View Full Version : She-Hulk #10 *spoilers*
bulbasteve
08-09-2006, 12:32 PM
Seem they got to take thier ID's off in court if a Lawyer good enough
changes things a bit. Also isnt sign your Idneity on a paper, not that classifed. Seem like those can be taken.
Well She-Hulk also said that only the highest ranking people in SHIELD would know the identities. Which I imagine is how the identities they knew before the act worked. So the whole leaking names or hackers seems a lot less likely since it's all in the same system. And I would doubt they would keep the paper around...
The court thing could be a big deal but Mallory dropped the case, and I bet SHIELD wouldn't let them anyway.
We also learn The Two-Gun Kid is a New York State bounty hunter. Which seems to imply that a person can work for different agencies and not everyone is an agent of SHIELD.
IamtheRock3
08-09-2006, 12:48 PM
question
Wait why close the other thread
If they going to just move it over here. Odd really
new She Hulk comic..came out today. related to CW.
Conn Seanery
08-09-2006, 12:59 PM
question
Wait why close the other thread
If they going to just move it over here. Odd really
new She Hulk comic..came out today. related to CW.
It has nothing to do with relevance. Have you read the sticky at the top of the forum regarding thread starters? If you're going to start a thread about She-Hulk #10, why not actually talk about the issue instead of some 2 second drive-by point about the issue like you did? I removed your post and made bulbasteve's post the first because he actually put some effort into what he had to say.
Brain-fart posts to start threads aren't going to last long here, folks. If you can't at the very least put together a paragraph to start a conversation about a comic, keep it to yourself until someone who can does.
shaunyc56
08-09-2006, 01:05 PM
We also learn The Two-Gun Kid is a New York State bounty hunter. Which seems to imply that a person can work for different agencies and not everyone is an agent of SHIELD.[/QUOTE]
"Bounty Hunter" isn't a law enforcement agency. You can become a bounty hunter for the whole US almost as easy as getting a drivers lic. Its just a matter of filling out forms and getting and ID. That alone means that if the gov is putting prices on outlaw heroes, things will be messy.
Miss Kitty Fantastico
08-09-2006, 01:17 PM
Two-Gun's status isn't clear - he was a 'bounty hunter' prior to registration (one of many employed by GLK&H), and is fulfilling the same function now. My guess is that he's been authorised by SHIELD, as a registered superhero, to continue in his current role, in much the same way - it seems - that Nightwing (Daughters of the Dragon) will continue to operate pretty much as before, with the addition of new staff, as Heroes for Hire.
It's also possible that, legally speaking, he's not a 'bounty hunter' - he still tends to talk in Cowboy-ese, so that may just be his way of explaining what he does.
As for Mallory's suggestion of outing heroes, the way she puts it suggests that it'd be a disciplinary measure - i.e. so long as a hero does what they're supposed to do, they'd be fine. If they step outside the boundaries they're meant to operate under, then they'd be violating the terms of their registration, and wouldn't be legally entitled to a secret identity any more than any other citizen.
bulbasteve
08-09-2006, 01:20 PM
"Bounty Hunter" isn't a law enforcement agency. You can become a bounty hunter for the whole US almost as easy as getting a drivers lic. Its just a matter of filling out forms and getting and ID. That alone means that if the gov is putting prices on outlaw heroes, things will be messy.
I see what you mean, I'm just saying that since many are saying its a superhero draft and you have to work for SHIELD. Although who knows if they care about time travelling cowboys...
The other Civil War related thing in the issue is that HYDRA is doing more because of the chaos that act has been causing, and that they put up some fake witnesses for the Starfox trial.
jackolover
08-09-2006, 06:22 PM
We also learn The Two-Gun Kid is a New York State bounty hunter. Which seems to imply that a person can work for different agencies and not everyone is an agent of SHIELD.
"Bounty Hunter" isn't a law enforcement agency. You can become a bounty hunter for the whole US almost as easy as getting a drivers lic. Its just a matter of filling out forms and getting and ID. That alone means that if the gov is putting prices on outlaw heroes, things will be messy.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how a person like Two-Gun kid could function 150 years in the future. He doesn't know cars, traffic lights. Hell the pace of modern living is too much for me let alone a past time traveller. It don't make sense using him. He should be a quivering mess.
But the other stuff in She-hulk was disturbing, where shulky interupted a bust by catwoman to sign a form. Hopefully, shulky can sum up the circumstances and not make a situation worse, by taking out a good guy.
drwho
08-09-2006, 08:48 PM
I don't recall this issue saying civil war on it. Anyway kind of surprised no one is talking about the death and revelation. Nah actually, I'm not surprised and that was a joke but I loved hellcats appearance in this book.
JWGucciEnvy
08-10-2006, 01:03 AM
i just read She Hulk #9 and #10, and I must say I really enjoyed this book. I also in loved with Awesome Andy. For whatever reason.
I like this title and have always been a fan of She-Hulk. I like that Hell Cat pop up too.
Miss Kitty Fantastico
08-10-2006, 05:00 AM
I don't see how a person like Two-Gun kid could function 150 years in the future.
He's been here before, of course. Don't underestimate him - the late 1800s weren't that different. Sure we have bigger buildings and cars aren't just something some German guy was working on (Two-Gun was about ten years too early for the first one), but I don't think people really function that differently. No more than if you were to move to a foreign country - you'd have to adapt, but it's nothing that'd reduce your brain to jelly, especially seeing as he's got She-Hulk looking after him, and Doc Samson's support group (pointless though he did seem to find it). And Two-Gun was a lawyer back in his native time, it's not as if he was some yokel cowboy who'd never seen a locomotive or a building more than one storey tall.
But the other stuff in She-hulk was disturbing, where shulky interupted a bust by catwoman to sign a form. Hopefully, shulky can sum up the circumstances and not make a situation worse, by taking out a good guy.
She had it covered - Two-Gun apprehended Ruby while She-Hulk was signing up Hellcat. If you ask me, that's one of the most positive portrayals of registration we've seen. She-Hulk made a good point about heroes being first responders, and she made sure that the villain wasn't going to get away in any case.
I don't recall this issue saying civil war on it. Anyway kind of surprised no one is talking about the death and revelation.
It wasn't an official tie-in, it just had material pertaining to Civil War - quite natural, seeing as She-Hulk's a hero, her firm deals with heroes, and registration is the current mode of operation for heroes. Seeing as this is the Civil War forum I haven't been commenting on non-CW aspects of it, but of course I thought it was sen-friggin'-sational as always :D
Mark (nonick)
08-10-2006, 06:04 PM
I think the developing subplot with Mallory Brook using the law to compel the government to reveal Thor Girl's identity is brilliant. It's a perfect example of the slippery slope that the SHRA is playing on. Score another one for Slott.
We also learn The Two-Gun Kid is a New York State bounty hunter. Which seems to imply that a person can work for different agencies and not everyone is an agent of SHIELD.
Civil War Frontlines #5 Spoiler Below....
Wonderman just found out that EVERYONE who registers can be "drafted" into SHIELD when they feel like it. Apparently it's in the fine print.
So they're all SHIELD agents where they know it or not. I wonder if Iron Man, She-Hulk and the rest of their crew are bothering to mention that little fact to their friends before registering.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 06:22 PM
Civil War Frontlines #5 Spoiler Below....
Wonderman just found out that EVERYONE who registers can be "drafted" into SHIELD when they feel like it. Apparently it's in the fine print.
So they're all SHIELD agents where they know it or not. I wonder if Iron Man, She-Hulk and the rest of their crew are bothering to mention that little fact to their friends before registering.
He was blackmailed into it, it wasn't a draft (even though she used that term for whatever reason). She gave him the mission, she took away an outstanding charge against him if he did it. If this was an actual draft there would be no reason to 'blackmail' the guy.
The Two Gun Kid I doubt has any criminal record since he has been around for like... a month. So they can't really make him do anything.
He was blackmailed into it, it wasn't a draft (even though she used that term for whatever reason). She gave him the mission, she took away an outstanding charge against him if he did it. If this was an actual draft there would be no reason to 'blackmail' the guy.
The Two Gun Kid I doubt has any criminal record since he has been around for like... a month. So they can't really make him do anything.
I'm not saying that he was drafted, but I'm saying that they outright admitted it's there in the fine print. He said he didn't sign up for a draft, and they corrected him.
And I think we all suspected that was there in the fine print somewhere (or at least I did).
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 06:42 PM
I'm not saying that he was drafted, but I'm saying that they outright admitted it's there in the fine print. He said he didn't sign up for a draft, and they corrected him.
And I think we all suspected that was there in the fine print somewhere (or at least I did).
But the fact this this is all part of a public act of congress. I find it hard to believe that Iron Man and all the rest just missed the "oh snap you're being drafted son!" section. I would think that the whole quid pro quo pardons that at least this seems to be would be something that many heroes really worried about since they tended to help SHIELD anyway when they asked. And most didn't steal money from orphans :D
But the fact this this is all part of a public act of congress. I find it hard to believe that Iron Man and all the rest just missed the "oh snap you're being drafted son!" section. I would think that the whole quid pro quo pardons that at least this seems to be would be something that many heroes really worried about since they tended to help SHIELD anyway when they asked. And most didn't steal money from orphans :D
I DON'T think Iron Man missed it. Since he's the one that's in seemingly in charge of the heroes, I think he knows dam well it's in there and that he like SHIELD can draft heroes into doing whatever the hell they want.
The reason most heroes aren't worried about it is probably because like Simon they probably missed it, and I doubt the other heroes in trying to get heroes to register would be to vocal about that portion of the deal.
Even in NA 22 they sort of danced around the issue with Jessica Jones. She said she didn't want to be a hero, and Tonys answer was basically we'll deal with that later after you sign up. He at least knows the deal. And I'm assuming Jennifer does because she's a lawyer. THe rest are probably like most people... they see this big contract and just skim through it.
It didn't look like Hellcat read it word for word before signing up.
jackolover
08-10-2006, 07:10 PM
I DON'T think Iron Man missed it. Since he's the one that's in seemingly in charge of the heroes, I think he knows dam well it's in there and that he like SHIELD can draft heroes into doing whatever the hell they want.
The reason most heroes aren't worried about it is probably because like Simon they probably missed it, and I doubt the other heroes in trying to get heroes to register would be to vocal about that portion of the deal.
Even in NA 22 they sort of danced around the issue with Jessica Jones. She said she didn't want to be a hero, and Tonys answer was basically we'll deal with that later after you sign up. He at least knows the deal. And I'm assuming Jennifer does because she's a lawyer. THe rest are probably like most people... they see this big contract and just skim through it.
It didn't look like Hellcat read it word for word before signing up.
Yeah, I think this is all going to blow up in the pro-regs faces when heros start realising that the blackmail part is now the deal. There will be loads looking for the exits.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 07:14 PM
I DON'T think Iron Man missed it. Since he's the one that's in seemingly in charge of the heroes, I think he knows dam well it's in there and that he like SHIELD can draft heroes into doing whatever the hell they want.
The reason most heroes aren't worried about it is probably because like Simon they probably missed it, and I doubt the other heroes in trying to get heroes to register would be to vocal about that portion of the deal.
Even in NA 22 they sort of danced around the issue with Jessica Jones. She said she didn't want to be a hero, and Tonys answer was basically we'll deal with that later after you sign up. He at least knows the deal. And I'm assuming Jennifer does because she's a lawyer. THe rest are probably like most people... they see this big contract and just skim through it.
It didn't look like Hellcat read it word for word before signing up.
Which kinda gets back to frontline. Where is the media in all this? They had at least a couple of weeks between when it was passed and when it was signed, plus all the time they were debating it before Stamford even happened. And yet you got Hellcat still asking if you have to register publically and having to have She-Hulk tell her that only the top of SHIELD will have access to the identities. All the stuff in the contract would have been specified in the law itself, it makes no sense that people are still vague on what it means.
If the 'draft' has to do with prior criminal charges against a person, shouldn't they know that by now? Clearly it's something JJJ would have been very concerned about since his whole paper is about brining superheroes to justice, so obviously the legal issues from their previous lives would have been an important point in the debate. Wouldn't he be asking for them to be just locked up and not given a chance to work the time off on SHIELD missions?
Which kinda gets back to frontline. Where is the media in all this? They had at least a couple of weeks between when it was passed and when it was signed, plus all the time they were debating it before Stamford even happened. And yet you got Hellcat still asking if you have to register publically and having to have She-Hulk tell her that only the top of SHIELD will have access to the identities. All the stuff in the contract would have been specified in the law itself, it makes no sense that people are still vague on what it means.
If the 'draft' has to do with prior criminal charges against a person, shouldn't they know that by now? Clearly it's something JJJ would have been very concerned about since his whole paper is about brining superheroes to justice, so obviously the legal issues from their previous lives would have been an important point in the debate. Wouldn't he be asking for them to be just locked up and not given a chance to work the time off on SHIELD missions?
I don't think the draft has anything to do with having a past criminal record... that's just an easy way to manipuate certain heroes that might play hardball. I think the draft is there for ALL the heroes cause that's ultimately what the government wants. They want their army of heroes to do their dirty work. Again, the ones with past criminal records are just easier to control.
jackolover
08-10-2006, 07:31 PM
I don't think the draft has anything to do with having a past criminal record... that's just an easy way to manipuate certain heroes that might play hardball. I think the draft is there for ALL the heroes cause that's ultimately what the government wants. They want their army of heroes to do their dirty work. Again, the ones with past criminal records are just easier to control.
Yeah? And do you trust them so much, just blackmailing capes with records is all they'll do? Besides, when Iron Man got Peter Parker on his side, he intimated PP's previous misdemeanors would be wiped. No wiping going on now!
jackolover
08-10-2006, 07:36 PM
Which kinda gets back to frontline. Where is the media in all this? They had at least a couple of weeks between when it was passed and when it was signed, plus all the time they were debating it before Stamford even happened. And yet you got Hellcat still asking if you have to register publically and having to have She-Hulk tell her that only the top of SHIELD will have access to the identities. All the stuff in the contract would have been specified in the law itself, it makes no sense that people are still vague on what it means.
If the 'draft' has to do with prior criminal charges against a person, shouldn't they know that by now? Clearly it's something JJJ would have been very concerned about since his whole paper is about brining superheroes to justice, so obviously the legal issues from their previous lives would have been an important point in the debate. Wouldn't he be asking for them to be just locked up and not given a chance to work the time off on SHIELD missions?
Yeah, well JJJ would kind of keep the blackmailing of heros quiet, wouldn't he, so that shield would hang it over the capes. Best way to get back at them is keep the details out of the papers. Then - "surprise, surprise", as one Gomer Pile would say.
Miss Kitty Fantastico
08-10-2006, 07:36 PM
Which kinda gets back to frontline. Where is the media in all this?
According to Front Line, either publishing pro-reg propaganda, or wasting their time searching for phantom conspiracies behind the whole thing. That's exactly what Banana-Guy (cough*NickFury*cough) told Sally: quit the X-Files crap and start looking at the reality, that the Act is a shoddy piece of legislation.
Iron Man (in Ms Marvel #6) referred to public service announcements regarding the Act; however, it's not difficult to imagine that info not getting to everyone in the superhero community. Some people just don't watch the news, and if TV in the Marvel Universe is anything like it is here, the networks probably aren't bothering to cover the Act from the superhero point of view much. After all, superheroes would make up a pretty miniscule portion of their ratings - far better to spend their airtime looking at what registration means for the average non-powered viewer.
"That's exactly what you signed up for," as a catchy soundbite notwithstanding, I don't think there's any evidence that the Act is a de facto superhuman draft. If it were, then SHIELD would simply have threatened to withdraw Wonder Man's registered status if he didn't cooperate. What they did was coerce him into agreeing, not legally force him. As for New Avengers #22, enjoyable as it was to read, I just can't bring myself to give its assertions about the Act any validity. The rest of Civil War just has not been about a situation where superbeings could be drafted against their will at SHIELD's discretion - either NA is wrong, or everything else is. She-Hulk's a lawyer, for crying out loud - it's ridiculous to suppose that she missed some fine-print 'draft clause'.
"That's exactly what you signed up for," as a catchy soundbite notwithstanding, I don't think there's any evidence that the Act is a de facto superhuman draft. If it were, then SHIELD would simply have threatened to withdraw Wonder Man's registered status if he didn't cooperate. What they did was coerce him into agreeing, not legally force him. As for New Avengers #22, enjoyable as it was to read, I just can't bring myself to give its assertions about the Act any validity. The rest of Civil War just has not been about a situation where superbeings could be drafted against their will at SHIELD's discretion - either NA is wrong, or everything else is. She-Hulk's a lawyer, for crying out loud - it's ridiculous to suppose that she missed some fine-print 'draft clause'.
If you look at NA 22 and the WOnderman scene together, they do support each other. Unless something outright says there isn't a draft, I don't think we can dismiss NA 22 as being wrong.
And just because they could legally draft Simon doesn't mean that offering to erase his criminal record isn't the better route to go. Even though it's clearly showing that the government is controlling the heroes agaist their will (like a draft), it's also highlighting the advantages of playing ball . They're trying to use honey instead of vinegar right now.
And who said She-Hulk missed it? She may know it's there and simply may not disagree with it.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 07:51 PM
Yeah? And do you trust them so much, just blackmailing capes with records is all they'll do? Besides, when Iron Man got Peter Parker on his side, he intimated PP's previous misdemeanors would be wiped. No wiping going on now!
Hm good point. Well actually that may explain why Iron Man put him on the hero hunting team without even asking him, if that is what is required to wipe the past stuff out. Or...he is just a jerk.
jackolover
08-10-2006, 07:55 PM
According to Front Line, either publishing pro-reg propaganda, or wasting their time searching for phantom conspiracies behind the whole thing. That's exactly what Banana-Guy (cough*NickFury*cough) told Sally: quit the X-Files crap and start looking at the reality, that the Act is a shoddy piece of legislation.
Iron Man (in Ms Marvel #6) referred to public service announcements regarding the Act; however, it's not difficult to imagine that info not getting to everyone in the superhero community. Some people just don't watch the news, and if TV in the Marvel Universe is anything like it is here, the networks probably aren't bothering to cover the Act from the superhero point of view much. After all, superheroes would make up a pretty miniscule portion of their ratings - far better to spend their airtime looking at what registration means for the average non-powered viewer.
"That's exactly what you signed up for," as a catchy soundbite notwithstanding, I don't think there's any evidence that the Act is a de facto superhuman draft. If it were, then SHIELD would simply have threatened to withdraw Wonder Man's registered status if he didn't cooperate. What they did was coerce him into agreeing, not legally force him. As for New Avengers #22, enjoyable as it was to read, I just can't bring myself to give its assertions about the Act any validity. The rest of Civil War just has not been about a situation where superbeings could be drafted against their will at SHIELD's discretion - either NA is wrong, or everything else is. She-Hulk's a lawyer, for crying out loud - it's ridiculous to suppose that she missed some fine-print 'draft clause'.
I hate to spoil it all for you, but Frontline 5 just changed all the rules as we knew it. The Gestapo just took over.
Regardless of what the government says, I doubt that they would completely erase anyone's records. They'll just put it away somewhere in case they need to use them again.
