I suppose I'm mostly a classicists. Especially for my favorite characters.
When Marvel/DC screw with this? Give the name & costume of one of my favorites to somebody else? Then I simply stop buying their books.
Because I'm not following "The adventures of whoever's wearing _____'s costume & using their name".
Recently Marvels done a really good job of saving me $ every month.... Between bad writing, bad art, & completely changing some of my favorite characters (sometimes a combination of these) "Make mine Marvel" is a phrase that just no longer applies.

I'm not at all opposed to making new characters of whatever race/creed/orientation/etc.
Make somebody new, give them their own name & costume, write a good story & put a decent artist on the title. Or take an existing non-white male character & elevate them to A-list status. (for ex: I like the Falcon from the Marvel movies. Write that. He doesn't need to be painted R/W/B, carrying Caps shield & going by the wrong name. He just needs to be made cool, using his own ID & gear in his own book)
I might give it a shot.
I AM against replacing existing characters (especially marquis characters) with them - as an ongoing thing vs just a gimmick for several issues. All this tends to do is make me reject the new character/book & wait patiently for my hero to return.

Peter Parker is Peter Parker. Miles Morales is Miles Morales. Steve Rogers is Steve Rogers. Sam Wilson is Sam Wilson. Carol Danvers is Carol Danvers. Kamala Khan is Kamala Khan.

And there are good stories to be told about Peter Parker or Miles Morales or Steve Rogers or Sam Wilson or Carol Danvers or Kamala Khan or Tony Stark or Riri Williams.

-J

I agree that there are good stories to be told, but at the same time they would be better if they were original stories as opposed to recycled and rehashed stories capitalizing on the legacy of another character...

Using the name of another character doesn't mean using the stories of another character.

Comics are entertainment, specifically story telling.

The only thing that matters to me is if the story is good and if I am entertained.

The next Captain America could be a lesbian Czechnian midget and if the story is good I'll buy, if it's not I won't. Same as when Steve has the shield



*Full disclaimer: I don't get comics monthly. I get paperbacks, and since I don't get that many I can pretty much only get "the good stuff." I realize not everyone gets to make the decision to purchase after a general consensus on quality is formed.

I don't know if they are doing it for future movie-verse concerns or just trying to appeal to a broader base than historically done before, or for the shock/sales factor, and I don't really care. If the story is good, it'll work out, if not, it will be forgotten soon enough. Do I want replacement characters to actually become the icon rather than the classic character? No. Are they ever? No. Eventually the old standard comes back and the new character either gets a new codename (if this was a well-written character), different stomping grounds, or gets killed-off/written out(if it was a character not well-received), or the entire "universe" gets a reboot.
I don't mind seeing a new character take off with the classic character's costume/codename/or entire book for a while in order to establish the new character, but I definitely want my classic hero back in his proper p.j.'s at some point.

Things that I enjoyed prior - I prefer.

Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel, Jessica Drew without child, Wolverine is Logan and he can't remember his background, Alan Scott has children, Captain America is Steve Rogers, etc.

When it comes to characters I don't have any emotional attachment to, it may create interest or I just ignore it.

I have no problem with a second Spider-Man or this new Iron "Man".

I love Damian Wayne as Robin. I like Jaime Reyes as Blue Beetle.

I hate the way Carol is written and her appearance.

I will always call Billy Batson Captain Marvel.

The best part of HeroClix is I can field the characters as I want them. I'll sculpt-swap whenever I need to.

Wouldn't they be Captain Czechnian then?


And I'm pretty sure I've seen that video...

It used to bug me a little bit, but for me story comes first. If you tell a good story, I am totally okay with legacy characters, especially, as Marvel is doing now and as DC has done for quite some time, the older character is treated with respect and allowed to grow into something new. (Arguably they're piling it on too fast, but they're also trying to reach a new generation and a very different reading audience than 20 years ago.)

I didn't realize how bored to death I was with Peter "I can't get my life together" Parker (who is tied with Wolverine as my all-time favorite comic book hero) until he was allowed to actually use that big brain of his to be an adult. I actually choked up a bit. Our Spider-boy done growed up. Which allows Peter to grow and be something new and dynamic, while allowing newer characters (Miles carrying on the Spider-legacy, Kamala Khan really being more like old-school wise-crackin' Peter Parker than anyone else these days) to fill in those old roles.

(Sidebar: when they "killed" Ultimate Peter and Miles took over, I was mad... not at Miles, but because I missed Pete. But when there's room for both the old and the new and they're both written well? I have no problem with it.)

I thought FemThor was an attention grab... but I read it. I enjoyed it. And better yet, Thor Odinson was allowed to evolve too, and become something more than he was before.

Heck, when Sam's ready to put down the shield, I'd get a huge kick out of seeing America Chavez pick it up next... as long as the universe still has room for Steve and Sam and Buck in some capacity. I'm not ready to live in a world without Steve Rogers in it, but he's allowed to pass the torch, too.

Well obvious Czech ancestry but American citizenship

What this guy said.

Honestly, having a character (new or existing) take up the mantle of an existing hero doesn't do anything to devalue the other one. And frankly, I've never been bothered by multiple people being the same "hero" at the same time. I don't care if Steve, Sam, and Bucky all want to run around in their Cap outfits at the same time, their still their own characters. Same with Bruce and Cho, etc. It really doesn't matter.

I don't really care who's in the Iron Man armor. I mean, do you know how many people have been some version of "Iron Man" at some point? Not to mention, I think the first Iron Man comic I had was back when Rhodey was wearing it because Tony a drunk.

What matters is if they make Riri a good character. And given the situation, I think there's a pretty good chance of it being handled really well. He's proven he can introduce new characters, and make them matter. I don't think this is motivated by anything other than a father wanting to create an awesome new character for his little girls.

Yes to both of those.

I sculpt swap and/or mod when I feel like the character isn't who or what I think it should be, or if it's a stupid or lame sculpt.

I prefer original/new characters over recycled/replaced characters. If this recycling mentality had been in place during the 1980's, the Uncanny X-men would have just been a new Angel and a new Ice Man and a new Cyclops, as opposed to Colossus and Nightcrawler and Storm.

As for DC and their Legacy, don't care for it, just my opinion. Sure, you can argue about the Silver Age heroes being recycled Golden Age heroes, but it was more of a reboot than a recycle. Hal Jordan wasn't Allan Scott 2.0, he was a new interpretation of a retired character, and his version was not just a continuation of the original.

Honestly, the only legacy I've truly loved, would be Wally West, and he didn't even make the Nu52 cut.

I just prefer Bronze Tiger being Bronze Tiger, instead of the new Batman. I just think it's lazy and obviously market driven to call someone else Blue Beetle, instead of just creating a new character.

Well, I do read the Iliad in Greek...

Zeus is totally a woman now. Retcon.