They Killed Cap!


log in or register to remove this ad

Cthulhudrew said:
And yet, in all the times that Captain America has been replaced, they've inevitably returned the mantle to Steve Rogers. Why? Quite possibly because it isn't about just the costume, but the man wearing it.



Again, though- in regards to "an heir with traction"- the reason that other Caps haven't taken in the past is because Steve Rogers as Captain America represents something that none of those other characters have. His idealism and conviction- among his other traits- have made him the standout person to wear the mantle time and again. In order to have someone replace him in the hearts and minds of the comic community, you have to craft a character of similar principle and moral character, essentially creating the character you've already got.

I'm not saying it can't be done, and that a writer (with more vision than I have, certainly) couldn't do it, just that it has yet to be done, and that its more difficult than it seems.

You keep pointing to DC, but even their attempts at "Legacy" characters don't always take. Azrael didn't take as Batman, Jason Todd didn't take as Robin, the new Aquaman may or may not take (jury's still out), Kyle Rayner didn't take as Green Lantern- despite what is one of the most directed and long-term attempts to create and support a legacy character. Thus far, Wally West stands out as almost an anomaly in the effort to pass along the mantle, and that was always a rocky road (and there are still people clamoring for a return of Barry Allen to this day).
Azrael was never intended to be Batman forever, not anymore than the Four Supermen during the Reign of the Supermen arc. Barry Allen was succesful, as was Wally West. Jason Todd didn't take after the editors at DC opted to make him an unlikeable brat to separate him from Dick Grayson, post-Crisis (pre-Crisis, Jason Todd was blonde, and behaved pretty much like Dick did). Kyle Rayner was a huge success, and is a strong character to this day (the Hal Jordan backlash stemmed mostly from the treatment given to Hal in Emerald Twilight/Zero Hour).
 

Umbran said:
Bats has it all over Cap in terms of detective work and science, sure, so wiht preparation he can pull out things Cap wouldn't expect. But in terms of battle tactics at fight time, not so much. Cap's also a master tactician. There's a reason that he tended to lead the Avengers in battle - he knows what the heck he's doing in a fight.
And Batman is the tactician of the JLA.

Physically, Batman and Cap are tied, with the caveat that Batman trained to get there, whereas Cap took the serum. Steve Rogers may be a great tactician, but Bruce Wayne is arguably the most intelligent man on Earth. People mention Cap's wartime experience, which ammounts to about 4 years. Then he gets frozen, and returns "ten years ago" or something. That's 14 years. By DC's timeline, Bruce Wayne has been Batman for 12-14 years, plus had his 10 years of training.
 

I don't think Batman and Cap are tied though. One is a great trained man, while one is pysically perfect. I think Cap has the edge. Bats fights thugs who are stronger than he is, but the only people stronger than Cap have superpowered strength. Plus he probably packed as much into those 4 years of War as Bats does in a decade of fighting normal crime. Bats is smarter no doubt, but I don't think he is the tactician or hand to hand combatant that Cap is.
 
Last edited:

Vigilance said:
Stan rebooted PLENTY of Golden Age characters (the Human Torch springs to mind here). Good enough for Stan, good enough for me.

Correct me if I am misinterpreting, please: You point out that a number of characters rebooted successfully after being dropped due to supers being out of fashion. Basically, they were given a "between age rest" .

I am not sure how that translates to rebooting Captain America, unless you also include that long rest. Seems to me the evidence you point to suggests that we'd need a long period without a Captain America at all before we could expect a successful passing of the mantle.
 

Umbran said:
Correct me if I am misinterpreting, please: You point out that a number of characters rebooted successfully after being dropped due to supers being out of fashion. Basically, they were given a "between age rest" .

I am not sure how that translates to rebooting Captain America, unless you also include that long rest. Seems to me the evidence you point to suggests that we'd need a long period without a Captain America at all before we could expect a successful passing of the mantle.

Sorry I was attempting to contrast what happened to Flash, Green Lantern and so forth and Cap.

Basically, the majority of the Golden Age Supers were revamped/rebooted when they were brought back.

The exceptions were Captain America, Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. The latter three never went out of print.

I must have stated it badly.

What I was trying to say was that Stan and DC weren't agraid to revamp Golden Age heroes but in four cases they chose not to. To me that says something.
 

Cthulhudrew said:
And yet, in all the times that Captain America has been replaced, they've inevitably returned the mantle to Steve Rogers. Why? Quite possibly because it isn't about just the costume, but the man wearing it.
And also quite likely because he was never intended to be replaced permanently. Indeed, citing multiple "replacements" is something of a canard, as they mostly weren't actually that, but rather retcons to explain some of Cap's post-WWII appearances. The Super-Patriot was the singular actual replacement, and that character was set up specifically to be an unworthy successor.

You keep pointing to DC, but even their attempts at "Legacy" characters don't always take. Azrael didn't take as Batman, Jason Todd didn't take as Robin, the new Aquaman may or may not take (jury's still out), Kyle Rayner didn't take as Green Lantern- despite what is one of the most directed and long-term attempts to create and support a legacy character. Thus far, Wally West stands out as almost an anomaly in the effort to pass along the mantle, and that was always a rocky road (and there are still people clamoring for a return of Barry Allen to this day).
Again, Azriel was to Batman what Super-Patriot was to Cap: a temporary gimmick to stimulated interest. But if you're gonna cite Jason Todd, then definitely throw Time Drake on that list as a successful Robin. Traction happens.
 

Flexor the Mighty! said:
I don't think Batman and Cap are tied though. One is a great trained man, while one is pysically perfect.
Nope, they're both at the peak of human physical ability...whatever the heck that means.

For the record, folks, in that fight in JLA/Avengers, Batman says "OK, you MIGHT be able to beat me", not "probably". Big difference. They've fought before too, in John Byrne's Batman/Cap one-off, and in DC vs. Marvel. In all cases, it was depicted as being anyone's game.
 
Last edited:

Umbran said:
Bats has it all over Cap in terms of detective work and science, sure, so wiht preparation he can pull out things Cap wouldn't expect. But in terms of battle tactics at fight time, not so much. Cap's also a master tactician. There's a reason that he tended to lead the Avengers in battle - he knows what the heck he's doing in a fight.
Sadly, I recall very few instances of Cap demonstrating any tremendous strategical skills. In fact, it is humorous to notice that during many writers' tenure (e.g. Roy Thomas) his leadership often boils to either A) yelling at individual characters not to attack alone, or B) yelling at multiple characters to not attack all at once. God, the Avengers were such an undisciplined bunch of brawlers.

His role was often more inspirational than strategic. However, as a notable exception, I really loved Mark Gruenwald's portrayal of the character. He always toned his characters down a bit and equipped with more brains than attitude (probably why he never really atttained the degree of popular recognition with readers). Jim Shooter did a fine job with him in Secret Wars too.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top