Because of the movie ? :P
Marvel Teaser: Who Will Shape the Future of Marvel NOW?
Why does Nick Fury have to be black? I like how there are 2 different Nick Fury's in comics. I like both regular Fury and Ultimate Fury but now it seems it doesn't matter even if this is Fury Jr...he could still be white.
Meh, I've seen worse transitions. I am not pleased with the adaptation of Ultimate/Movie Fury existing, but at least they gave it a back story instead of a DC-esque reboot. No reality punch needed, thankfully.
Some of the other costumes also look terrible, but at least they're trying something new.
If anyone didn't read the battlescars story it was pretty good upto the last couple of pages, which they needlessly tried to make ultimate nick fury into the regular universe.
@rouder said:
@wowylied: What is your point? Nick Fury Sr still appears on panel in current ongoing comic books. His son has not replaced him.
Just because it is on some "LOL ZOMG so funny" collage does not mean it is true. It just means you just got trolled.
Agreed! I bet most folks dont even know Fury Sr. has retired and Quake is head of SHIELD now.
@Baddamdog said:
Any money they'll kill off Nick Fury and he'll replace him as head of SHIELD and the original will never be mentioned ever again...
They kicked Nick Fury out of head of SHEILD a long time ago. He Lost in Secret War. So about 7 years. Since then we have had Hill, Stark, Osborn, Rogers and now Quake running it.
And no Sam Jackson did not ruin Star Wars. He was one of the only good part in that crappy trilogy, you can thank Lucas.
Although yeah the new Cable design looks like Fury.
I doubt we get a New Sheild Book, I am thinking Fury Jr. and club take over Secret Avengers.
Still I like the teaser design.
@rouder:Regularly? No, not really regularly. His role in Marvel was significantly diminished since his Secret War. His role was brought back, slightly, in Secret Warriors but other than that he has not been a big player nor has he been regularly showing up anywhere except Secret Warriors. Not to mention the fact he no longer has any Infinity Formula to use when he needs his next injection. I assume this is nothing but Marvel's way to shoehorn in a black Nick Fury to coincide with the movie universe (not to mention they also are bringing in a version of agent coulson). This is the same thing they've done in the past, to make the comic character more relatable to people who are coming in from the movie. Arguably, I can't believe the numbers of these alleged readers are enough to significantly impact sales in any way compared to if they left them alone.
@jcbart said:
Doesn't make a difference to me. Nick Fury hasn't done anything of interest for years, so yep! Let's see what Marcus has to offer.
Hey Funrush - thanks for the info on that being the cover which would be released. As for your thougts on what market divisions are being targeted by advertisers - here are some links on what demographic markets are buying comics;
- http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/children.html
- http://adage.com/article/american-demographics/inside-gen-y/43704/
Check the dates to these. You should know that the markets for advertising haven't changed - in fact that data is beyond robust. It's garnered strenght. Children under 20 aren't supplying their own monies in most cases; they're having it given to them by their parents or guardians. That is what makes their dollar and spending so important.
Reminds of me Sentinel from Youngblood You ever think Image comics 90's was a future version of the Marvel Universe.
I have a feeling that NOW stands for Not Our World so I think I'm gonna stay out of it and stick to the Spider related titles. Pun intended. Nothing but Amazing Spider-Man, Avenging Spider-Man, Scarlet Spider, and Venom for me. Maybe Daredevil if it's untouched.
great, it looks like we might have to have a moment of silence for the original Nick Fury. After they pulled the Jackson Fury crap in Battle Scars, Marvel gave the impression that Nick Fury wasn't going anywhere more or less. I remember one article saying something like "Nick isn't going to go down easy".
Well that was before we knew about Marvel NOW. Sure they said continuity wouldn't be affected but what's to stop them from cherry picking a few things here and there. Whoops Nick Fury never existed.
Okay that's a stretch, I don't expect Marvel to do anything like that. There's NO WAY they would right?...............right?
@DMC said:
great, it looks like we might have to have a moment of silence for the original Nick Fury. After they pulled the Jackson Fury crap in Battle Scars, Marvel gave the impression that Nick Fury wasn't going anywhere more or less. I remember one article saying something like "Nick isn't going to go down easy".
Well that was before we knew about Marvel NOW. Sure they said continuity wouldn't be affected but what's to stop them from cherry picking a few things here and there. Whoops Nick Fury never existed.
Okay that's a stretch, I don't expect Marvel to do anything like that. There's NO WAY they would right?...............right?
Unlikely without an actual reboot. Marvel tends to ignore parts of continuity though.
Still Fury has his max book and shows up in Winter Soldier and soon Defenders so he is around but has not been central for a long time. And no I don't think there is some vast conspiracy they started 7 years ago.
Nick Fury Junior? Who just happens to look like Ultimate Nick Fury, and is a different colour to his father? How very plausible indeed. There can't be one person controlling everything, that's been done far too often.
Why does Marvel hate Nick Fury sr.? They are so detemined to never have him show up in comics again.
@They Killed Cap!: He was the only one trying to SAVE that fiasco!!
But even that Baddest Jedi in the galaxy couldn't save Star Wars from Derp Vader!
Why is everyone so shocked by this?! They've been phasing out White Nick Fury for years beyond just the comics. Nobody knows white Nick Fury anymore, and if Marvel wants to bring new money, they want to put characters people will recognize in their books. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying I get it. As soon as they introduced him & Coulsen into the books I knew this was f*ckin inevitable.
But regardless, right now he's still Nick Jr. he's still got along way to go before he can compare with the old man
I dont like this at all. Its like in certain Wolverine art they make him more and more like Hugh Jackman. I like the old school Nick Fury who was a total typical war vet chain smoking badass veteran black ops guy. The Sam Jackson inspired Nick Jr, just seems pansy to me. "Aww Hell naww" lol really Marvel?.
@SavageDragon said:
I dont like this at all. Its like in certain Wolverine art they make him more and more like Hugh Jackman. I like the old school Nick Fury who was a total typical war vet chain smoking badass veteran black ops guy. The Sam Jackson inspired Nick Jr, just seems pansy to me. "Aww Hell naww" lol really Marvel?.
Is smoking even allowed outside of Max?
@Skaddix: oh.
Well, I'm still tired of how there are now three different black Nick Furys out there now, and countless more in the cartoons.
The only thing that Marvel is doing right is that they brought Agent Coulson into the comics.
Dear Marvel, YOU SUCK! With all these nonstop crossovers you are getting really annoying. I can read Fantastic Four or X-Men with having to read another comic to understand the story. I've stop reading most of your works except for the Wizard of Oz comics basically. DC has been far better lately. They can change a character and actually improve them. Plus, DC does Vertigo (some of the best of the best). Marvel re-think about what your doing. You're focusing on the movies more then the comics.
Hooray for Sam Jackson Fury! I've never cared much for regular Nick. I just hope he doesn't start off super high ranking. It would be cooler if he had to earn his stripes a bit.
As one who always liked Ultimate Nick Fury, I'm looking forward to what Marvel does with the new Fury!!!! ^__^
@Mercy_: That's a bit semantic and situationally inappropriate. It's one thing to state that your opponents concerns are not justified - it's another altogether to insinuate that someone's sense of emotional investment is illegitimate simply because one does not agree. It is in fact, serious business when public artistic properties are bandied about in a way which changes their moral or cultural meaning. I am beyond dead damn serious when I say I will not endorse (read: buy) a product from a company when they drastically alter it's original design/intent. And this very forum is the best sounding board for those in places to affect change should take heed of what their investors are saying.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment