Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Its like changing the color of someones cape from red to blue.

Oh look another gender....

That won't change anything. Now if you killed thor and had a female replace him, that would be interesting. And you know. Stop making your main characters ressurectable.

How many women have been Thor (held the hammer) before?

 d-usa wrote:
How many women have been Thor (held the hammer) before?

One. I think.

Although Reds8n already beat me to it, I already burned through all of my "They're replacing Thor" outrage back in 1983, when he lost his job to an undocumented alien, AKA "the only cool Thor in the comics, ever"

Zond wrote:

Anyway this is like the hullabaloo over Idris Elba being Heimdall. Pointless.

The problem is that a lot of people seem to think that god in comic = actual Northern god. This just ain't the case. They share the same name and loosely a similar backstory, but they aren't the same. Heimdall, for example, is a totally different character. Starting with his apperance. The actual Northern god = "whitest of all Aesirs". Movie: black.

Uncle Ben and Gwen Stacy have both stayed 100% dead in the 616. They have both survived in various alternate universes that are usually meaningless. Gwen more commonly than Uncle Ben (I think he's survived maybe one time).

 Asherian Command wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
How many women have been Thor (held the hammer) before?

One. I think.

Canonically, two - and one was black, as well, so ready those fainting couches!



The other was Wonder Woman, in a canon crossover.



That must have been awkward - what a hussy Mjolnir is.


Non-canonically, 3 - Rogue also was Thor in a What-If that I had.



This one's a little stickier though, since it was less that she was worthy, and more that she was actually Thor, because she absorbed his power for too long and hoovered him up like she did to Carol Danvers.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I enjoy the tears of all those who are pissed off at the change. Now what the freaking hell happened to cause Steve Rogers to AGAIN give up the mantle of Cap?!

I'm pissed, but not to the point of tears...


Anyhow... Cap gave up the mantle AGAIN, due to a small, minor inconvenience of being dead. Again.



@Compel.... Uncle Ben used to be of the "perfect triumvirate" of comic book dead guys, but alas... he's still dead. He's made appearances since dying in 1963, however in all of those appearances, it is in flashback mode to the time when he was alive. He's still dead. One of the other "perfectly dead guys" was Bucky, but he was brought back for a spell.... Though, IMO what they did to him in the newest Cap movie was atrocious.

Actually, I'm not even mad. Thor lady = definitely more boobs. Since when is that a bad thing?

Pleas us the outfit as portrayed above. Please.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Mr Nobody wrote:
I personally like the symbolism of a woman being worthy of wielding the power of Thor.

I agree with this.... And upon reading, re-reading and re-reading again... .and again... It is VERY unclear as to whether this new Character will be named Thor, or will carry another name... as they say, she is worthy of the hammer, and the name of Thor.... So, it's entirely possible that she will be like Beta-Ray Bill, and possess the powers/hammer, but not actually CARRY the name Thor, but merely is viewed as being "worthy" of the name.

As far as I can tell, the new person will have another name, but will take on the powers of Thor, and so go by that name, using it as a superhero identity rather than the guy's name. (basically separating the person Thor Odinson from the hero Thor: God of Thunder) similarly to how Iron Man is Tony Stark and Tony Stark is Iron Man, but if someone were to take over from Tony if he were unable, he would still be Iron Man. (see also: Dick Grayson as Batman was still Batman, Bucky as Captain America was still Captain America, Ben Reilly as Spiderman was still Spiderman)

The person is someone that's been previously established in the Marvel canon as well, so it's not an entirely new character (my money would have been on Angela, but new Thor's hair is blonde, not red, so I don't know)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Uncle Ben and Gwen Stacy have both stayed 100% dead in the 616. They have both survived in various alternate universes that are usually meaningless. Gwen more commonly than Uncle Ben (I think he's survived maybe one time).

Gwen is currently alive in the Ultimate Universe I believe (and hates Spiderman.

I think the confusing thing for non-comics-readers is the distinction that Thor is both a person, and an office that can have a different occupant.

nkelsch wrote:Any idea if it is a reboot, a self-contained mini-series or something else?

Something else; it's a continuation of the main universe, but with Thor becoming unworthy and this woman being worthy, so it'll take over from the current Thor: God of Thunder series.

timetowaste85 wrote:I enjoy the tears of all those who are pissed off at the change. Now what the freaking hell happened to cause Steve Rogers to AGAIN give up the mantle of Cap?!

