|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 3, 2021 14:09:54 GMT -5
The new series has amazing art, an overly convoluted story, the needless inclusion of Thanos, and a relevation that taints everything about the Eternals and ruins them as characters,
I thought Mark Gruenwald's retcon of Thanos (that he was a mutant Eternal rather than half-Greek god / half-alien) to be pointless and obnoxious, however it does place the character directly in the Eternals camp so his inclusion makes sense.
(although really, if they're going to do that, they ought to make good use of Eros/Starfox as well)
(not that I love the character so much, especially after he was redefined as a mind manipulator, but as Thanos' brother he really ought to have a higher profile)
Yeah, Thanos is fit into the Eternals Myhtos in the new series, I still found it pointless.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Nov 3, 2021 14:33:20 GMT -5
Tried reading the Peter Gillis/Sal Buscema maxi-series but didn't get very far, just didn't find the storyline compelling enough to continue - although oddly it kind of resembles what i've seen of the movie plot - Ikaris trying to get the gang back together (in this case the handful of Eternals still around) to fight a Deviant navy that came outta nowhere (weird since last i recall the unimind had towed all the Deviant "matter" (now rearragned into a cube) after them into space. The Gaiman series is probably the one i like the least, though. I don't care for his take on the Eternals, in particular i really dislike the notion that the Celestials created Deviants as a food source (?), it just removes all their majesty and mystery and makes them just giant slobs imo. Beyond that, the pacing and structure of Gaiman's story just don't work for me. Feels like we are being set up for an epic battle but in the end it is instead setting up a new status quo, presumably for future writers to work with. But it felt like this new status quo was quickly abandoned. I like a lot of Gaiman's comic work but this one was a miss for me. I agree that the Gaiman series seemed like a set up for...something. It didn't really deliver in the end.
I'd be interested in reading the Gillis series as I have really liked his work on other titles like The Defenders and Micronauts.
|
|
|
Post by bashbash99 on Nov 3, 2021 15:40:22 GMT -5
I thought Mark Gruenwald's retcon of Thanos (that he was a mutant Eternal rather than half-Greek god / half-alien) to be pointless and obnoxious, however it does place the character directly in the Eternals camp so his inclusion makes sense.
(although really, if they're going to do that, they ought to make good use of Eros/Starfox as well)
(not that I love the character so much, especially after he was redefined as a mind manipulator, but as Thanos' brother he really ought to have a higher profile)
Roger Stern did have Eros interact with the Eternals during his run, and had in join in the uni-mind although i think he said he didn't care to repeat the experience. So i suppose it was inevitable that once Marvel decided that other writers besides Starlin could use Thanos that he would end up squaring off against the Eternals sooner or later. Maybe back in the day that might have felt exciting but Thanos is just too overused at this point imo. Also i think Starfox did show up at the beginning of one of the more recent GotG runs (they start over so often its hard for me to keep track). Memory's a bit hazy but i think he assembles a huge group of cosmic heroes, because while Thanos is ostensibly dead, Eros is sure he'll come back somehow. And he does indeed return, in a somewhat ironic fashion.... but if you're a Starfox fan you will not like how it turns out. I didn't, anyhow. I have enjoyed some of Kieron Gillen's writing in the past (on Journey into Mystery etc) and imo he is a writer who can do mythological stories so on paper he seems like a good fit for Eternals. But the 1st issue didn't really draw me in and having Thanos show up in subsequent issues is a real turn off, for me.
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Nov 5, 2021 11:29:49 GMT -5
I'm not so much a Starfox fan per se. I liked him better when it was assumed women all fell for him because he was such a gorgeous dude. I wondered whether he was actually the mythological Eros and thought something could have been done with that.
I never thought he was all that interesting as an Avenger, particularly, just … a guy who shouldn't be forgotten about when doing space epics.
Thanks for the warning though!
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 10, 2021 0:25:26 GMT -5
I never really took to Starfox, or to any of Starlin's Titanians. Collectively, they always felt to me like a somewhat sketchy background for Thanos's origin story, for the most part. I didn't actively dislike them, but they never captured my imagination - even the one character I did grow to like, Moondragon, only came to life for me when Englehart started using her in his Avengers run.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 10, 2021 0:38:14 GMT -5
I thought Mark Gruenwald's retcon of Thanos (that he was a mutant Eternal rather than half-Greek god / half-alien) to be pointless and obnoxious, however it does place the character directly in the Eternals camp so his inclusion makes sense.
