was for the best). Plenty of changes are just fine.

The Wanda and Pietro thing bothers me because it contradicts a lot of things and seems like it was done because of rights issues rather than story issues (in any medium).

 

[Reverend]

I wonder how much people will complain about that?
Some of the comic sites I go to have done stories about how comic fans are getting frustrated by the movies and TV shows starting to influence the comics more and more.
I can kind of see some of the frustration, but at the same time I can kind of see Marvel wanting to give the people like me who come into the comics from the shows and movies more stuff that they will recognize.

As someone who can be annoyed at overhauls to match comics, I have no problem with Coulson calling Daisy Skye. Making her an Inhuman bothers me slightly, but not significantly. Daisy's not a significant enough of a character for me to be upset.

Let's keep in mind that Alfred became skinny because of the movie serials of the time and other changes have followed (Mr. Freeze being an example where I doubt anyone can disagree it was for the best). Plenty of changes are just fine.

The Wanda and Pietro thing bothers me because it contradicts a lot of things and seems like it was done because of rights issues rather than story issues (in any medium).

I'm not sure, but wasn't the bit about Wanda & Pietro being Magneto's children a retcon in the first place? Regardless, certain aspects of comic book continuity has always been somewhat fluid and again, this is hardly the only time rights issues have influenced creative decisions.

Indeed, if it wasn't for copyright shenanigans we wouldn't have Carol Danvers. Nor She-Hulk and Spider-Woman if memory serves.
The former of course exists as a spin-off from Mar-Vell, a character created purely to prevent DC from ever publishing the old Fawcett Comics Captain Marvel character in a book with that title after they let the rights to the name lapse.
Similarly, the latter two were invented specifically to stop anyone from making female derivative versions of Hulk and Spider-Man by laying claim to those names.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Wanda and Pietro's original retcon was a retcon that wasn't that old. It led to something like 40 years of them being Magneto's children, including a story called Son of M that only makes sense if Pietro is a mutant.

I think there's a huge difference between trying to create a character so they can use a copyright and not being able to adapt their own comics because they can't use a copyright. The former invites creative opportunities and the worst case is it's a stupid idea to get a right. The latter limits creative opportunities and the best you hope for is you come up with something in spite of it. But the more important thing is, the movies limit themselves out of necessity. The comics are deliberately cutting off their hand to follow suit.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

As a subscriber of The Avengers back in the day (the only comic book I ever had mailed to my house), and collector of X-Men, current and back issues, both with and without the original line-up, I don't give two whits who the Scarlet Witch's and Quicksilver's father was. It didn't make a whole heck of a difference; it didn't even make much difference that they were brother and sister. They were rarely together, and they had even less to do with Magneto. Quicksilver hung with the Fantastic Four and the Inhumans. Magneto fought the X-Men. Scarlet Witch ran with the Avengers. Most of the time, it was like they were in three separate worlds.

Where Pietro will be missed in the MCU, assuming he stays dead, will be if Crystal appears among the Inhumans, since Pietro and Crystal married in the comics and that was a big deal back in the day. It was even an Ultron issue, FF #150. At least it was a big deal for me, because that was one of the first comic books I ever bought.

Honestly, though, besides the sentimental attachment, I thought their marriage was a significant storyline, because even though Pietro was a powered mutant who fit in among the Inhumans, his wedding with Crystal was still a metaphor for interracial marriage. It was obvious enough that eight-year-old me picked up on it.

 

[Reverend]

Wanda and Pietro's original retcon was a retcon that wasn't that old. It led to something like 40 years of them being Magneto's children, including a story called Son of M that only makes sense if Pietro is a mutant.

I think there's a huge difference between trying to create a character so they can use a copyright and not being able to adapt their own comics because they can't use a copyright. The former invites creative opportunities and the worst case is it's a stupid idea to get a right. The latter limits creative opportunities and the best you hope for is you come up with something in spite of it. But the more important thing is, the movies limit themselves out of necessity. The comics are deliberately cutting off their hand to follow suit.

I'd call this an opportunity too.
For one thing it's made the Inhumans a hell of a lot more prominent and provide a much more plausible (by comic book logic standards) reason why a random person would mutate the ability to teleport, regenerate tissue, defy the laws of mass an energy by splitting into multiple copies or cause earthquakes with their minds other than "natural random mutation" or "next stage in evolution."

To me this enriches the MCU's lore overall while still allowing they to use the civil rights persecution/bigotry allegories that are normally associated with the X-Men.For their part, if the comics start to fuse these two concepts together then we may find ourselves with a "New Mutants" style X-Men movie in all but name made by Marvel before long (that might even be what they're doing with the Inhumans movie.)

Also worth remembering that we probably wouldn't even have an MCU without these rights not all belonging to Marvel. People forget now, but back when the made Iron Man, he was a second stringer and pretty obscure to non-comic book readers. Thanks to them not being able to make their own X-Men or Spider-Man movies, that character along with the likes of Thor and Cap have had their profiles raised considerably in the public consciousness.

 

[DWF]

Wanda and Pietro's original retcon was a retcon that wasn't that old. It led to something like 40 years of them being Magneto's children, including a story called Son of M that only makes sense if Pietro is a mutant.

I think there's a huge difference between trying to create a character so they can use a copyright and not being able to adapt their own comics because they can't use a copyright. The former invites creative opportunities and the worst case is it's a stupid idea to get a right. The latter limits creative opportunities and the best you hope for is you come up with something in spite of it. But the more important thing is, the movies limit themselves out of necessity. The comics are deliberately cutting off their hand to follow suit.