He got his powers removed by a guy called the Iron Nail, which included his longevity, so now he's an 80 year guy, but with Captain America's tactical experience. He needs a cane to walk, which rules out him being a hero, but can still help out with tactics and such (and looks to be staying with the avengers in an advisory role)

Compel wrote:I don't follow comics (Never did 'appreciate' them, the full books like Long Halloween would take me about an hour to read through, tops.)

However, presumably in the comics, Asgard is still some kind of actual place, in some form or another / plane of existence, what have you. So when the person who is holding the hammer goes there, who, well, are they? Are they 'Thor' then, or are they person-who-is-granted-the-powers-and-personnae-of-Thor?

And what happens to ex-Thor now? If he turns up at Asgard, who is he?

If new person turned up they would be Jane Smith, who happens to have Thor's powers and heroic alias. If Thor turned up he would be Thor Odinson (possibly prince of Asgard? I don't know how worthiness ties in to royal heritage)



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
I think the confusing thing for non-comics-readers is the distinction that Thor is both a person, and an office that can have a different occupant.

This exact thing is what I have had to explain upwards of ten times today. I use the analogy of "imagine that Batman decided to change his superhero name to Bruce Wayne. If he were injured and someone took over from him, the new person's superhero name would still be Bruce Wayne, but the original would be the only one whose real name was Bruce Wayne.

There are plenty of good female characters within Marvel's lineup, and they've been doing good work with Captain Marvel. Why not elevate Sif or Valkyrie, and do a series around them if you want to make a big deal about a female Asgardian? Why take an existing male character and change it?

I mean, this'll all go back to the status quo eventually - comics love nothing more than the status quo - but this does seem like a boneheaded decision.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Why take an existing male character and change it?

Because "hero dies/loses their powers/etc and someone else takes over" is a very common story in comics? I don't see how having a woman take the job for a while is any different than any of the other stories involving a man taking over for a hero.

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how having a woman take the job for a while is any different than any of the other stories involving a man taking over for a hero.

Never said it was. Please don't put words into my mouth. They would have been better served elevating an existing character or creating a new one.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
. They would have been better served elevating an existing character or creating a new one.

Some people think this will either be Thundra or maybe even Angela -- latter seems unlikely to me but .....


edit : then again ..... http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/comics/news/a567042/c2e2-marvel-unveils-100th-anniversary-thors-sister-young-guns-plans.html#~oKaC1VXRb4vLwp

 Goliath wrote:

nkelsch wrote:Any idea if it is a reboot, a self-contained mini-series or something else?

Something else; it's a continuation of the main universe, but with Thor becoming unworthy and this woman being worthy, so it'll take over from the current Thor: God of Thunder series.

timetowaste85 wrote:I enjoy the tears of all those who are pissed off at the change. Now what the freaking hell happened to cause Steve Rogers to AGAIN give up the mantle of Cap?!

He got his powers removed by a guy called the Iron Nail, which included his longevity, so now he's an 80 year guy, but with Captain America's tactical experience. He needs a cane to walk, which rules out him being a hero, but can still help out with tactics and such (and looks to be staying with the avengers in an advisory role)

Compel wrote:I don't follow comics (Never did 'appreciate' them, the full books like Long Halloween would take me about an hour to read through, tops.)

However, presumably in the comics, Asgard is still some kind of actual place, in some form or another / plane of existence, what have you. So when the person who is holding the hammer goes there, who, well, are they? Are they 'Thor' then, or are they person-who-is-granted-the-powers-and-personnae-of-Thor?

And what happens to ex-Thor now? If he turns up at Asgard, who is he?

If new person turned up they would be Jane Smith, who happens to have Thor's powers and heroic alias. If Thor turned up he would be Thor Odinson (possibly prince of Asgard? I don't know how worthiness ties in to royal heritage)



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
I think the confusing thing for non-comics-readers is the distinction that Thor is both a person, and an office that can have a different occupant.

This exact thing is what I have had to explain upwards of ten times today. I use the analogy of "imagine that Batman decided to change his superhero name to Bruce Wayne. If he were injured and someone took over from him, the new person's superhero name would still be Bruce Wayne, but the original would be the only one whose real name was Bruce Wayne.

