Talk:Medusa (comics)

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Comics: Marvel Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group. Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

The current image used to illustrate the character is OK, but it is cluttered by word balloons and extraneous people. Does anyone have a full body image of Medusa without the clutter? --GentlemanGhost 20:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problematic image is not Jack Kirby's because of any clutter, it is Jae Lee's because he makes Medusa look like road kill. Why in the world does every entry for a silver age comic book character have as its primary image a contemporary rendering? Sometimes they are so bizarre that I don't even recognize the characters I loved so much when I was a boy. And really! Jack Kirby's Medusa is voluptuous, but always majestic; she isn't some bony slut you would expect to see clinging against a pole and gyrating to "Fuck the Pain Away."

What goes for Medusa goes for other characters. All the male heroes were already supermuscular in the silver age; today's artists have no sense of proportion at all, but have decided that all superheroes must look as though they have taken so many steroids that they are just a heap of spheres and ovoids crowding one another before they explode. There is no grace, no restraint, no nuance in their art—at the very least, none in the images chosen. Wake up! Be fair! Give the creators their due! Wordwright (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I propose the entire history of Medusa needs to be rewritten. It does unfair service to her character. It mentions absolutely nothing of how she defied her husband and the entirety of her society to sneak away to earth to have her kid. Or how her kid was kidnapped by Blackheart. Surely very notable events in a mother's life.

Lots42 05:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't the amnesia she had at the first times a plot by Maximus, to drive the royal family away from Attilan in her search and take the power and build the Atmo-Canon during their absense? Perón 00:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Black Bolt's article says he was exposed as an embryo and this was considered standard practice (how would that work anyway?) whereas here it says Medusa was exposed as a child at a time when puberty was the norm (very advanced of their society and/or that editor to consider puberty separate from childhood, by the way). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume she does but I don't know. 2600:1005:B00C:6504:830A:D8F4:3B70:3AA (talk) 05:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edits needed on language to render more encyclopedic in tone. Also, unnecessary details in biography section? I'm not a reader of the comics so I've abstained from removing but seemed somewhat cluttered - lots of info that can be already found in hyperlinked articles.

Cheers :) Preoccupied2019 (talk) 11:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]