(although really, if they're going to do that, they ought to make good use of Eros/Starfox as well)
(not that I love the character so much, especially after he was redefined as a mind manipulator, but as Thanos' brother he really ought to have a higher profile)
Roger Stern did have Eros interact with the Eternals during his run, and had in join in the uni-mind although i think he said he didn't care to repeat the experience. So i suppose it was inevitable that once Marvel decided that other writers besides Starlin could use Thanos that he would end up squaring off against the Eternals sooner or later. Maybe back in the day that might have felt exciting but Thanos is just too overused at this point imo. Also i think Starfox did show up at the beginning of one of the more recent GotG runs (they start over so often its hard for me to keep track). Memory's a bit hazy but i think he assembles a huge group of cosmic heroes, because while Thanos is ostensibly dead, Eros is sure he'll come back somehow. And he does indeed return, in a somewhat ironic fashion.... but if you're a Starfox fan you will not like how it turns out. I didn't, anyhow. I have enjoyed some of Kieron Gillen's writing in the past (on Journey into Mystery etc) and imo he is a writer who can do mythological stories so on paper he seems like a good fit for Eternals. But the 1st issue didn't really draw me in and having Thanos show up in subsequent issues is a real turn off, for me.
I'm sure that was the thinking behind the hiring of Gillen to write an Eternals book and also of Gaiman before him: unfortunately neither writer found any kind of rapport with Kirby's series and thus produced some of the poorest work either of them has ever done. Not entirely their fault, since the worst aspects of their versions result from the nature of the assignment they were given, but for me they went above and beyond in some respects: e.g. Gaiman making the Eternals programmed robot lackeys to the Celestials; or Gillen making Thena an emotionally immature girl (albeit hundreds of thousands of years old) blindly obsessed with her current love affair, whoever it happens to be with.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 10, 2021 8:48:01 GMT -5
Berkley, I doubt either Gaiman or Gillen were given assignments, both pick the projects they want to do. They probably wanted to take this title on because of their love for Kirby. Not that your assessment is wrong about the results. And I believe you mean Sersi, not Thena having love affairs.
|
|
|
Post by bashbash99 on Nov 10, 2021 9:19:52 GMT -5
I think Berkley is correct in that the fact that neither of these mythology-oriented writers could tell a good Eternals story* really speaks to how difficult the task is when these characters are forced to be part of the ongoing 616.
*have only read the 1st issue of Gillen's series so i can't speak to how his run was a whole, although dragging Thanos into the title doesn't encourage me to read more issues. ANd i'm sure many would argue that Gaiman's story is good although the consensus here seems to be that it doesn't quite work (my opinion as well).
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 10, 2021 9:37:32 GMT -5
Berkley, I doubt either Gaiman or Gillen were given assignments, both pick the projects they want to do. They probably wanted to take this title on because of their love for Kirby. Not that your assessment is wrong about the results. And I believe you mean Sersi, not Thena having love affairs.
Yes, I didn't mean to imply that they were full-time Marvel employees who had no choice but to accept an assignment they were given but simply that they were approached by Marvel with the proposal to do an Enternals series, which they or course accepted. IOW, it wasn't an idea they came up with themselves and brought to Marvel. If you read interviews with either writer regarding work, it's clear that neither had thought much about Kirby's Eternals before accepting the assignment. Gillen, for example, says he was familiar with it mainly through seeing the Celestials in some 1980s Marvel comics.
And I understand why you or anyone who's read the Kirby series would think I must be referring to Sersi, but unfortunately it really is Thena that Gillen portrays in this way in his current Eternals series. Yes, I know, it's hard to believe a writer of his calibre could get something so basic to the character so very wrong, but you can probably find the comic in question online to see for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Nov 10, 2021 11:13:30 GMT -5
The Eternal's problem can be summed up by "new" writers NOT following Kirby's premise and their feeling the "NEED" to make their own changes to HIS mythos. While Eternals does work better outside of the MU, it can work just as well as part of the MU. Place it on the fringes with minimal connections or place them full on into the thick of things. BUT you have to maintain what has come before, informing what we already know and have read while staying true to their characters.