Wow, what happened to Cap is incredibly stupid then. His powers don't keep him looking young, he looks young because he was suspended in animation for X years, and didnt age during that time. Granted, his powers kept him alive to survive the SA, but his powers aren't responsible for his lack of aging. So Marvel fails continuity 101. Hell, have they ever made mention of the SSS extending life, outside of the ultimate universe (Fury received it before Cap in that one)?

And I don't blame Gwen for hating the new Ultimate Spider-Man. That guy annoyed me about 5 seconds after he showed up. Couldn't even get through his intro comic. I feel sorry for the soulless people who enjoy that comic. My friend who loves Spider-Man won't even touch that flaming turd.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how having a woman take the job for a while is any different than any of the other stories involving a man taking over for a hero.

Never said it was. Please don't put words into my mouth. They would have been better served elevating an existing character or creating a new one.

Not a bad idea to push one of the others in front.

Marvel could take the less damaging route and put another Norse god-dess/Asgardian in place of Thor.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Wow, what happened to Cap is incredibly stupid then. His powers don't keep him looking young, he looks young because he was suspended in animation for X years, and didnt age during that time. Granted, his powers kept him alive to survive the SA, but his powers aren't responsible for his lack of aging. So Marvel fails continuity 101. Hell, have they ever made mention of the SSS extending life, outside of the ultimate universe (Fury received it before Cap in that one)?

And I don't blame Gwen for hating the new Ultimate Spider-Man. That guy annoyed me about 5 seconds after he showed up. Couldn't even get through his intro comic. I feel sorry for the soulless people who enjoy that comic. My friend who loves Spider-Man won't even touch that flaming turd.

Evidently I was partially mistaken; he got aged at an accelerated rate by the Iron Nail, so he's biologically at an age where he should be dead, but the serum means he's still alive, only frail and old.

So yeah, he didn't have his powers removed, he still has them, but at the moment they're the only reason he hasn't died of extreme old age.

That's a lot better. I can handle an aging ray.

Yeah, Valkyrie is an amazing character that really deserves to get some action.

 curran12 wrote:
While I agree with your general assessment, gorgon, I do see a bit of value in the "powers lost" chapters that comics go through. Those story arcs act as a reboot to the world or story's relative power creep. If you don't have it, you eventually run into what you could call a Dragon Ball Z problem where the next threatening bad guy is so powerful that they require the same power increase from the hero, and generally invalidate any character not at that power level.

IMO, it is better to reset things rather than let them reach that point.

I'm generally okay with it, and as I said I realize they probably really cash in when the eventual restoration occurs.

It's just that in the case of Cap, losing-the-serum and especially quitting/passing-the-torch stories have become tiring and repetitive. I can however recognize that my old fart status is part of that. Many of readers won't be personally familiar with the Nomad/Super-Patriot/etc. storylines and so this will seem fresher(-ish) to them. I still have the right to yawn and not buy the comic, though.

 Ouze wrote:


The other was Wonder Woman, in a canon crossover.

Spoiler:

That must have been awkward - what a hussy Mjolnir is.

Y'know, that got me thinking. We know how Marvel and DC like to play the "us too" game at times, especially with their events. DC is has been ramping up Wonder Woman lately -- the comic is winning awards, Grant Morrison has a high-profile WW comic project in the works, and the character will be in BvS and JL and will reportedly get her own feature.

Could even .1% of this be a "us too" from Marvel? Could another .1% of this be Marvel creating some options for the MCU down the road after Hemsworth's deal is up?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Yeah, Valkyrie is an amazing character that really deserves to get some action.

I don't know where she is in the comics at the moment, but given that she was a member of The Defenders, and that Marvel Disney are working on a Defenders TV/Netflix series, she could well see some more popularity soon. I wouldn't be surprised if she shows up in Thor 3 as well.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So a human girl now possesses the power of Thor, because he is no longer worthy. He hasn't had a sex change, he just screwed up (again), lost his power (again), and it was granted to a new person who IS worthy, and also happens to be a woman. Shock!! Horror!! Somebody think of the comic book code! Seriously, who cares? He'll be working to prove himself again and he'll get his powers back soon, and she'll be granted her own, new, personal weapon. Big deal.