This is why you don't bargin with blackmailers (or terrorists). Once they realize it works, there's nothing to stop them from doing it again. If Simon caves now, what's to stop them from simply pulling it out again down the line? Nothing.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 07:59 PM
If you look at NA 22 and the WOnderman scene together, they do support each other. Unless something outright says there isn't a draft, I don't think we can dismiss NA 22 as being wrong.
Well in NA 22 weren't Iron Man and Ms. Marvel there alone? As much as he is being portrayed as a jerk, maybe he was trying to get her to leave the country since he knew that Cage wasn't about to register so he didn't want to have a women and her baby around when SHIELD came blasting through the door. If she wasn't going to be active anyway maybe he just misled her a bit so she would get out of dodge while the in-fighting between the heroes is going on.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 08:04 PM
Regardless of what the government says, I doubt that they would completely erase anyone's records. They'll just put it away somewhere in case they need to use them again.
This is why you don't bargin with blackmailers (or terrorists). Once they realize it works, there's nothing to stop them from doing it again. If Simon caves now, what's to stop them from simply pulling it out again down the line? Nothing.
As sarcastic as the girl was, he could have actually went to his congressmen actually. Or whatever superhero affairs office they have now, or the media, or Iron Man.
This is a SHIELD operation, but they are still held accountable to the U.S government since it's their act, and I doubt that the U.S. really wants SHIELD to have a superhuman army. Remember She-Hulk said that only top SHIELD staff have the ID's, that seems to mean that even the President wouldn't know who is who...so there can't be much trust between them. And in an odd way that would actually help the heroes out since you have two competiting organizations so noone has absolute control over supers.
CyberCoyote
08-10-2006, 08:27 PM
Wonderman just found out that EVERYONE who registers can be "drafted" into SHIELD when they feel like it. Apparently it's in the fine print.
So they're all SHIELD agents where they know it or not. I wonder if Iron Man, She-Hulk and the rest of their crew are bothering to mention that little fact to their friends before registering.
I just hope the editorial staff is sharing the info with all the other writers. A lot of this seems to be done on the fly (like the Neg-Zone/annihilation thing going on around the same time frame)
The version of it that Jen showed is the best I've seen thus far, and being a lawyer I'd expect for her to have checked for loopholes and weasle clauses in the forms she's handing over to her compatriots.
Michael P
08-10-2006, 08:38 PM
Two-Gun isn't a superhero. He has no powers, and since his arrival in the 21st century, he doesn't even wear a mask. The Registration Act doesn't apply to him.
When he says he's a licensed bounty hunter, he means exactly that. (They do still have bounty hunters. http://www.beabountyhunter.com/main.htm)
Two-Gun isn't a superhero. He has no powers, and since his arrival in the 21st century, he doesn't even wear a mask. The Registration Act doesn't apply to him.
When he says he's a licensed bounty hunter, he means exactly that. (They do still have bounty hunters. http://www.beabountyhunter.com/main.htm)
I'm not sure how SHIELD looks at him (even they even bother looking at him at all), but I'd wager the simple fact that he was an Avenger probably makes him registration worthy.
As sarcastic as the girl was, he could have actually went to his congressmen actually. Or whatever superhero affairs office they have now, or the media, or Iron Man.
This is a SHIELD operation, but they are still held accountable to the U.S government since it's their act, and I doubt that the U.S. really wants SHIELD to have a superhuman army. Remember She-Hulk said that only top SHIELD staff have the ID's, that seems to mean that even the President wouldn't know who is who...so there can't be much trust between them. And in an odd way that would actually help the heroes out since you have two competiting organizations so noone has absolute control over supers.
Going to the government and complaining that SHIELD didn't illegally make his criminal activity go away so he wouldn't have to go to jail will likely hurt Simon more than SHIELD though.
He should start complaining about this at least to Iron Man though. I'll wager once heroes start seeing what it really means to be registered, things will start to go downhill.
bulbasteve
08-10-2006, 09:33 PM
Going to the government and complaining that SHIELD didn't illegally make his criminal activity go away so he wouldn't have to go to jail will likely hurt Simon more than SHIELD though.
He should start complaining about this at least to Iron Man though. I'll wager once heroes start seeing what it really means to be registered, things will start to go downhill.
I don't know, after the whole Secret War business, even with stooge at the top I don't think they are exactly buddy buddy. Hell I bet from the governments point of view putting heroes in SHIELD will help keep that shady place in check.
Miss Kitty Fantastico
08-10-2006, 10:26 PM
Two-Gun isn't a superhero. He has no powers, and since his arrival in the 21st century, he doesn't even wear a mask.
Yeah he does, he's wearing it in #10. And back in #5 he took advantage of a superhero clause in firearms laws to get his beloved guns back without having to sit out the waiting period - clearly he's legally considered a superhero (or 'costumed hero' if you prefer).
IamtheRock3
08-10-2006, 10:51 PM
According to Front Line, either publishing pro-reg propaganda, or wasting their time searching for phantom conspiracies behind the whole thing. That's exactly what Banana-Guy (cough*NickFury*cough) told Sally: quit the X-Files crap and start looking at the reality, that the Act is a shoddy piece of legislation.
Iron Man (in Ms Marvel #6) referred to public service announcements regarding the Act; however, it's not difficult to imagine that info not getting to everyone in the superhero community. Some people just don't watch the news, and if TV in the Marvel Universe is anything like it is here, the networks probably aren't bothering to cover the Act from the superhero point of view much. After all, superheroes would make up a pretty miniscule portion of their ratings - far better to spend their airtime looking at what registration means for the average non-powered viewer.
"That's exactly what you signed up for," as a catchy soundbite notwithstanding, I don't think there's any evidence that the Act is a de facto superhuman draft. If it were, then SHIELD would simply have threatened to withdraw Wonder Man's registered status if he didn't cooperate. What they did was coerce him into agreeing, not legally force him. As for New Avengers #22, enjoyable as it was to read, I just can't bring myself to give its assertions about the Act any validity. The rest of Civil War just has not been about a situation where superbeings could be drafted against their will at SHIELD's discretion - either NA is wrong, or everything else is. She-Hulk's a lawyer, for crying out loud - it's ridiculous to suppose that she missed some fine-print 'draft clause'.
To me it kind of hard to ignore new Avengers.
Becuase it like Marvel top book..and marvel Editor certain AWARE of it existence. Kind of like the She Hulk writer saying he going to write it as If Hulk never kileld anyone..or Hulk only killed bad guys
Undestand why he do that. But hey stuff happen
NA actully been a promblem in this. Sensese The Reg act is sound on paper. But before Cival War NA spent a lot of issue painting shield as EVIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLL
which may contradict other comics
To me it kind of hard to ignore new Avengers.
Becuase it like Marvel top book..and marvel Editor certain AWARE of it existence. Kind of like the She Hulk writer saying he going to write it as If Hulk never kileld anyone..or Hulk only killed bad guys
Undestand why he do that. But hey stuff happen
NA actully been a promblem in this. Sensese The Reg act is sound on paper. But before Cival War NA spent a lot of issue painting shield as EVIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLL
which may contradict other comics
Calling SHIELD evil may be a bit strong... but they're certainly pretty unethical by most conventional superhero standards. And I don't think that image of SHIELD only exists in NA.
Obviously Frontlines is painting them with a pretty dark brush as they're blackmailing Wonderman.
And even Hill's treatment of Cap in Civil War 1 was pretty questionable in a lot of ways.
I don't see NA as being inconsistant with the rest of Civil War. It's just that so far that and Frontlines are the only parts which require SHIELD to start playing dirty. I'll wager it's merely the first of many instances where SHIELD will come off looking bad and the pro-side starts having serious second thoughts about what they signed onto.
dingo
08-10-2006, 11:23 PM
To me it kind of hard to ignore new Avengers.
Becuase it like Marvel top book..and marvel Editor certain AWARE of it existence. Kind of like the She Hulk writer saying he going to write it as If Hulk never kileld anyone..or Hulk only killed bad guys
Undestand why he do that. But hey stuff happen
NA actully been a promblem in this. Sensese The Reg act is sound on paper. But before Cival War NA spent a lot of issue painting shield as EVIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLL
which may contradict other comics
You know what the funny thing is about the Hulk killing thing... I can't find one. I really can't.
There is an interview on AIC with Dan Slott where he challenges you to find a Hulk murder that is in continuity (not a what if or future story), not a robot, not later retconned or resurected and the person killed is an innocent.
He says throwing people through building doesn't count either cause that would mean Thor and Iron Man and a dozen other guys are murderers too.
I don't have an exhaustive Hulk collection by any means but I can't even find an example of him admiting that he has killed an innocent person let alone seeing him do it.
You know what the funny thing is about the Hulk killing thing... I can't find one. I really can't.
There is an interview on AIC with Dan Slott where he challenges you to find a Hulk murder that is in continuity (not a what if or future story), not a robot, not later retconned or resurected and the person killed is an innocent.
He says throwing people through building doesn't count either cause that would mean Thor and Iron Man and a dozen other guys are murderers too.
I don't have an exhaustive Hulk collection by any means but I can't even find an example of him admiting that he has killed an innocent person let alone seeing him do it.
Hulk is the equivalent of Godzilla. You almost never actually see anyone die... you just kind of assume it happens. Or maybe you don't assume it, but it's believable enough the minute someone says it happened.
And really, this is marvel... if they did show Hulk killing someone on panel, that person would be resurrected half a year later as Hulks new villian of the month.
TommyV
08-11-2006, 09:01 AM
I don't see NA as being inconsistant with the rest of Civil War. It's just that so far that and Frontlines are the only parts which require SHIELD to start playing dirty. I'll wager it's merely the first of many instances where SHIELD will come off looking bad and the pro-side starts having serious second thoughts about what they signed onto.
