Tag: marvel

He’s both a foil and a tether; an anchor. I was interested in the two of them having a blood-is-thicker-than-water relationship. The last time they had seen each other Barney was threatening to murder him and Clint had stolen all of his money from him. Barney’s been a super villain and a killer and a real monster, and not just to Clint — so I wanted to show that when Barney was really down on his luck and needed somebody to help him, the one person who couldn’t say no to him was his baby brother Clint.

I suspect there’s lots of ways to interpret their relationship. [Laughs] And I’d much rather let readers interpret than give them my interpretation. I don’t know if there’s a right or a wrong answer. It was this or Clint talking to a sock puppet for five issues.

Matt Fraction, on Barney Barton’s relationship to Clint (via fuckyeahavengingarcher)

nikolasdraperivey:

CINEMATIC MILES MORALES COSPLAY

Yo! My name is Nikolas A. Draper-Ivey…This is cosplay as Cinematic Miles Morales: The Ultimate Spider Man. This suit was made by Jesse Covington ( Writer and Costume Designer) and sewn by Sasha Williams ( Fashion Major graduate). Photos were taken by Pierre BL Brevard I specifically would like to thank Marvel Comics Artist Sara Pichelli for designing this character. I’m also very excited to see Olivier Coipel’s work on Spider-Verse!

(Full shoot will be shot in New York itself just in time for NYCC)

spiralstreesandcupsoftea:

raiining:

“So I’ve decided fandom will forever be confused about Natasha’s name. Not, uh, coincidentally, comics writers have been confused about it for even longer. The tricky bit is this: Natalia and Natasha are both forms of the Russian name Наталья. The Natalia/Natasha equivalency doesn’t exist in English, leading to all kinds of tail-chasing confusion re: which is real and which is fake. Natasha is a diminutive form of Natalia the same way Bill is for William. “Natalia” is not more authentic or more Russian, it’s just a bit more formal. And “Natasha Romanoff” is not an alias the way “Nadine Roman” or “Nancy Rushman” are. The Romanoff/Romanova issue is just a question of transliteration. The Russian surname is Рома́нов, which is written as Romanoff or Romanov depending on your history book. Traditionally, Russian ladies take feminine endings to match their grammatical gender— Ivan Belov becomes Yelena Belova, Aleksandr Belinsky becomes Aleksandra Belinskaya. But the feminine endings often get dropped in English translation, e.g. Nastia Liukin, not Nastia Liukina. It’s a matter of preference. If that’s too confusing, don’t worry, until about 1998 the comics had no idea what they were doing either. Natasha’s name has been Natasha since her very first appearance, where she and her partner Boris Turgenev were the butt of the obvious joke. Her last name wasn’t revealed until the early 1970s. Yeah, she went through a whole solo series without getting a last name. Weird, but it took dozens of issues for Hawkeye to get a first name. Romanoff: a name no one knows or knew. At the time, Natasha was being written as an aristocratic jet-setter, a glamorous countess. Since Romanov is the most famous Russian surname, and superhero stuff isn’t codenamed subtlety, I figure Gerry Conway just went with what he knew. And so Natasha Romanoff was her name through the 1970s. Instead of “Miss” or the Danvers-ian “Ms.”, Natasha used “Madame”, contributing to that Old World mystique and invoking feelings of a boudoir. By 1983 someone on staff realized that Romanova might be more technically correct. (Might being operative, here, the best way of translating the feminine endings is still debated.) Anyway, her Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe page listed her as Natasha “Romanoff” Romanova. The next big change would occur when someone, and I’m thinking it was Chris Claremont, realized she was missing a patronym. A full Russian name has three parts: the given (first) name, the patronym, and the family (last) name. For example, Grand Duchess Anastasia, the one who had that Bluth film, would be formally called Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova, or Anastasia “Daughter of Nicholas” Romanoff. Her brother, the Tsarevich Alexei, was Alexei Nikolaevich Romanov, or Alexei “Son of Nicholas” Romanoff. Basically: everyone in Russia has a middle name, and it is their father’s. I think it was Claremont who realized Nat’s was lacking because he is a phonetic accent wizard and an expert on Piotr Nikolaievitch Rasputin da tovarisch. Also, because the first time I could find a patronym for Natasha was in a 1992 issue of X-men that he wrote. The weird thing about Alianovna is that it would mean her father’s name was Alia or Alian or something else not really common. Maybe that’s why Kurt Busiek, continuity repair man, pretended it was something else in his Heroes Return Iron Man run. Ivanovna, or daughter of Ivan, is a much more common patronym and also meshes with her backstory. But it didn’t stick. Everyone and the guidebook uses Alianovna. What did stick was Natalia. Yeah, this is the first comic I could find that uses Natalia, and you can tell by context that Busiek’s using it to emphasize formality. When talking to Tony, she calls herself Natasha, when declaring her total identity before an epic beatdown, she takes the “my name is Inigo Montoya” route. From the late nineties forward Natalia started popping up with some frequency, usually in formal or impersonal contexts. Yelena speaks of “Natalia Romanova” as the Red Room’s greatest legend, Natasha demands that the he-was-evil-all-along Ivan Petrovich address her without the diminutive. There are exceptions. I figure some writers check wikipedia, see her name listed as “Natalia” and decide they’ve done their homework. Daniel Way has Logan refer to Natalia, his surrogate daughter, completely bizarre for the quasi-familial relationship and for the nickname-happy Wolverine. Brubaker had Bucky refer to her as Natalia, at first— an odd distancing from a previously intimate relationship. Since they’ve gotten back together, though, he uses Natasha, or Nat, or ‘Tasha, or in any case, he’s dropped the formality.”