I shall rage even harder on that day.

 Paradigm wrote:

 reds8n wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
.

Thor is a character based on a centuries-old myth that has, since its inception, been male.

And this matters for comics how ..?







Nowhere near the first time

For the record he's also been/is a frog

http://www.comicvine.com/throg/4005-30596/

an alien


http://marvel.com/universe/Beta_Ray_Bill

He's also not been quite himself at other times over the years

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderstrike_(Eric_Masterson)


and the hammer has been wielded by a few people over the years





Give you evens this "event" is over just prior to the next Avengers film ......

I appreciate there's a precedent, but I just don't see why (other than the fact the name is already popular) they didn't go for a new character. Why massively change one of your most major characters (Who was only killed off and redone a few years back if I recall) when you can keep that going and set up a new character?

All of which are alternate continuity/what-if/non main timeline iterations of the character. This is in the primary continuity, *THE* Thor, not *A* Thor, although given how much of a clusterfeth Marvel's continuity/continuities have become, I don't really suppose that matters all that much anymore.

As for Falcon/Captain America, pretty sure thats happened before, and will likely eventually be reversed. I see that as a different situation though, Captain America is a mantle, its not a character, its a costume, Steve Rogers is the character, he didn't suddenly become black. Thor, on the other hand, is a character. It's his goddamned name. Now we have "Thor, the superhero formerly known as Thor", and "Thor, the chick that picked up Mjolnir pretending to be Thor".

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I don't think I understand this...
Comics are silly

They weren't always this way, but yes you're right.

Marvel Comics sucks.

The movies are good, though.

Very much this. DC isn't much better, but they have a few redeeming comic series.

 LuciusAR wrote:
I assume this is just a change in one particular series, no a fundamental makeover of the character. A bit like that time that Spiderman became Latino?

Alternate continuity. As I understand it, that continuity has been destroyed (as in, the in-comic universe was entirely wiped out by some event, destroying all the characters, etc. save for that iteration of Spider-Man who got merged into the 'mainstream' continuity somehow... so now theres like, two spider-mans or some nonsense).

Here's the thing. Thor (male guy) isn't suddenly becoming female. He's becoming unworthy and so switches to carrying his old axe Jarnbjorn (as seen on the cover of Avengers #35).

Thor (male guy) will still be doing superhero stuff with the avengers and such, he's just no longer the god of thunder.

Right, that I understand and have no issue with. BUT HE IS STILL THOR, GOD OF THUNDER. Mjolnir isn't his identity, its just (stupidly) the source of most of his power. Losing his hammer doesn't make him not Thor, it makes him less powerful.

Mjolnir still has the associated powers, and if they be worthy, whosoever shall lift this hammer shall wield the power of Thor (the god). The female character is worthy of lifting the hammer, and so wields the power of Thor (the god). She has the power of Thor (the god) so why shouldn't she call herself Thor (the god)? Thor (male guy) is still Thor (male guy), he's just not as powerful.

Because she *isn't* Thor. Having the hammer doesn't make her Thor. It makes you the bearer of Mjolnir and the powers of Thor. That would be like me coming into possession of Donald Trump's toupee and hot wife and calling myself Donald Trump.

At the end of Final Crisis, Batman (Bruce Wayne) was zapped with the Omega Sanction by Darkseid and sent to the past. while he was stuck in the past (and so unable to be Batman) Dick Grayson took over the mantle of Batman. Does this somehow "pollute" the character of Batman? or would it only be "polluting" the character if a woman had taken over the mantle?

And here's my next point. While others were covering for Batman, the general public was none the wiser. They couldn't tell that Batman was any different from who he had been prior. This is a different situation, in effect they were *pretending* to be Batman by masquerading as him. Good luck to the new 'Thor' doing the same with obvious boobplate. Same thing with Batman Beyond, for all intents and purposes, the general public is clueless that the Batman of the future is not the same Batman of the past.

This is the part that I thought would have been all over the internet originally, but that was before the Thor news hit he web.

Though I am rather surprised at the complete lack of people complaining about the fact that Steve Rogers has lost his powers, and so Sam Wilson (Falcon; a black man) will be taking over as Captain America. I was expecting far more outrage about that.