That's exactly right. How much more foreshadowing do you guys need? Obviously this is a slow boil which will eventually lead to heroes realizing that they've been essentially "tricked" by SHIELD and that the registration thing is drowning in badness. It bothers me that Jennifer isn't hip to this yet, but she will be soon. Iron Man is certainly aware of most things, but I'm sure there's dirty dealings going on that even he isn't privy to. I mean, really - SOMETHING is going to have to spur him (and Reed) to re-think things eventually, or they will end up utterly irredeemable as upstanding heroes. As it stands now, they are both teetering on the edge of villainy, and I don't believe that Marvel will allow those two particualar characters to continue down that road for long.
lima_bean
08-11-2006, 09:43 AM
You know what the funny thing is about the Hulk killing thing... I can't find one. I really can't.
There is an interview on AIC with Dan Slott where he challenges you to find a Hulk murder that is in continuity (not a what if or future story), not a robot, not later retconned or resurected and the person killed is an innocent.
He says throwing people through building doesn't count either cause that would mean Thor and Iron Man and a dozen other guys are murderers too.
I don't have an exhaustive Hulk collection by any means but I can't even find an example of him admiting that he has killed an innocent person let alone seeing him do it.
Dan Slott was right. Hulk really hasnt. But I also disagree with Dan Slott's conclusion for that. The fact that throughout all these rampages, we never see any actuall injury done has always made me dislike the Hulk character. It just makes me stretch my suspension of disbelief way too far and it really nueters his plight. How much of a curse can it really be when he never really manages to actually do anything tragic or cause any real damage? How the hell is it even physically possible? I think some of the recent writers have felt the same way I have, and tried to kind of 'retcon' this issue and add some weight and drama into Hulk's character. Surely, it has pissed off a lot of fans and some people at Marvel (Slott seems to totally disagree for example), but for me I am applauding as loud as I can, and actually pulling Hulk now.
thats just my subjective opinion though, others prefer their comics diferently.
(and for the record: i have the same problems when any super hero causes mass destruction in a populated enviornment and they dont deal with the consequences, but writers are getting better and better at dealing with them lately).
I'm going to take the middle ground on the issue.
I don't think they NEED to show dozens of people killed on Hulks rampages.
But if a writer chooses to acknowledge that it happens, I can't fault that either.
ivesaidway2much
08-11-2006, 11:04 AM
I'm going to take the middle ground on the issue.
I don't think they NEED to show dozens of people killed on Hulks rampages.
But if a writer chooses to acknowledge that it happens, I can't fault that either.
The problem with making the Hulk a killer, is that it also makes Bruce Banner (and pretty much every hero who ever teamed up with the Hulk) a villain. I mean, sure the Hulk becomes the child-killing mass murderer that some people seem to want him to be, but Banner becomes a guy who has had countless opportunities over the Hulk's 4+(or 1+ in Marvel time, I think) decades of destruction to stop the wanton slaughter by killing himself during the numerous times the Hulk would have been unable to stop him. The only explanation for that can be that Bruce Banner is a sociopath who puts his own life above those of the thousands if not millions of innocent people the Hulk has killed. Oh yeah, and any hero who ever helped the Hulk in any way is essentially aiding a serial killer with a death toll that only trails the likes of Thanos, Annihilus, Kang, and Cassandra Nova.
I know some of you might read that and think that's exactly the kind of story I want to read. But the issue here is that this version of the Hulk is incapable of supporting a solo book. This new version of the incredible Hulk would feature two guys one of whom is a pyschopathic killer and the other a cold-hearted scientist who apparently thinks only his life is worth anything. A book about two supervillians with no regard for human life and close to zero redeeming qualities if you really think about their crimes for a minute. Even the Punisher MAX series isn't that hardcore. Which is why Ultimate hulk will never have a successful solo book unless its a mini or one-shot because eventually the mindless acts violence without any consequences for the guy that commits will just get boring.
But back to She-Hulk. Stu Cicero and Awesome Andy are(or were) my two favorite characters in the book, now I officially can't wait for She-hulk to smash RT-Z9 into parts. Which makes me feel a little worse for Jen Walters. She never said anything when the mutants were put into concentration camps, or when Luke Cage was ambushed for sitting in his chair and menacingly... staring at his clock, she never even bothered to attempt and warn her cousin that an army of SHIELD agents headed by the Sentry, Iron Man, and Ms. Marvel were likely going to hunt him down very soon(assuming she doesn't know about Planet Hulk). I wonder if Jen is going to fully appreciate the irony when there is no one left to speak up when the capekillers come for her. When all it would have taken to stop the madness was a simple legal challenge.
The problem with making the Hulk a killer, is that it also makes Bruce Banner (and pretty much every hero who ever teamed up with the Hulk) a villain. I mean, sure the Hulk becomes the child-killing mass murderer that some people seem to want him to be, but Banner becomes a guy who has had countless opportunities over the Hulk's 4+(or 1+ in Marvel time, I think) decades of destruction to stop the wanton slaughter by killing himself during the numerous times the Hulk would have been unable to stop him. The only explanation for that can be that Bruce Banner is a sociopath who puts his own life above those of the thousands if not millions of innocent people the Hulk has killed. Oh yeah, and any hero who ever helped the Hulk in any way is essentially aiding a serial killer with a death toll that only trails the likes of Thanos, Annihilus, Kang, and Cassandra Nova.
I know some of you might read that and think that's exactly the kind of story I want to read. But the issue here is that this version of the Hulk is incapable of supporting a solo book. This new version of the incredible Hulk would feature two guys one of whom is a pyschopathic killer and the other a cold-hearted scientist who apparently thinks only his life is worth anything. A book about two supervillians with no regard for human life and close to zero redeeming qualities if you really think about their crimes for a minute. Even the Punisher MAX series isn't that hardcore. Which is why Ultimate hulk will never have a successful solo book unless its a mini or one-shot because eventually the mindless acts violence without any consequences for the guy that commits will just get boring.
Though I do see your point... I don't agree that this will be that much of a problem. It's out there right now that Hulk is responsible for deaths, but I doubt that fact is making it impossible at for him to carry his book.
I doubt Banner or Hulk will be written any differently... I don't think there will be a new version of the Hulk. The only difference is now when we see rubble in the background, we have to assume there could be people under there (which is frankly what we should have assumed all along).
Maybe the Hulk series will be canceled after this, we'll see... but I think even if they make him a killer, the status quo will pretty much go on. Does that makes sense from a logic standpoint? To a degree no... but the same thing can be argued about Hulk not being responsible for a single death after countless rampages.
lima_bean
08-11-2006, 12:18 PM
But the issue here is that this version of the Hulk is incapable of supporting a solo book. This new version of the incredible Hulk would feature two guys one of whom is a pyschopathic killer and the other a cold-hearted scientist who apparently thinks only his life is worth anything. A book about two supervillians with no regard for human life and close to zero redeeming qualities if you really think about their crimes for a minute.
Having read a bunch of hulk books recently you almost exactly described them they way I would.
ivesaidway2much
08-11-2006, 12:19 PM
Though I do see your point... I don't agree that this will be that much of a problem. It's out there right now that Hulk is responsible for deaths, but I doubt that fact is making it impossible at for him to carry his book.
I doubt Banner or Hulk will be written any differently... I don't think there will be a new version of the Hulk. The only difference is now when we see rubble in the background, we have to assume there could be people under there (which is frankly what we should have assumed all along).
Maybe the Hulk series will be canceled after this, we'll see... but I think even if they make him a killer, the status quo will pretty much go on. Does that makes sense from a logic standpoint? To a degree no... but the same thing can be argued about Hulk not being responsible for a single death after countless rampages.
The difference is that this is a comic book we are talking. People not dying during any powerful superhero battle makes about as much sense as someone survivng a massive dose of radiation. The laws of physics are always a bit off in comic books. Heck, it could be argued even under all his anger the Hulk is essentially a good person and either instinctively or consciously avoids killing innocents. What doesn't change is that comic characters are still human with fairly human emotions. And it makes no sense for Spider-man, the Fantastic Four, or the Avengers to repeatedly aid one of the world's greatest mass murderers who shows no indication of ever stopping or even slowing his needless slaughter of innocents.
The difference is that this is a comic book we are talking. People not dying during any powerful superhero battle makes about as much sense as someone survivng a massive dose of radiation. The laws of physics are always a bit off in comic books. Heck, it could be argued even under all his anger the Hulk is essentially a good person and either instinctively or consciously avoids killing innocents. What doesn't change is that comic characters are still human with fairly human emotions. And it makes no sense for Spider-man, the Fantastic Four, or the Avengers to repeatedly aid one of the world's greatest mass murderers who shows no indication of ever stopping or even slowing his needless slaughter of innocents.
Again... we'll see. Maybe you're right and this will change how the Hulk is written, and he's become this psychiopath unable to carry his own series. I'm just saying I kinda doubt it.
ivesaidway2much
08-11-2006, 12:47 PM
Again... we'll see. Maybe you're right and this will change how the Hulk is written, and he's become this psychiopath unable to carry his own series. I'm just saying I kinda doubt it.
If it's not going to change how the Hulk's written what's the point of making him a killer? Is he just going to go around killing people and no one's going to notice he's killed several thounsand people this year?
If it's not going to change how the Hulk's written what's the point of making him a killer? Is he just going to go around killing people and no one's going to notice he's killed several thounsand people this year?
Basically yeah.
They'll probably just go back to not mentioning whether or not people are hurt or killed in Hulks rampages UNLESS there's a reason to bring it up.
In this case, Hulk killing people was a useful tool for the Planet HUlk story as well as helping to add fuel to the fire for Civil War. So it was mentioned, and it was clearly noticed. After a while, it'll probably go back to people ignoring the fact that the building Hulk trashes during fights are probably filled with people.