— Fuck Yeah, Black Widow: The Name Game  (via eppypeninc)

interesting!

brandnewfashion:

hermeliin:

loving-that-officey-feel:

copperbadge:

[From Captain America #15, 2003.]

But seriously though, this is always something I’ve thought about a lot in relation to Steve. Because Steve is super-committed when it comes to almost EVERYTHING. Justice, freedom, equality, civil rights, doing the Right Thing, trying to be the best person he can be, trying to see the good in all people, to being Captain America, and an Avenger, and leading by example. Steve generally doesn’t do anything by half-measures. When he’s in, he’s ALL IN.

Except when it comes to romantic relationships, which he has an oddly casual go-with-the-flow approach to. Which has always struck me as odd considering the rest of Steve’s personality. But he keeps having all these on-and-off relationships where he’s together with whoever for a couple weeks/months and then for whatever reason they amicably part ways, and he’s not overly bothered by it other than perhaps a bit of melancholy. He’s got a very ‘oh well, maybe next time will work?’ attitude and doesn’t fight tooth and nail to try to keep relationships together like he does with, well, everything else in his life.

Instead Steve is like ‘ok, if we’re not working, we’re not working. It was nice being together. Good luck on whatever you choose to do after this, I wish you all the best.’ (Which, don’t get me wrong, it is great that Steve can be on good terms with basically every ex he’s ever had). And that his rationale for dating some of the people he’s date who haven’t been long-term love interests, (like Sharon or Bernie,) seems to boil down to ‘they seem like a nice person, maybe I will give this a go again’. Which is a pretty wishy-washy reason for dating someone, IMO. ‘You are a non-objectionable, caring person, (who is hopefully not a super-villain,) ok, we can give this a go’. Really?

Like where is the spark and the passion? (I will give Bernie credit here, because I could really feel the love when they were together, but even other long-term love interests like Sharon and Rachel seem like just something that is convenient for both them and Steve at the time, as opposed to something that either of them are really committed to actually making last). 

And from all of this I’ve always kind of gotten the feeling that Steve dates most of the people he dates based on what he THINKS he should want as opposed to what he ACTUALLY wants. So he has this ideal image of the kind of person he should fall in love with…which is not necessarily the type of person that work well as his partner long-term. And that, because he can’t have that white-picket-fence dream that he has the image of in his mind, he isn’t going to have anything/get to be happy at all? Without really considering that he could have something different, and it may be just as good or better. Its one of the times where I see Steve’s tendency to get really set in his ways is just sabotaging himself.

Then combine this with the fact that Steve has this kind of casual disdain/self-hate for himself back when he was tiny and weak and sick, (any arc where Steve is de-serumed or something similar make this REALLY obvious,) and this goes into some really interesting territory. Because on one hand, Steve really wants, desperately, for people to see him as Steve, as just another guy, not Captain America: larger than life patriotic symbol and hero. But he also kind of dislikes who he was before the serum when he didn’t have the physical strength to fight for everything he believed like he does now, along with the isolation, the bullying, having doors slammed in his face, stuck with dreaming because he couldn’t be DOING. And so I think he actually kind of dismisses a lot of the ‘tiny Steve’ thoughts, (which to me ARE the wistful dreams, the doubts, the insecurities, and all the creativity,) in favour of the ‘big Steve’ thoughts, (which covers all his morals, beliefs, and convictions. the ‘big picture thoughts’ that are bigger than one man and have to be stood up for,) in his head. Because the ‘big Steve’ thoughts are so much more important, and the ‘tiny Steve’ thoughts…well, he was kind of pathetic back then. (The storyline in Avenging Spider-Man #5 is like the PERFECT example of this to me).  which leads to this disconnect between who Steve sees himself as and what he’s actually FEELING.  Because ‘big Steve’s views/desires and ‘tiny Steve’s views/desires do not overlap all the time.

So, I can’t help but think that it’s ‘big Steve’ that’s the half that makes all the relationship decisions, and then wonders when he just keeps drifting away from partners and nothing really lasts. Because I think ‘tiny Steve,’ not ‘big Steve,’ is actually the part of him that knows what would REALLY make him happy. But he hasn’t really been listening to ‘tiny Steve’ for a long time, in any situation where ‘big Steve’ and ‘tiny Steve’ actually disagree. So he just ends up feeling confused and not being able to figure out what it is that he’s really searching for.

And, well, it’s kind of hard to figure out what will make someone else really happy when you can’t figure out what makes YOU really happy.

I also think this is a not-small factor in Steve’s often STAGGERING tendency to be completely oblivious to the emotions/distress/love/stress that the people around him are going through until things just blow up.

Oh, god, thank you for this post. I have the similar thought, but I also draw the line bitween Steve Rogers and Captain America. Captain doesn’t act as he wants, he is acting as it should be, as others expect.

Like with Falcon:

image

image

He is passive in relationships with women – Bernie and Sharon have always made the first move. Hana didn’t -> nothing happened.

The only time (or one of the few), when Steve first kissed Sharon and decided to try them again, suprise Sharon a lot. 

Anyway, totally agree with post.

(sorry for my English)

I’m pretty sure I’ve reblogged this at some point, but I felt the need to do so again because of the new run of Captain America: 

image

Sharon blatantly points out that she had to ask him otherwise Steve probably never would. 

image

And this, this is what bothered me the most: not the fact that he’s thinking of saying “yes” to Sharon, but his whole attitude about marriage.  It really is strange that someone, like Steve, who is usually so proactive and committed isn’t that way when it comes to relationships.  If anything, those values are made most evident in relationships.  Personally, I don’t think much good can come from a marriage that he thinks “might not be so bad,” but I guess we’ll see.