Like I said, been there, done that, not the first time. Seems stupid to me, but its more acceptable as its been done already in the past within the primary continuity of the comics, and its already been established within the continuity that Captain America is more of a title/role than it is an individual person, as others have publicly/semi-publicly taken on his mantle in the past to continue his work.

As a long time Cap fan, I've grown to dislike the "Steve Rogers lost his powers" storylines. For one thing...what "powers"? And why does he of all heroes have to get taken down a notch?

The other major issue I have is the lack of versimilitude regarding the serum and his "powers". It doesn't seem like something he should "lose" or "get sucked from him," and it shouldn't cause all that muscle mass to dissolve into nothingness.

Yeah, this is like what, the 3rd or 4th its happened? Still not a rational explanation for it.

While I agree with your general assessment, gorgon, I do see a bit of value in the "powers lost" chapters that comics go through. Those story arcs act as a reboot to the world or story's relative power creep. If you don't have it, you eventually run into what you could call a Dragon Ball Z problem where the next threatening bad guy is so powerful that they require the same power increase from the hero, and generally invalidate any character not at that power level.

IMO, it is better to reset things rather than let them reach that point.

Like I said to a friend the other day, the problem is that comic book writers don't know how to write an ending.

I don't like the idea of turning Thor into a legacy character (DC is overflowing with those and Marvel has a few of its own) just to put some breasts on the cover of the book, especially when there already several perfectly good female Asgardians that the writers are ignoring (and have done so for years) who could pick up a hammer and hit dudes with it.

This. Its paying lip-service to 'diversity', and IMO pretty much acknowledging that they are unable to produce a minority background superhero that is capable of standing on his/her/it's own merits, instead having to piggy-back off the name and success of a long-established and more successful Caucasian male character to promote sales.

Judging by the reactions elsewhere online, the outcry from the fans will mean Marvel makes this a rather short chapter, and bring things back to "normal", perhaps with a spinoff series somewhere, or they'll ad this girl to the pantheon of Mjollnir wielding people throughout the various realms (joining guys like Beta-Ray Bill) and she'll crop up from time to time as the "real Thor" has need of more than one hammer

Basically another case of the Superior Spider-Man.

It is VERY unclear as to whether this new Character will be named Thor, or will carry another name...

Your reading comprehension skill check must have failed you:

http://marvel.com/news/comics/2014/7/15/22875/marvel_proudly_presents_thor

This October, Marvel Comics evolves once again in one of the most shocking and exciting changes ever to shake one of the “big three” of Captain America, Iron Man and Thor. No longer is the classic Thunder God able to hold the mighty hammer, Mjölnir, and a brand new female hero will emerge worthy of the name THOR.

More on Marvel.com: http://marvel.com/news/comics/2014/7/15/22875/marvel_proudly_presents_thor#ixzz37dq5Nv4x

And this new Thor isn't a temporary female substitute - she's now the one and only Thor, and she is worthy!”

More on Marvel.com: http://marvel.com/news/comics/2014/7/15/22875/marvel_proudly_presents_thor#ixzz37dq8nS4y

“This is not She-Thor. This is not Lady Thor. This is not Thorita. This is THOR. This is the THOR of the Marvel Universe. But it’s unlike any Thor we’ve ever seen before.”

More on Marvel.com: http://marvel.com/news/comics/2014/7/15/22875/marvel_proudly_presents_thor#ixzz37dq8nS4y

I don't know how much clearer it could get.

And what happens to ex-Thor now? If he turns up at Asgard, who is he?

He had to petition Asgard for a Change of Name from Thor to "The superhero/Norse god formerly known as Thor"

Ultimately, why the hell not just make the already extremely-similar Valkyrie the new owner of Mjolnir, kill off Thor (for good, or maybe just permanently retired or whatever), and... you know... push Valkyrie as a worthwhile 'strong female character' with a proud 'feminist tradition' dating back thousands of years, and write a convincing comic series based on her...?