Of course, thats just my speculation. Maybe they will turn him into a psychiopath and his book will be canceled.
The ease with which Books was ready to 'out' Thorgirl via the registration was both chilling and very telling. Nice touch their by Slott. Thank goodness for Andy :)
IamtheRock3
08-12-2006, 01:58 AM
Basically yeah.
They'll probably just go back to not mentioning whether or not people are hurt or killed in Hulks rampages UNLESS there's a reason to bring it up.
In this case, Hulk killing people was a useful tool for the Planet HUlk story as well as helping to add fuel to the fire for Civil War. So it was mentioned, and it was clearly noticed. After a while, it'll probably go back to people ignoring the fact that the building Hulk trashes during fights are probably filled with people.
Of course, thats just my speculation. Maybe they will turn him into a psychiopath and his book will be canceled.
Heck She Hulk writer said in an iterview he basicly going to ignore anything that says he actully KILLED
And if Hulk did they were all bad
Because he feels it would make him unremable
In fact think an early comics She Hulk said Hulk never took an innocent life before.
And in fairnes a lot of heroes tosses each other in buildings
Reason for the registration act. Promblem is Shield shoots missles into building and dought fighting style will change
If a writer and artist feel it be cool for someone to be tossed into the buidling then they go back to assuming no one dies in those fights.
Dan_Slott
08-12-2006, 04:17 AM
Heck She Hulk writer said in an iterview he basicly going to ignore anything that says he actully KILLED.
Nope. I think if you go back and re-read the interview you'll see that I never said that.
Has the Hulk killed? Yes. He has.
My stance is a very specific 12 word statement:
"The Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life."
And, to clarify, I mean the present day mainstream Hulk (not a Hulk from an alternate reality: Ultimates, a What If?, a possible alternate future, or any other "make believe" story).
By "responsible" I mean that he was acting under his own control (as opposed to hypnosis, mind-control, etc.).
And, the term "innocent life" does not rule out that Hulk hasn't killed a "bad guy."
There's a LOT of wiggle room in that statement for the Hulk to have killed someone.
Using those criteria, I am NOT ignoring continuity. In fact, I would say just the opposite. From my point of view, those who claim that the Hulk HAS taken innocent life are RE-WRITING continuity and adding in things that weren't there before.
Can anyone state a single mention in ANY of the 500+ issues of the mainstream Hulk, the 100+ issues where he appeared in the Defenders, or ANY of his other mainstream appearances, where it HAS been stated that he's taken an innocent life?
If he had, don't you think the news would have reported it? Or at least a funeral of one of these innocent victims would have been shown? A mass funeral/memorial for a town that the Hulk wiped out WOULD have been a pretty important story point-- don't you think?
Until someone can proved the NAME of one, single Hulk victim-- an innocent life that he was responsible for taking-- I'm going to stick by those 12 words.
IamtheRock3
08-12-2006, 10:47 AM
Nope. I think if you go back and re-read the interview you'll see that I never said that.
Has the Hulk killed? Yes. He has.
My stance is a very specific 12 word statement:
"The Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life."
And, to clarify, I mean the present day mainstream Hulk (not a Hulk from an alternate reality: Ultimates, a What If?, a possible alternate future, or any other "make believe" story).
By "responsible" I mean that he was acting under his own control (as opposed to hypnosis, mind-control, etc.).
And, the term "innocent life" does not rule out that Hulk hasn't killed a "bad guy."
There's a LOT of wiggle room in that statement for the Hulk to have killed someone.
Using those criteria, I am NOT ignoring continuity. In fact, I would say just the opposite. From my point of view, those who claim that the Hulk HAS taken innocent life are RE-WRITING continuity and adding in things that weren't there before.
Can anyone state a single mention in ANY of the 500+ issues of the mainstream Hulk, the 100+ issues where he appeared in the Defenders, or ANY of his other mainstream appearances, where it HAS been stated that he's taken an innocent life?
If he had, don't you think the news would have reported it? Or at least a funeral of one of these innocent victims would have been shown? A mass funeral/memorial for a town that the Hulk wiped out WOULD have been a pretty important story point-- don't you think?
Until someone can proved the NAME of one, single Hulk victim-- an innocent life that he was responsible for taking-- I'm going to stick by those 12 words.
Wow you guys actully read these
Ok. Little Far fetch
That those 25 people just HAPPEN to be Evil
Then Again he is in LAS VEGAS
so not to far fetch
IamtheRock3
08-12-2006, 10:52 AM
So heck I'll buy the explanation
Although just note not sure your fellow writers agree that interperation. Namely the person who wrote the vegas scenes. But hey that happens every now and then
And kind of like it if he didnt kill to many innocence.
Wow you guys actully read these
Ok. Little Far fetch
That those 25 people just HAPPEN to be Evil
Then Again he is in LAS VEGAS
so not to far fetch
Well, if they weren't evil before they will be.
No one dies in marvel afterall... they'll all come back in some form or another as Hulks brand new villian of the month.
xmanson
08-12-2006, 11:26 AM
Isn't there a short story some years ago that show Samson being "haunted" by some ghosts fo the people Hulk killed "by accident"?
And it ends up with samson blaming himself for it, because he couldn't help Banner or something.
I'll see if I can find it in my collection.. must be buried somewhere...
bulbasteve
08-12-2006, 06:45 PM
Until someone can proved the NAME of one, single Hulk victim-- an innocent life that he was responsible for taking-- I'm going to stick by those 12 words.
Are you counting accidental deaths or not? It seems pretty damn ridiculous to believe noone died in any of the buildings he's knocked over. Especially since it seems that with Civil War and all you guys over at Marvel are saying that people can actually die because of super-heroes actions. I mean just cause drugs weren't talked about till the 80s does that mean they didn't exist before that in the MU? Or homosexuality, or any other taboo subject? Retconning that sort of stuff seems like a good thing if anything to me.
I'm not too much of a Hulk fan (except of course She-Hulk :)), but didn't Byrne have him kill a whole lot of people in his run? I know there were some particular events that were retconned but did any of the news reports about him killing people get explained away? And why would he be sent to space anyway if he doesn't kill anyone?
Honestly, when I first read the explanation you wrote in She-Hulk, I just figured she was in denial about it...
jester1436
08-12-2006, 08:44 PM
The inclusion of Hellcat at the start of the issue made the book for me. She's one of Marvel's most underrated heroines and it was great to see her get panel time against a similarly great villainess in a book starring a great heroine written by a great writer.
That said, isn't her identity pretty much known that she wouldn't care about "pulling a Parker"? She's published books ("Gidget Goes To Hell" anyone?) and been on talk shows, she's a known heroine, so I don't see why that'd be a problem.
Either way, this does make me hope the upcoming Hellcat project has Slott involved. Pretty please?
Hellcat aside, the whole issue was so good. She-Hulk really is one of the most consistent books out there. I've never felt like there's been a dud issue yet.
Mark (nonick)
08-14-2006, 12:18 PM
Man! Was just browsing around and there's an unreasonably angry review of this issue at one of the competitor's websites. I don't want to post links - don't know what the rules say about that stuff. (If you wanted to fire Comic Books from a gun with the intention of killing a werewolf, this would be the place to go)
The guy is really nutty angry about any mention of Civil War in She-Hulk. Guess he's not a fan of the event.
bulbasteve
08-14-2006, 05:11 PM
Man! Was just browsing around and there's an unreasonably angry review of this issue at one of the competitor's websites. I don't want to post links - don't know what the rules say about that stuff. (If you wanted to fire Comic Books from a gun with the intention of killing a werewolf, this would be the place to go)
The guy is really nutty angry about any mention of Civil War in She-Hulk. Guess he's not a fan of the event.
Really, who would have figured a comic book about a Lawyer would have anything to do with a hotly contested law which was recently passed in the MU? Should he really be reading Slott of all people if he didn't want continuity?
xmanson
08-15-2006, 01:50 PM
Found it...
Hulk Annual #18.
Of course some may dismiss it as some short story in a forgotten Anuall issue, but the words are there...
"Samson: In my efforts to cure Bruce Banner, I was the one who created that totally mindless, totally savage incarnation of the Hulk. The Hulk that killed thousands."
It's a very nice short story, highly recommended.
Found it...
Hulk Annual #18.
Of course some may dismiss it as some short story in a forgotten Anuall issue, but the words are there...
"Samson: In my efforts to cure Bruce Banner, I was the one who created that totally mindless, totally savage incarnation of the Hulk. The Hulk that killed thousands."
It's a very nice short story, highly recommended.
Thousands. Ouch.
I guess cause that was stated in an annuel, it was easier to ignore. Stating it in Civil War is obviously a different story. That can't be ignored quite as easily.
It'll definately be interesting to see if any writers decides to give a name and face to one of Hulk's innocent victims.
Nate Palm
08-15-2006, 02:36 PM
Found it...
"Samson: In my efforts to cure Bruce Banner, I was the one who created that totally mindless, totally savage incarnation of the Hulk. The Hulk that killed thousands."
Hey hey hey now! Let's not put words into the mouth of that annual's writer. It doesn't say that the Hulk killed thousands of people. It just says 'thousands'. Picture this, the Hulk is doing his rampage thing and smashes apart some riverside chemical plant. The vats spill leaking hundreds of gallons of toxic byproduct into the river. Boom just like that the entire river population of the Dingle-eyed Watillawomsca eastside river wallers is wiped out. Thousands dead. As Doc Samson is clearly green, this would have had a major impact on him. Those poor poor river wallers.
Mark (nonick)
08-15-2006, 02:49 PM
Found it...
Hulk Annual #18.
Of course some may dismiss it as some short story in a forgotten Anuall issue, but the words are there...
"Samson: In my efforts to cure Bruce Banner, I was the one who created that totally mindless, totally savage incarnation of the Hulk. The Hulk that killed thousands."