Instead we get things like oh, look at my great idea that Celestials are created by using worlds as "eggs" (Not a bad idea at all, just not what Kirby meant) or the Eternals are preprogrammed cosmic "robots" as tools of the Celestials. We get Thena the promiscuous, Sprite the "evil" killer, Ikaris the dumb insensitive no longer a protector and hero to humanity and so forth. In the movie, Deviants are now not a part of the equation/solution to Celestial appearance but just predators, killing everything in sight (from what I see in trailers) now.
It used to be publisher/editorial mandate to NOT significantly alter what was already printed and consider ADDING to the existing characters WITHOUT ignoring or destroying them. Now EVERY hero or villain is nearly unrecognizable at times as each new writer places THEIR ideas with importance over the established mythology. You can add depth and richness without ruining things. Just take into account what is already there in a series from the ORIGINAL CREATOR(s) and don't ignore it. Play with it, respect it and tweak it but don't shit in the sandbox thereby ruining it for others.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 10, 2021 20:39:37 GMT -5
Berkley, I doubt either Gaiman or Gillen were given assignments, both pick the projects they want to do. They probably wanted to take this title on because of their love for Kirby. Not that your assessment is wrong about the results. And I believe you mean Sersi, not Thena having love affairs.
Yes, I didn't mean to imply that they were full-time Marvel employees who had no choice but to accept an assignment they were given but simply that they were approached by Marvel with the proposal to do an Enternals series, which they or course accepted. IOW, it wasn't an idea they came up with themselves and brought to Marvel. If you read interviews with either writer regarding work, it's clear that neither had thought much about Kirby's Eternals before accepting the assignment. Gillen, for example, says he was familiar with it mainly through seeing the Celestials in some 1980s Marvel comics.
And I understand why you or anyone who's read the Kirby series would think I must be referring to Sersi, but unfortunately it really is Thena that Gillen portrays in this way in his current Eternals series. Yes, I know, it's hard to believe a writer of his calibre could get something so basic to the character so very wrong, but you can probably find the comic in question online to see for yourself.
I am reading the current Gillen book. I guess I missed that while questioning so many other aspects of the book.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 10, 2021 23:49:50 GMT -5
Yes, I didn't mean to imply that they were full-time Marvel employees who had no choice but to accept an assignment they were given but simply that they were approached by Marvel with the proposal to do an Enternals series, which they or course accepted. IOW, it wasn't an idea they came up with themselves and brought to Marvel. If you read interviews with either writer regarding work, it's clear that neither had thought much about Kirby's Eternals before accepting the assignment. Gillen, for example, says he was familiar with it mainly through seeing the Celestials in some 1980s Marvel comics.
And I understand why you or anyone who's read the Kirby series would think I must be referring to Sersi, but unfortunately it really is Thena that Gillen portrays in this way in his current Eternals series. Yes, I know, it's hard to believe a writer of his calibre could get something so basic to the character so very wrong, but you can probably find the comic in question online to see for yourself.
I am reading the current Gillen book. I guess I missed that while questioning so many other aspects of the book. Totally understandable: there are so many things wrong with the Gillen book it's hard to know where to start. But the basic problem is, as Brutalis mentions, a basic lack of interest in the Kirby series. Gillen is more taken up with the Gaiman Eternals, the Jason Aaron Eternals, possibly the Infinity Gauntlet/War Celestials, etc. I get the impression he never read the Kirby series until he accepted the job of writing this new series, and when he did read it, he saw it through the lens of those later versions.