As far as I can tell, the new person will have another name, but will take on the powers of Thor, and so go by that name, using it as a superhero identity rather than the guy's name. (basically separating the person Thor Odinson from the hero Thor: God of Thunder) similarly to how Iron Man is Tony Stark and Tony Stark is Iron Man, but if someone were to take over from Tony if he were unable, he would still be Iron Man. (see also: Dick Grayson as Batman was still Batman, Bucky as Captain America was still Captain America, Ben Reilly as Spiderman was still Spiderman)

Nope, see above. As an aside, that needs to be pointed out, in every example you listed, the alternate Iron Man/Batman/Captain America/Spider-Man, etc. all PRETENDED to be *THE* Iron Man/Batman/Captain America/Spider-Man, etc. They all imitated the "actual" character and went through an effort to maintain the appearance that nothing had changed. This is *clearly* not the case with Thor. In the case of Captain America, however, they publicly announced IIRC a replacement for him, at least once, that was just as capable as the original, as Captain America has, in-effect, become an official position/title, rather than an individual persona.

Gwen is currently alive in the Ultimate Universe I believe (and hates Spiderman.

Isn't the Ultimate universe dead?

I think the confusing thing for non-comics-readers is the distinction that Thor is both a person, and an office that can have a different occupant.

Except it isn't. Mjolnir didn't make Thor Thor. Thor's powers, persona, and identiy as the Norse God of Thunder are inherent to Thor being Thor, an Asgardian. It wasn't until recently that Odin bound Thor's power to Mjolnir, instead of it being inherent to Thor. That doesn't make Thor not Thor if he no longer wields Mjolnir, it makes him considerably less powerful and not the wielder of Mjolnir, but he still remains as Thor, the Norse God of Thunder by virtue of being Thor Odinson of Asgard. Conversely, possessing Mjolnir does not make one Thor, Norse God of Thunder, nor does it make one Thor, the Superhero, it makes one the wielder of Mjolnir.

I use the analogy of "imagine that Batman decided to change his superhero name to Bruce Wayne. If he were injured and someone took over from him, the new person's superhero name would still be Bruce Wayne, but the original would be the only one whose real name was Bruce Wayne.

It's a bad and invalid analogy. Thor is Thor by virtue of being Thor, not by virtue of wielding Mjolnir. Batman is not Bruce Wayne, Bruce Wayne is Batman, that doesn't disqualify someone other than Bruce Wayne playing the role of Batman. Changing Batman's name to Bruce Wayne doesn't change that, it just makes for a confusing relative statement (i.e. Bruce Wayne is not Bruce Wayne, Bruce Wayne is Bruce Wayne, that doesn't disqualify someone other than Bruce Wayne playing the role of Bruce Wayne.)

There are plenty of good female characters within Marvel's lineup, and they've been doing good work with Captain Marvel.

Do you mean Ms. Marvel or Captain Marvel? I can't speak for Captain Marvel, but the primary redeeming quality of Ms. Marvel is that she's a minority from Jersey City. That's another character who was and is worthy of their own distinct identity that was forced to use the name of a legacy character to push sales, although I think its more forgivable, as the previous Ms. Marvel (Carol Danvers) essentially publicly changed her name to Captain Marvel and in the process abandoned her rights to it (and Captain Marvel has been dead for what? decades? besides the numerous imposters that have popped up over the years?) and the in-universe explanation for it at all is at least reasonable (and the resulting confusion in their personas or whatever is a bit of a gag as well). Beyond that, former Ms. Marvel cum Captain Marvel is still a thing with her powers, ability, and identity intact, she wasn't 'replaced' by any means (unlike Thor, who may still be referred to as "Thor" since that is his actual name, but essentially somehow *isn't* Thor because some chick with a hammer is), the new Ms. Marvel is in-addition-to, not instead-of. Beyond that, the whole Captain Marvel thing was also the result of a real-world legal issue between Marvel and DC, Marvel only recently gained the ability to use the name again.

Why not elevate Sif or Valkyrie, and do a series around them if you want to make a big deal about a female Asgardian? Why take an existing male character and change it?

This.

Y'know, that got me thinking. We know how Marvel and DC like to play the "us too" game at times, especially with their events. DC is has been ramping up Wonder Woman lately -- the comic is winning awards, Grant Morrison has a high-profile WW comic project in the works, and the character will be in BvS and JL and will reportedly get her own feature.

Could even .1% of this be a "us too" from Marvel? Could another .1% of this be Marvel creating some options for the MCU down the road after Hemsworth's deal is up?