It's a very nice short story, highly recommended.
NICE! Come on, somebody get XMANSON a no prize or something!! Mr. Slott?
Alan2099
08-15-2006, 03:12 PM
Are you counting accidental deaths or not? It seems pretty damn ridiculous to believe noone died in any of the buildings he's knocked over.
It's pretty damn ridiculous that Bruce Banner has pants that only slightly rip when he turns into the Hulk but can't seem to find a shirt that can survive the change.
Comics by their nature are ridiculous. Relax and just enjoy it. You're taking things much too seriously.
NICE! Come on, somebody get XMANSON a no prize or something!! Mr. Slott?
Nah. That's not No-Prize worthy. That's just pointing out a mistake. Nate Palm would be the one who would get the No-Prize. He was the guy that explained why it wasn't really a mistake.
stealthwise
08-15-2006, 03:25 PM
Bah, I'm sure that every Marvel hero has caused the death of a ton of innocents just through smashing buildings, or tossing cars or whatnot. They've been in so many battles that it's "impossible" for them not to have. Not sure why Hulk would get picked on for it.
xmanson
08-15-2006, 03:36 PM
It's pretty damn ridiculous that Bruce Banner has pants that only slightly rip when he turns into the Hulk but can't seem to find a shirt that can survive the change.
Comics by their nature are ridiculous. Relax and just enjoy it. You're taking things much too seriously.
Nah. That's not No-Prize worthy. That's just pointing out a mistake. Nate Palm would be the one who would get the No-Prize. He was the guy that explained why it wasn't really a mistake.
Well, since the story is about Samson feeling guilty for the Hulk acts, and stating pretty clearly he is haunted by dead PEOPLE in his dreams (so he must know that many died in the rampages), I doubt things would have affected him that much if it were a bunch of fishes that ended up dead.
ivesaidway2much
08-15-2006, 04:22 PM
Found it...
Hulk Annual #18.
Of course some may dismiss it as some short story in a forgotten Anuall issue, but the words are there...
"Samson: In my efforts to cure Bruce Banner, I was the one who created that totally mindless, totally savage incarnation of the Hulk. The Hulk that killed thousands."
It's a very nice short story, highly recommended.
I think John Byrne retconned away any of the deaths related to his mindless Hulk arc. In issue #4 of the current volume of the incredible Hulk Byrne's Banner seems to believe that the Hulk has never killed any innocent people. And later when he's put on trial for downing an airplane with 316 passengers(which he was also innocent of) no one on either the prosecution or defense mentions any of the thousands of murders the annual accuses him of.
IamtheRock3
08-15-2006, 04:48 PM
Bah, I'm sure that every Marvel hero has caused the death of a ton of innocents just through smashing buildings, or tossing cars or whatnot. They've been in so many battles that it's "impossible" for them not to have. Not sure why Hulk would get picked on for it.
Probally because that pretty much all the hulk does for the MOST part
Hulk SMASH
He faught Armies for the first part of his career tossing tanks around.
Plus Marvel said he killed people a bunch of times
Said he killed 25 recently. Game over.
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 05:51 PM
Probally because that pretty much all the hulk does for the MOST part
Hulk SMASH
He faught Armies for the first part of his career tossing tanks around.
Plus Marvel said he killed people a bunch of times
Said he killed 25 recently. Game over.
No, they didn't. Pull up the quote from the actual issue. We've never seen an on camera scene where the Hulk has been responsible for the loss of innocent life. We've never heard of any specific innocent person who Hulk has been responsible for their death. Any time a specific person has been shown and/or mentioned, it's been explained away later. Really. No foolin'.
The Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life.
Mark (nonick)
08-15-2006, 06:32 PM
The Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life.
First, I am a huge fan of your work. Really.
Second, in the above mentioned Annual, it seems like Samson is mourning the deaths of somebody. Was it ever explained away? Was Doc Samson just wrong? Torturing himself over a nonspecific assumed death-toll?
I live in the NYC area and although a whole bunch of innocent people died a little while back, I can't specifically name a single one of them. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, right? In fact, if I was ever in a conversation about the incident, and someone interjected "Oh, you mean like Sally Lingenfelter?" - I think it would be downright weird. People describe tragedy with generalizations all the time, to take the edge off the hurt etc.
Does this mean that Peter Parker and Mary Jane have never had sex? I've never seen it happen. I've seen her make bedroom eyes at him, I've read them talking in what might be considered innuendo, and I've seen her pregnant (well, maybe I didn't - whatever ).
But I've never seen them actually doing it. They never mentioned a time, date or place that they knocked boots. I just kind of assumed that they did. I looked at the situation, filled in the logical blanks, and came up with the assumption that they did it. Wrong?
IamtheRock3
08-15-2006, 06:33 PM
well hate to say it, and say this with all due respect
not sure your on the same page as OTHER writers CURRENTLY
untill it Reconned again..To me he killed people
unless of course those 25 people happen to be guilty, Like Hulk has some Nazi seeking fist or something.
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 08:45 PM
well hate to say it, and say this with all due respect
not sure your on the same page as OTHER writers CURRENTLY
untill it Reconned again..To me he killed people
unless of course those 25 people happen to be guilty, Like Hulk has some Nazi seeking fist or something.
Again, check the ACTUAL line regarding those 25. Does it say "dead". Recently, when asked this question at a convention panel, Tom Brevoort (who, as Executive Editor) oversees the Hulk, said that the actual dialogue in the Illuminati Special was worded in such a way as to leave wiggle room for interpretation.
So...
It doesn't really matter if I'm on the same page as OTHER writers. What matters is that I'm on the same page as the EDITOR. And that would be the same editor that let me put this line in the December issue of SHE-HULK2 #4:
"I don't care what anyone's seen or read, the Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life."
xmanson
08-15-2006, 08:47 PM
So the other mentions of dead people are retconned away, then?
Like Samson clearly feeling guilty due all the innocent people that died due to Hulk?
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 08:58 PM
I live in the NYC area and although a whole bunch of innocent people died a little while back, I can't specifically name a single one of them.
Yes, but as a fellow New Yorker I can tell you that there were countless pictures, shrines, and memorials lining the streets-- each dedicated to a specific person. Their names were constantly on the news and in the papers. And friends and neighbors talked about specific people who died who were either friends or friends of friends.
If the Hulk were responsible for the loss of ANY innocent lives, wouldn't that have been shown on panel in some way? A newspaper headline? A funeral? A comment in passing? Don't you think that the lead character of a book being responsible for the loss of even ONE innocent life would be a BIG enough event in their life-story that it would merit a mention?
If YOU were responsible for the loss of an innocnent life, don't you think that YOU would mention it in your day to day conversations? If you were Bruce Banner wouldn't you remember the name of EACH and EVERY innocent life that you were responsible for taking? Wouldn't you think about it and/or mention it every day of your life? There's no way that something of that magnitude-- that importance-- would get swept under the rug.
Does this mean that Peter Parker and Mary Jane have never had sex? I've never seen it happen. I've seen her make bedroom eyes at him, I've read them talking in what might be considered innuendo, and I've seen her pregnant (well, maybe I didn't - whatever ).
But I've never seen them actually doing it. They never mentioned a time, date or place that they knocked boots. I just kind of assumed that they did. I looked at the situation, filled in the logical blanks, and came up with the assumption that they did it. Wrong?
Exactly! Mary Jane and Peter have talked about having sex. We've seen them in bed. We've seen the results of their lovemaking (her pregnancy). So if something were as important as Hulk taking an innocent life, even if such a PIVOTAL event were alluded to off panel... Where's the set up? Where's the aftermath? The blood on his hands? The funerals? The news articles and endless follow ups? The grieving widows? The heroes who would spend every iota of their cape-wearing lives hunting him down? Why don't the Defenders bring it up while they're all sitting around a table eating pie with the Hulk and cracking jokes? C'mon. If he did it-- there should be tangible evidence of it in the comics. It should be pretty easy for you to find, right?
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 09:04 PM
So the other mentions of dead people are retconned away, then?
Like Samson clearly feeling guilty due all the innocent people that died due to Hulk?
I believe so. In Byrne's second run on the Hulk.
And during the separation-Hulk run, did we SEE the Hulk do this?
And, if you go back to my comments in the AICN article-- you also have to ask if the separation Hulk even counts. If a doctor lobotomized you and set you loose on an unsuspecting public, who's RESPONSIBLE for what your lobotomized body did? You? Or the Doctor? And isn't that what Samson is feeling guilt over?
IamtheRock3
08-15-2006, 09:05 PM
Again, check the ACTUAL line regarding those 25. Does it say "dead". Recently, when asked this question at a convention panel, Tom Brevoort (who, as Executive Editor) oversees the Hulk, said that the actual dialogue in the Illuminati Special was worded in such a way as to leave wiggle room for interpretation.
So...
It doesn't really matter if I'm on the same page as OTHER writers. What matters is that I'm on the same page as the EDITOR. And that would be the same editor that let me put this line in the December issue of SHE-HULK2 #4:
"I don't care what anyone's seen or read, the Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life."
yes but Issue 4 came BEFOR
The vegas thing
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 09:34 PM
yes but Issue 4 came BEFOR
The vegas thing
Yes, and Brevoort's comments came AFTER the Vegas thing. So your point is what?
CMBMOOL
08-15-2006, 09:38 PM
Mr. Slott if you are reading this,
I am a fan of your work at Marvel and have collect every one of the recent She-hulk Series.
I do have a question on when will She-Hulk learn the truth about her new boss and when will her old boss return to the series ?
I have an couple idea I hope you might consider in the future :
A crossover between She-Hulk and the Runaways: In which Southpaw heads to LA, CA. Attracts the attentions of both the She-Hulk and the Runaways which one want to bring her back to New York while the other want her on the team. They team up to battle the Absorbing man and Titana.