I'd call this an opportunity too.
For one thing it's made the Inhumans a hell of a lot more prominent and provide a much more plausible (by comic book logic standards) reason why a random person would mutate the ability to teleport, regenerate tissue, defy the laws of mass an energy by splitting into multiple copies or cause earthquakes with their minds other than "natural random mutation" or "next stage in evolution."

To me this enriches the MCU's lore overall while still allowing they to use the civil rights persecution/bigotry allegories that are normally associated with the X-Men.For their part, if the comics start to fuse these two concepts together then we may find ourselves with a "New Mutants" style X-Men movie in all but name made by Marvel before long (that might even be what they're doing with the Inhumans movie.)

Also worth remembering that we probably wouldn't even have an MCU without these rights not all belonging to Marvel. People forget now, but back when the made Iron Man, he was a second stringer and pretty obscure to non-comic book readers. Thanks to them not being able to make their own X-Men or Spider-Man movies, that character along with the likes of Thor and Cap have had their profiles raised considerably in the public consciousness.

The mutants in the comics have been out in the open ever since the first issue of the X-Men, the racial angle came later on. But on AOS the Inhumans and any other super powered people have been kept a secret.

Really though for all the attempts to say otherwise AOS continues to be a commerical for the MCU movies. Had the show been styled after the comic book it'd a show closer Alias or Mission:Impossible. By creating an Inhuman storyline on the show it meere allows people some understanding of them before the movie comes out and it's likely the movie won't fit in with what people know about the Inhumans based on AOS.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

^ I agree it made the movies stronger, but I disagree with the idea that it makes the comics stronger. Unlike movies where you can only make a handful a year, you release dozens of comics every year (and usually a sequel to the previous character's comic every month). And the Civil Rights analogy just doesn't work as well with the Inhumans as it does with mutants. Mutants are part of humanity but considered separate. There's a coming out period around puberty where they realize they're a mutant. There's the whole concept of "passing" where some mutants look like "normal" people while others don't.

Where Pietro will be missed in the MCU, assuming he stays dead, will be if Crystal appears among the Inhumans, since Pietro and Crystal married in the comics and that was a big deal back in the day. It was even an Ultron issue, FF #150. At least it was a big deal for me, because that was one of the first comic books I ever bought.

Honestly, though, besides the sentimental attachment, I thought their marriage was a significant storyline, because even though Pietro was a powered mutant who fit in among the Inhumans, his wedding with Crystal was still a metaphor for interracial marriage. It was obvious enough that eight-year-old me picked up on it.

The analogy to interracial marriage is part of the reason I was terrified the retcon was going to make him an Inhuman. Thankfully, it didn't. Although I don't recall any true opposition to the marriage that you'd expect for an analogy. Even the royal family didn't seem to have a huge problem with it, at least in the issues where it happened. Only Johnny Storm did, but that was for other reasons.

However, I do have to point out that Quicksilver and Crystal's marriage got annulled after Quicksilver killed an Inhuman and stole the Terrigen Crystals with the intent of using them to restart the mutant race. He did this because he lost his powers after his sister caused 90% of mutants to lose their powers. The story did a pretty good job of showing him becoming like Magneto where he would take extreme actions for the protection of mutants. Before I'll be OK with the retcon, I feel they have to explain how this story can still fit.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The mutants in the comics have been out in the open ever since the first issue of the X-Men, the racial angle came later on.

Not that much later. Hank and Bobby ran into their first angry anti-mutant mob in X-Men 7.

ETA: And the term "Homo-Superior" was coined in the very first issue.

 

[DWF]

The mutants in the comics have been out in the open ever since the first issue of the X-Men, the racial angle came later on.

Not that much later. Hank and Bobby ran into their first angry anti-mutant mob in X-Men 7.

ETA: And the term "Homo-Superior" was coined in the very first issue.

True but at first they were seen as heroes and Prof. X had a goor relationship with the military after they stopped Magneto in the first issue.

 

[Gaith]

So Civil War comes out next year, and apparently Spidey will already be operating within that story's time frame... and they just hired a relative nobody as Peter Parker.

So, how awesome could it be if MCU Peter's first appearance was on an AoS? Maybe even before his bite, if he was interning at OsCorp and they found some way to organically write him into a story? I highly doubt it'd happen, of course, but a fan can dream...

 

[Christopher]

^It depends on whether Marvel signs Holland to a contract that includes a TV commitment -- something most of the actors' agents managed to avoid, since they want their clients to be paid extra for doing TV appearances. So it depends on how good an agent he has, I guess.

I'm not sure Marvel would want their new Spidey's first appearance to be on TV rather than a movie, though. Not enough of an event. We might get some degree of foreshadowing in the show, though -- references to the Daily Bugle, perhaps, or a mention about some guy showing up on late-night talk shows and doing wall-crawling tricks.

 

[Gaith]

^ Well, sure, of course it'd be a contractual matter.

But with Evans, Downey, ScarJo and all the many others, it's not as though Civil War's b.o. success isn't completely inevitable.

And yeah, I'd be damn surprised if we didn't get a few S3 mentions of Spidey and maybe the Bugle and/or OsCorp at the very least.

 

[Christopher]

And yeah, I'd be damn surprised if we didn't get a few S3 mentions of Spidey and maybe the Bugle and/or OsCorp at the very least.

Come to think of it, they might be better off avoiding mentions of OsCorp. It's been this overriding, dominant threat in the movies, and certainly in the Webb films, but it's not that all-encompassing in the comics. Sure, Norman Osborn is Spidey's arch-nemesis and one of the top villains of the Marvel Universe, but he's not the end-all and be-all of Spidey's rogues. There's a ton of stuff going on that isn't about OsCorp. So if Marvel wants the MCU Spider-Man to feel distinct from his cinematic predecessors -- which is something that I think they probably do want where the Webb films in particular are concerned -- they'd be well-advised to downplay OsCorp.