I'm sure it is, but Marvel is kicking DC's ass in the diversity department by a wide margin, so its almost unnecessary. Besides that, Wonder Woman has always been a woman, and as a result has been grossly neglected, DC is finally trying to correct that. Thor is something else entirely. The politically correct 'undertones' are about as subtle as Mjolnir, but the reality is that the attempt at political correctness is misguided because they are trying to establish a Marvel counterpart to Wonder Woman essentially overnight by using an established male character as a basis for sales, even though there are more than a few existing female characters, some of whom are already extremely similar, who are more deserving of the limelight.

It's a bad and invalid analogy. Thor is Thor by virtue of being Thor, not by virtue of wielding Mjolnir.

Not in the Marvel Universe it seems

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=54083

CBR News: Jason, the big news is that a new volume of "Thor" launches in October and its protagonist is female. I understand you have to be wary of spoilers here, but what can you tell us about the new title character? Has Thor been transformed? Or has another character received Thor's powers?

Jason Aaron: The latter. This is not the Thor we knew transformed into a woman. This is a new character; someone else picking up the hammer. I knew when I took over Thor that at some point I wanted to do a Beta Ray Bill-style story about somebody else wielding the hammer for awhile. It took me awhile to figure out what kind of story that should be and who the character should be.


When you look back over the history of Thor comics, a lot of different people have picked up the hammer at one point or another and hardly any of them female. The only women to wield the hammer are in brief moments here and there, or "What If?" stories, or future stories and stuff like that. So we've never seen a big story about a woman picking up the hammer and if you look at the inscription on the hammer it even says, "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor." I'm going to flip that on its ear and for the first time see what it's like to have a brand new version of Thor who is female; the Goddess of Thunder.

And the new volume will just be called "Thor," correct?

Right. I like that. If it's "Thor: Something" it's a different kind of book. You pick up this book and it just says "Thor" on the cover, which features a new female version of Thor. It's pretty much telling you she's not She-Thor or Lady Thor. She's not Thorika. She is Thor. This is the new Thor. So I like that part of it.

Is this new Thor a character we've met already? Or is she a character we'll meet very soon?

When I say new character I mean a new version of Thor. Who the person is behind the mask will be a big question mark. The Thor we know will not know the answer to that question. Odin won't know the answer to that. No one will know who this new Thor is.

Is the question of why Thor is no longer wielding Mjolnir something we'll see answered in books like "Thor & Loki: The Tenth Realm?" Or September's "Thor: God of Thunder" #25?

By the time we get to "Thor" #1 you'll have seen the answer to that. You'll see why Thor has become unworthy. We'll talk about that again in "Thor" #1. It's a very new reader-friendly issue, but it's also a continuation of everything I've been doing on "Thor: God of Thunder." So this is not me scrapping all the previous plans I had and starting over. This was kind of the idea from the get go. So everything was always moving towards Thor becoming unworthy and someone else having to pick up that hammer.

Everything I've been setting up in "Thor: God of Thunder" with Malekith and the different dark unions of the Nine-now-Ten Realms, and the revelations of the "Tenth Realm" miniseries will continue to feed into the new book. It's a dark time for all these realms.

We've got upheaval in Asgardia. At the end of "Thor: God of Thunder" #24 we see that Asgardia has to leave the Earth. So for the first time in quite awhile we won't have Asgardia hovering just above the Earth. It's out in space again. Some political turmoil has also begun in Asgardia. In the midst of all of this you tack on the fact that Thor can't pick up his hammer. It's an intense situation and clearly a situation that demands that there still be a Thor. So a new Thor has to arise out out of that.

I'm not going to reveal who's behind the mask of this new Thor, but if you look back over "Thor: God of Thunder" you'll find quite a few suspects. We've had quite a few female characters who have played quite big roles in the series so far. We also have a few more who will be playing roles in the new series. So if you're looking for suspects we have quite a few of them.

With that in mind, it sounds like this new "Thor" volume will have all of the action fans of your run love, but it will also feature a mystery and quite a bit of political intrigue. Is that accurate?

Absolutely, yes. There's certainly a lot of intrigue and dark maneuvering between all of these different realms that is very clearly building towards some kind of massive conflict. We're starting to see different realms align. We saw Malekith, the king of the Dark Elves, broker a deal with the Frost Giants, and we'll start to see the fruits of that collaboration. We'll start to see some other characters join that cabal as well; characters both new and old.