Also a few of Squirrel girl ideas for the Future :
A Squirrel girl and Spider-man special, cause you do Spider-man so well. :D
A Squirrel girl and Runaways story in which Squirrel Girl returns to LA and meet the Runaways, and possible teach them the mean of being heroes.
Finally, A Squirrel Girl and X-23 special, odd couple style. :D
I hope you can take these into consideration. Thank you for your time
and I hope to hear from you soon.
Dan_Slott
08-15-2006, 09:44 PM
Mr. Slott if you are reading this,
I am a fan of your work at Marvel and have collect every one of the recent She-hulk Series.
I do have a question on when will She-Hulk learn the truth about her new boss and when will her old boss return to the series ?
I have an couple idea I hope you might consider in the future :
A crossover between She-Hulk and the Runaways: In which Southpaw heads to LA, CA. Attracts the attentions of both the She-Hulk and the Runaways which one want to bring her back to New York while the other want her on the team. They team up to battle the Absorbing man and Titana.
Also a few of Squirrel girl ideas for the Future :
A Squirrel girl and Spider-man special, cause you do Spider-man so well. :D
A Squirrel girl and Runaways story in which Squirrel Girl returns to LA and meet the Runaways, and possible teach them the mean of being heroes.
Finally, A Squirrel Girl and X-23 special, odd couple style. :D
I hope you can take these into consideration. Thank you for your time
and I hope to hear from you soon.
Oh thank God! Questions about the actual book! :)
Hmm...
Well, there are plans for Southpaw...
And a Titania/Absorbing Man reunion....
And... well... you're just gonna have to wait and see. :)
IamtheRock3
08-15-2006, 10:10 PM
Yes, and Brevoort's comments came AFTER the Vegas thing. So your point is what?
........
......
ouch
What my point was The editor you refered to issue 4
So Not sure if you ask the Editor NOW he would say the same thing
Read last issue of She hulk, Where She Hulk mention attacks in vegas, but they very carefull not to mention if anyone died or not
Just said what my cousin did
Took it as, your going with Hulk never killed
But dont want to push your luck by coming out and saying it
To be fair didnt see brevroot speech, so I acknowledge I could be wrong.
Haunt
08-15-2006, 10:12 PM
Mr. Slott if you are reading this,
I am a fan of your work at Marvel and have collect every one of the recent She-hulk Series.
I do have a question on when will She-Hulk learn the truth about her new boss and when will her old boss return to the series ?
I have an couple idea I hope you might consider in the future :
A crossover between She-Hulk and the Runaways: In which Southpaw heads to LA, CA. Attracts the attentions of both the She-Hulk and the Runaways which one want to bring her back to New York while the other want her on the team. They team up to battle the Absorbing man and Titana.
Also a few of Squirrel girl ideas for the Future :
A Squirrel girl and Spider-man special, cause you do Spider-man so well. :D
A Squirrel girl and Runaways story in which Squirrel Girl returns to LA and meet the Runaways, and possible teach them the mean of being heroes.
Finally, A Squirrel Girl and X-23 special, odd couple style. :D
I hope you can take these into consideration. Thank you for your time
and I hope to hear from you soon.
how about a Squirrel Girl and She-Hulk special where She-Hulk represents someone Squirrel Girl gave rabies to?
IamtheRock3
08-15-2006, 10:13 PM
not edited a stament above to make things clearer
bulbasteve
08-15-2006, 11:00 PM
Exactly! Mary Jane and Peter have talked about having sex. We've seen them in bed. We've seen the results of their lovemaking (her pregnancy). So if something were as important as Hulk taking an innocent life, even if such a PIVOTAL event were alluded to off panel... Where's the set up? Where's the aftermath? The blood on his hands? The funerals? The news articles and endless follow ups? The grieving widows? The heroes who would spend every iota of their cape-wearing lives hunting him down? Why don't the Defenders bring it up while they're all sitting around a table eating pie with the Hulk and cracking jokes? C'mon. If he did it-- there should be tangible evidence of it in the comics. It should be pretty easy for you to find, right?
hmm I'll play no prize!
1. Same reason the heroes didn't spend every iota of their lives hunting down the Thunderbolts after they tried to take over the world. They are jerks.
2. Hulk would get angry and kill them if they said anything, same goes for the press umm yeah...it would just make Hulk angry so they hide the fact people die.
3. Wait! They didn't die because the gamma radiation which makes his purple pants stay together also extends to normal people in range and makes them super resistant to falling debris.
4. The comics code exists in the MU, so there is censorship of the comics that are magically transported to the real world. So we never really get the "True story", Except secret ID's. Man those comics must be boring over there, I bet Amazing Fantasy 15 is worth like 5 bucks.
5. Byrne was fired/quit. And Marvel hates change (except that whole Civil War thing where Speedball of all people has blood on his hands but somehow not Hulk).
6. You didn't write the story yet.
7. She-Hulk is the only ongoing at Marvel I read so Hulk doesn't exist.
8. If you decode the phrase "Hulk Smash" it actually says "Hulk totally killed like 1000 guys last week". It's been there since day one! You aren't the only one with that trick (fooled me...sigh..I gotta not post and read these things closer)
Dermie
08-15-2006, 11:16 PM
Well, there are plans for Southpaw...
And a Titania/Absorbing Man reunion....
Awesome!!!!!! I'm looking forward to seeing Southpaw again (and seeing what the Mad Thinker's head has planned for her...) but I am really excited about more Titania stuff, and a reunion with Absorbing Man! Hopefully that isn't too far in the distant future of your plans.
Back to questions about the book...
Could you clarify Kohl's revelation in this issue? Kohl confesses that he is not in love with Starfox the way he claimed back in #7, and that it was a ploy by Hydra to discredit an Avenger. But was he *ever* 'in love' with Eros? We know he got zapped by Starfox's pleasure powers (it is how he got arrested in the first place), but its not clear how much of his story was truth and how much was lies.
I'm guessing he honestly did think he was in love with Starfox at one point--after all, he testified about his wife leaving him over it. If that were a lie, his wife would be able to come forward to expose the lie, and say that she really left him because he was a terrorist, or whatever other reason. On the other hand, as was pointed out this issue, Starfox's powers usually only last a few hours, so that shouldn't have been long enough to drive his wife away...
Help?
David O Burcham
08-16-2006, 01:31 AM
how about a Squirrel Girl and She-Hulk special where She-Hulk represents someone Squirrel Girl gave rabies to?
Jen is defending Squirrel Girl. She's being sued by Thanos. "My reputation as a galactic nihlist has been besmirched by the claims of this female creature that she bested me... Death's soulmate... in physical combat. Her obviously blantant untruths have caused me monetary and emotional distress.Thanos demands compensation!!"
Cthulhudrew
08-16-2006, 10:01 AM
And later when he's put on trial for downing an airplane with 316 passengers(which he was also innocent of) no one on either the prosecution or defense mentions any of the thousands of murders the annual accuses him of.
Maybe they just didn't want to make him angry? :eek:
lima_bean
08-16-2006, 10:17 AM
The Hulk has never been responsible for the loss of innocent life.
Dan Slott is my favorite Marvel writer, I pick up all of his books, and I disagree with him so much on this issue haha. I will fight you tooth and nail on this one Dan! You and me! Mud Wrestling Showdown! Lets settle this issue once and for all!
But, then what if you got hurt and couldnt write any more She-Hulk? Hmmm maybe we should just keep this argument on the net then yeah..
Dan_Slott
08-16-2006, 11:34 AM
Here's the thing...
Do I mind if someone says the Hulk's a killer? Not a bit.
If someone did a story where the Hulk took the Leader's head in his enormous Hulk-hands and popped it like a grape? I'd totally be cool with that.
If someone did a story where Hulk smashed down a base full of Hydra agents, reducing all of 'em to so much Hydra-goo? Wouldn't bat an eye.
Shove his fist through the Abomination's heart? Game for that too.
But if the Hulk were EVER responsible for the loss of innocent life-- it would irreparably ruin the CHARACTER of Bruce Banner. And then "whoosh", it's over. I say if people want to read about that-- that's what Ultimates and What ifs are for.
Haunt
08-16-2006, 04:15 PM
Here's the thing...
Do I mind if someone says the Hulk's a killer? Not a bit.
If someone did a story where the Hulk took the Leader's head in his enormous Hulk-hands and popped it like a grape? I'd totally be cool with that.
If someone did a story where Hulk smashed down a base full of Hydra agents, reducing all of 'em to so much Hydra-goo? Wouldn't bat an eye.
Shove his fist through the Abomination's heart? Game for that too.
But if the Hulk were EVER responsible for the loss of innocent life-- it would irreparably ruin the CHARACTER of Bruce Banner. And then "whoosh", it's over. I say if people want to read about that-- that's what Ultimates and What ifs are for.
what did Emil Blonsky ever do to you?!! :mad:
Jake V
08-16-2006, 04:17 PM
Here's the thing...
Do I mind if someone says the Hulk's a killer? Not a bit.
If someone did a story where the Hulk took the Leader's head in his enormous Hulk-hands and popped it like a grape? I'd totally be cool with that.
If someone did a story where Hulk smashed down a base full of Hydra agents, reducing all of 'em to so much Hydra-goo? Wouldn't bat an eye.
Shove his fist through the Abomination's heart? Game for that too.
But if the Hulk were EVER responsible for the loss of innocent life-- it would irreparably ruin the CHARACTER of Bruce Banner. And then "whoosh", it's over. I say if people want to read about that-- that's what Ultimates and What ifs are for.
Fair enough. You think that might be why more people read The Ultimates than the regular Hulk?