Gaiman may have read it beforehand, I forget now, but it was clear in his interviews that he didn't rate it highly. Both he and Gillen appear to see little in it apart from a bunch of random ideas Kirby threw at the wall to see which would stick. IOW, they don't see much underlying structure or meaning to the concept - whch is in part why they feel free to pick and choose random elements without regard to how they are related to one another or how they fit into the basic scheme behind it all - they don't think there is one, to speak of - and also to change them without regard to the core elements of the characters or the overall concept. It's all more or less a blank slate to them, so they proceed to write on it anything they feel like - and anything that helps them meet the specifications of the job they were given to do by Marvel, which was to make the Eternals fit into The MU, no matter what it takes. Both Gaiman and Gillen were very clear about this last point in their interviews.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 11, 2021 0:16:16 GMT -5
The Eternal's problem can be summed up by "new" writers NOT following Kirby's premise and their feeling the "NEED" to make their own changes to HIS mythos. While Eternals does work better outside of the MU, it can work just as well as part of the MU. Place it on the fringes with minimal connections or place them full on into the thick of things. BUT you have to maintain what has come before, informing what we already know and have read while staying true to their characters. Instead we get things like oh, look at my great idea that Celestials are created by using worlds as "eggs" (Not a bad idea at all, just not what Kirby meant) or the Eternals are preprogrammed cosmic "robots" as tools of the Celestials. We get Thena the promiscuous, Sprite the "evil" killer, Ikaris the dumb insensitive no longer a protector and hero to humanity and so forth. In the movie, Deviants are now not a part of the equation/solution to Celestial appearance but just predators, killing everything in sight (from what I see in trailers) now. It used to be publisher/editorial mandate to NOT significantly alter what was already printed and consider ADDING to the existing characters WITHOUT ignoring or destroying them. Now EVERY hero or villain is nearly unrecognizable at times as each new writer places THEIR ideas with importance over the established mythology. You can add depth and richness without ruining things. Just take into account what is already there in a series from the ORIGINAL CREATOR(s) and don't ignore it. Play with it, respect it and tweak it but don't shit in the sandbox thereby ruining it for others.
Yeah, agreed on all scores. I think it comes down to a basic contempt for the original: they don't see anything much there, just a few borrowed ideas, like Von Daniken's Gods as ancient astronauts, that Kirby was playing around with at random. They don't see any underlying meaning or structure to the original, so they think they have to create one of their own - and since their number one priority, the specific task they are being paid by Marvel to do, is to make the Eternals fit into the superhero MU, they borrow tried and true concepts from the MU more than from the Kirby Eternals.
So to Gaiman, as to most other MU writers, the Celestials are just a race of Galactuses (Galacti?): giant aliens who threaten the earth in one way or another, enemies to be fought and defeated by earth's superpowered defenders. and of course once you start from that premise, there are consequences for everything else - which for Gaiman and Gillen, end with the Eternals being programmed constructs of the Celestials, designed to do their bidding - because otherwise, why wouldn't they oppose the Celeistials like any self-respecting superhero would?
I've been reading the Jamie Delano Constantine the last few months, and what a complete contrast it makes to the Eternals: because it's obvious on every page, every panel, every line of dialogue that Delano studied the Alan Moore Constantine, thought about it, and did his best to write stories that reflected his vision of Moore's character. Not to siply repeat what Moore did, but to take his understanding of that character and build on it, develop it - without contradicting the basic idea behind the original, and without pretending that there never was much to that original idea apart from a trenchcoat, an English accent, and a cocky attitude.
I'm not suggesting that Gaiman and Gillen didn't do any thinking or didn't put in any time reading the Kirby series: I know they did those things. So why then was the result so different to Delano and Constantine? I think, #1, their priorities were different: their job wasn't to write the best Eternals series they could - i.e. to look at Kirby's series, figure out what it was all about, nail down the core elements of both the over-all concept and the individual characters - but rather to integrate the Eternals into the MU in a convincing way, no matter what; and #2, they just didn't see much of value in the Kirby series, they didn't know what to make of it, it didn't speak to them except on the most superficial level (trenchcoat, blonde hair, attitude).
I imagine Gillen and Gaman would both disagree with one thing I'm saying: that they didn't try to figure out the characters: I think they made a conscientious attempt to do this and I can see the signs of their efforts, but they continually get it wrong in the most obvious ways because of that basic lack of rapport with the Kirby series as a whole, that basic view of it as a slight, sketchy thing, with lots of blank spaces to fill in and faint lines to be erased at will. Then there are other things I imagine they'd acknowledge upfront because it's straight from their interviews. And there are yet other things I suspect that both guys would agree with - if you talked to them off the record.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Nov 13, 2021 19:28:19 GMT -5
Good News!
The Eternals by Jack Kirby - all the issues in digital format - is on sale at ComiXology for $7!
I’m not sure I need to own it but that’s a pretty good bargain, even if it ends up being one more thing cluttering up my digital library.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Nov 13, 2021 20:11:30 GMT -5
Good News! The Eternals by Jack Kirby - all the issues in digital format - is on sale at ComiXology for $7! I’m not sure I need to own it but that’s a pretty good bargain, even if it ends up being one more thing cluttering up my digital library. It's Kirby KRACKLE, not clutter! Besides, ANY KIRBY is worthwhile in digital or paper.
|
|