So in the coming months we'll see the return of some familiar villains from Thor's past. That means this new Thor will certainly have her hands full and will have no shortage of people lining up to take her on including at some point, as you might expect, the previous version of Thor.

I imagine he's not going to be too happy about someone else running about with his hammer, especially when he doesn't even know who it is.

Does that mena the old Thor isn't going anywhere? Will he still very much be a part of this new book?

Yes, Thor Odinson, the Prince of Asgard, will still be around. He's still Thor. That's his birth name. He's unworthy of Mjolnir, but he'll still have a role to play. If you've seen the cover of one of Jonathan Hickman's upcoming "Avengers" issues where it flashes forward into the future you see what appears to be Thor holding his axe, Jarnbjorn. So that's kind of a glimpse into our book's future as well. That's kind of where we've been heading.


Again it all goes back to what I've set up in "God of Thunder" where we had these three different versions of Thor -- the young rambunctious Thor who wasn't yet worthy of picking up his hammer, present day Thor the Avenger, and then grumpy old King Thor. We'll continue to see those other versions, but we'll also start to see present day Thor becoming more of an amalgam of those other two versions.

All of which are alternate continuity/what-if/non main timeline iterations of the character.

No they're not. The Fog version/splinter is mainstream MU as are beta Ray Bill, Thunderstrike etc etc

Not in the Marvel Universe it seems

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=54083

No, Thor is still Thor by virtue of being Thor, Mjolnir being his power source doesn't change that. Thor Odinson is THE Norse God of Thunder, and Thor Odinson happens to wield Mjolnir, which in turn is the source of his powers. If another were to wield Mjolnir, that wouldn't suddenly make them Thor Odinson, the Norse God(dess) of Thunder, it would just give them the powers of Thor Odinson, Norse God of Thunder, but not the identity, title, or persona.

Frog Thor was still Thor, he was transformed into a frog by Loki. Beta Ray Bill was still Beta Ray Bill. In the case of pre-Thunderstrike Thunderstrike, its important to remember that *THE* Thor was fused with Eric Masterson, and essentially trapped inside of Eric Mastersons mind as a distinct entity. Red Norvell became "Thor" through an in-universe plot by Odin which involved him defeating the actual Thor in an attempt to replace him so that he would then die in the Ragnarok instead of the actual Thor. Those are the only mainstream continuity versions of Thor, and all of them avoid the stupidity of the present fem-Thor situation.

P.S. - That interview screams of "THIS IS A TEMPORARY SITUATION AND FEMTHOR WILL EVENTUALLY NOT BE THOR ANYMORE".

Well of course. Status Quo is the lifeblood of comics. I mean, does anyone think Wolverine is really going to stay dead? Wolverine is the most well known character Marvel has with the general populace and probably the second or third most popular character of all their characters (Spider-man being number 1). To, by choice, remove him from future stories? No...

Pretty sure Spider-man is still be the best known character to the general populace.

 Goliath wrote:

If new person turned up they would be Jane Smith, who happens to have Thor's powers and heroic alias. If Thor turned up he would be Thor Odinson (possibly prince of Asgard? I don't know how worthiness ties in to royal heritage)

Nope, he's just Thor Odinson. He's already been the king of Asgard, and exiled from there. In Thor's true story line, I believe that Baldur is the current king of the Asgardians..


And Gwen Stacy is currently dead in the "real" Marvel timeline (apparently, the Ultimates timeline is separate from "real life" somehow) As each character has a central timeline to their story, it's usually encompassed within a single title name, such as Invincible Iron Man, or Incredible Hulk (with the exceptions of Planet Hulk and World War Hulk, those are in the "real" timeline as well), which is how a ton of people, even some comic fans get confused, since there can be quite an array of books available on any one character. I'm not sure how DC does it (as I dont like them), but with Marvel, each character generally has a central book line, and anything else may or may not be canon (basically, if something happens in another book that isn't part of the usual timeline gets mentioned in their central book, then it's canon)

So, what if Thor should surprisingly (haha!) become worthy again? Will She-Thor just step down and be like "Yo, here you go again bud!"?