@aliltron: Actually, it's Marvel trying to get in on Batgirls success that is trying to get in on Ms. Marvels success.
Wait, wha? Success?? So selling less books and barely maintaining enough readers to stay alive is success? Brian Reed's run on Ms. Marvel was a success. That book stayed a top seller for a long time. "Captain" Marvel can barely stay in the top 100, and I don't think it's been there for a while. Batgirl's new costume hadn't really been out long enough to determine how much of a failure it is, and honestly I haven't been keeping up with much of DC's numbers lately. (Collectors tend to buy these "first appearance" issues as investments, so the sales numbers are skewed.)
This new Spider-Woman is going to be a huge flop, if I were to guess. It's a horrible costume on a fairly unpopular character. I much preferred her classic costume.
It seems Marvel and DC are trying to wipe their hands of older readers like me. The era of "superheroes" is over. Teen angst, violence, and first world problems are all the rage now, so that's the direction they're going with comic books in hopes of grabbing the attention of the new generation of readers. Gone are the days of colorful costumes and epic archvillains; instead we get characters with low-self esteem hoping their outfit is trendy enough to find a date.
Well, at least until these guys in charge are replaced by someone who wants to bring them back again. If I recall, this sort of thing happened in the early 2000s when the X-Men were wearing leather suits and Ms. Marvel wore an armored vest. Maybe colorful and fun superhero comics will eventually make a comeback.
Absolutely horrendous. I'm constantly reminded why I stopped buying any of the mainstream comic books. The whole "more practical" mentality is complete bollocks.
To paraphrase something I once heard, the more realistic they try to make superheroes, the less believable they become.
The reason Spider-Woman's costume has persisted for so long is because it was perfect. It didn't need modifying. It's a little sad that the vocal minority feminists are dictating the direction of comic books. Most of them don't even read comic books, and they never will. Yet DC and Marvel think they're somehow going to gain readers by appealing to them. On the other hand many female readers (at least based on the ones I know and the various blogs I read) actually enjoy the sexiness of the female superheroes and aren't asking for these costume changes.
Oh well. That's enough of the soap box for me. Fashion is cyclical, and in another decade or so, spandex will be the "new" hot thing for super heroes. (Just take a look at the X-Men when they went through their "realistic" phase.)
@linkjt: While she is definitely getting a lot more recognition, it's only because Marvel is trying to throw her into everything they can. But the same could have been done with Ms. Marvel - it's just they didn't. It's nothing to do with the name but how much Marvel is willing to market the character.
And also, her sales haven't improved at all. They pretty much hit an all-time low for Carol. Her sales were highest when she had her own "Ms. Marvel" title. The "Captain Marvel" book is just barely hanging in there. I'm still confident that Ms. Marvel is coming back, but it might be a long wait before the current regime at Marvel has moved on. (Or if they happen to make a successful Ms. Marvel movie, since these days the comic books tend to follow movie ideas.)
No interest in reading it. If they're going to make a character who looks like Ms. Marvel, here's a novel idea - KEEP CAROL AS MS. MARVEL. It makes no sense to invent someone new to be her substitute when we already had one who is perfectly fine at the role.
The simple solution was to invent someone new to be the Captain Marvel wannabe until the real Captain Marvel came back (which everyone already knows is going to eventually happen anyway). Sometimes I have to wonder about the people running Marvel and DC. They make inane decisions like this then wonder why their books do so poorly.
Was it always going to be under the "Ms. Marvel" title, or was it originally not even that developed?
It wasn't even that developed. There was some relay about what direction to go. There were several Marvel events that were in production at that point, and there was some question as to whether we wanted to tie this character into any of those events. It started out very open-ended.
I think it was Sana's idea, because we had been talking about the most recent other big, successful rebranding of a female character, that being "Captain Marvel," and the very interesting fan culture that's come up around that, and all the great work that Kelly Sue [DeConnick] has done with it. It was in the course of that conversation that Sana came up with the idea -- "Wouldn't it be interesting if this girl was a hardcore Captain Marvel fan? A Carol Corps person?" In that case, it would make sense for her as sort of a junior female superhero who really looks up to Captain Marvel, to take up the "Ms. Marvel" mantle.
Wait, what? Successful rebranding of a female character? Are they looking at the same sales numbers I am because Captain Marvel hasn't been successful at all. Maybe Marvel just doesn't care what kind of numbers Carol brings in because they had low expectations for her anyway, but when she's bringing in far worse sales rankings than she did as Ms. Marvel, then I don't call that a successful rebranding.
But they say this is a new hero for a new generation of readers. The same thing DC said when they created the New 52 universe. The big companies are making it loud and clear that anyone born in the previous century shouldn't be reading comic books anymore. Message received, Marvel. Message received. At least Carol's still Ms. Marvel in all the new Marvel games that have been released recently.