Sandy Hausler
08-17-2006, 08:48 AM
Well She-Hulk also said that only the highest ranking people in SHIELD would know the identities. Which I imagine is how the identities they knew before the act worked. So the whole leaking names or hackers seems a lot less likely since it's all in the same system. And I would doubt they would keep the paper around...
The court thing could be a big deal but Mallory dropped the case, and I bet SHIELD wouldn't let them anyway.
We also learn The Two-Gun Kid is a New York State bounty hunter. Which seems to imply that a person can work for different agencies and not everyone is an agent of SHIELD.
Uh, is being a sharp shooter enough to put you under the law? Two Gun doesn't wear a disguise anymore. I don't think that instance proves anything.
Sandy Hausler
Soundrave
08-17-2006, 09:43 AM
Fair enough. You think that might be why more people read The Ultimates than the regular Hulk?
That's a stupid comparison. Compare Ultimates to New Avengers, not Hulk. How many pick up Ultimates just to see Ultimate Hulk kill innocent people? Take Ultimate Hulk out of the book altogether and the title still sells the same.
ForEverAncien
08-17-2006, 12:04 PM
Okay, as former Hulk reader, the 'killings' of innocents...is nothing new.
If it was paraphrase in such a way, again, nothing new.
C'mon...where the Hulk lands, as the old adage would say, 'Death and Destruction is soon to follow", as I see it.
Anyway, back to the main topic of this thread.
Pug has just found the means to 'save' Jen, but he now, might need saving...especially at a full moon.
Andy was frakkin' brilliant...
And the discovery indentity of the head honcho of that the lawyer firm, was funny. And of course...deadly.
That bubble head, hand using villian (crook, is more a better term) was the lamest EVER!!!!:p
Hellcat's 'capture' was outright crazy....Jen's head is so wrapped in this regristration business, it is almost too funny
And yeah...time to bring in some other news...when are we going to see some green little feet?:rolleyes:
Sandy Hausler
08-17-2006, 12:42 PM
Hellcat's 'capture' was outright crazy....Jen's head is so wrapped in this regristration business, it is almost too funny
Yeah, why not help Hellcat take down Ruby and THEN talk to her about the Act? It would make a heck of a lot more sense.
Sandy Hausler
Soundrave
08-17-2006, 01:34 PM
Yeah, why not help Hellcat take down Ruby and THEN talk to her about the Act? It would make a heck of a lot more sense.
Sandy Hausler
I guess they don't teach humor in law school, huh?
Yeah, why not help Hellcat take down Ruby and THEN talk to her about the Act? It would make a heck of a lot more sense.
Sandy Hausler
That was actually the upside and downside of the pro-registration side.
Capturing Ruby did get covered, and it was done in a very efficient manner. No problems in that regard.
But the apparent apathy Jen showed towards the whole thing really came off cold. She was prioritizing the registration over the criminal, and making the whole notion of being heroes come off more like a job than a matter of conscience.
It was a very good scene in that it gave people both for and against the registration reasons to support how they felt.
Sandy Hausler
08-17-2006, 07:15 PM
That was actually the upside and downside of the pro-registration side.
Capturing Ruby did get covered, and it was done in a very efficient manner. No problems in that regard.
But the apparent apathy Jen showed towards the whole thing really came off cold. She was prioritizing the registration over the criminal, and making the whole notion of being heroes come off more like a job than a matter of conscience.
It was a very good scene in that it gave people both for and against the registration reasons to support how they felt.
Oh yeah, it's more efficient to bust up Hellcat's play, let the villain get away and take her down later. What's wrong with She-Hulk hitting her then talking to Patsy? It didn't look like she was running. That's my response to your first paragraph.
You're absolutely right in your second paragraph.
Sandy Hausler
Sandy Hausler
08-17-2006, 07:16 PM
I guess they don't teach humor in law school, huh?
Uh, no. You go to clown school or something?
And it wasn't very funny anyway.
Sandy Hausler
EmmettHULK
08-17-2006, 07:17 PM
I guess they don't teach humor in law school, huh?
You actually think that Hellcat scene was humorous?
Dermie
08-17-2006, 08:15 PM
Oh yeah, it's more efficient to bust up Hellcat's play, let the villain get away and take her down later.
That isn't what happened. Two-Gun took Ruby down WHILE She-Hulk was dealing with Patsy. They didn't let the villain get away at all, unless you count her getting another block or two as 'getting away'.
Miss Kitty Fantastico
08-17-2006, 08:58 PM
That isn't what happened. Two-Gun took Ruby down WHILE She-Hulk was dealing with Patsy. They didn't let the villain get away at all, unless you count her getting another block or two as 'getting away'.
True - and in fact curtailing Hellcat's attempt prevented further incidental property damage. Ruby was veering all over the place and firing wildly, causing all kinds of havoc, as we saw around She-Hulk and Hellcat. Two-Gun stopped Ruby and took her down without her getting off a shot. That's hardly a bad result for the pro-reg side.
Soundrave
08-18-2006, 05:50 AM
You actually think that Hellcat scene was humorous?
Slightly, but not as humorous as a full-grown NY civil litigation/appeals lawyer spending so much time overanalyzing a few panels in a comic book.
I can see what Dan was going for. The reader was expecting She-Hulk to arrive on the scene and take down Ruby (the villain). The swerve was that she was went for Hellcat (the hero) instead. That's what made it funny. Of course, we later find out that She-Hulk knew that Two-Gun was handling Ruby all along, but having that info revealed to us beforehand would have ruined the "WTF" value of the She-Hulk/Hellcat confrontation.
Seriously, guys, there are bad comics to rip-apart. Black Panther. Most of New Avengers. I don't think She-Hulk is one of them. But even if it was, this is a really trivial thing to get worked up about. You're giving comic book fans (not to mention NY civil litigation/appeals lawyers) a bad name . . . and that's never humorous.
Markavian
08-18-2006, 06:15 AM
This issue was Classic. I cant wait til Jen catches Eros (Starfox) and gives him his just deserts for making her fall in love with John . Eros while amusing is simply out of control..And seeing how his Father lets him run wild like this I can see how Thanos started down the Path that made him what he is. I am wondering where the Lawfirms Story line will carry She Hulk as one person was killed already.We'll have to see what the Recorders Motivations are in the end.:cool:
cactusmaac
08-18-2006, 06:15 AM
I can accept Hulk not killing innocent people.
He didn't ever in the TV series.
Sandy Hausler
08-18-2006, 07:03 AM
That isn't what happened. Two-Gun took Ruby down WHILE She-Hulk was dealing with Patsy. They didn't let the villain get away at all, unless you count her getting another block or two as 'getting away'.
She-Hulk was right there with Ruby and instread of clocking her, she went after Hellcat. And yes, Ruby did get caught, but leaving her to Mat, a man with no super powers, is a little riskier than taking her out when you have the chance.
It was just poorly considered (and written).
Sandy Hausler
Sandy Hausler
08-18-2006, 07:05 AM
[QUOTE=Soundrave]Slightly, but not as humorous as a full-grown NY civil litigation/appeals lawyer spending so much time overanalyzing a few panels in a comic book. [QUOTE]
I'm glad to provide you with enjoyment (or at least amusement). I see you've googled me. That's humorous.
Sandy Hausler
Mark (nonick)
08-18-2006, 07:28 AM
He didn't ever in the TV series.
Well, he didn't have to. Flex, roar, flip the nearest car. Any problem - solved.
Soundrave
08-18-2006, 07:46 AM
I see you've googled me. That's humorous.
Sandy Hausler
Or I'm a client who's disturbed at the amount of time his lawyer spends arguing about trivial nonsense on comic book message boards. Is this considered billable hours, sir?
Sandy Hausler
08-18-2006, 08:05 AM
Or I'm a client who's disturbed at the amount of time his lawyer spends arguing about trivial nonsense on comic book message boards. Is this considered billable hours, sir?
Touchy aren't you, when you're being poked. Of course, nobody gets charged for time I spend on personal amusement. Is it different for you?
Sandy Hausler
Soundrave
08-18-2006, 08:10 AM
Touchy aren't you, when you're being poked. Of course, nobody gets charged for time I spend on personal amusement. Is it different for you?
Sandy Hausler
I was poked?
Sandy Hausler
08-18-2006, 01:40 PM
I was poked?
Poked, as in poked fun at.
Sandy Hausler
EmmettHULK
08-18-2006, 01:55 PM
I can see what Dan was going for. The reader was expecting She-Hulk to arrive on the scene and take down Ruby (the villain). The swerve was that she was went for Hellcat (the hero) instead. That's what made it funny. Of course, we later find out that She-Hulk knew that Two-Gun was handling Ruby all along, but having that info revealed to us beforehand would have ruined the "WTF" value of the She-Hulk/Hellcat confrontation.
I still don't see exactly how that makes it funny, but to each their own.
Seriously, guys, there are bad comics to rip-apart. Black Panther. Most of New Avengers. I don't think She-Hulk is one of them.
That's your opinion.
I am sure some people think She-hulk is a terrible book.
I'm sure some people think New Avenegers is brilliant.
Black Panther too.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, if some people want to "rip-apart" She-hulk, I don't see what the big deal is...
But I don't see why you need to attack Sandy on a personal level in order to get your points acrosss( Actually, there's no point...you just don't want anybody to "rip apart" a book you enjoy)
Sandy Hausler
08-18-2006, 02:04 PM
I still don't see exactly how that makes it funny, but to each their own.
That's your opinion.
I am sure some people think She-hulk is a terrible book.
I'm sure some people think New Avenegers is brilliant.
Black Panther too.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, if some people want to "rip-apart" She-hulk, I don't see what the big deal is...
But I don't see why you need to attack Sandy on a personal level in order to get your points acrosss( Actually, there's no point...you just don't want anybody to "rip apart" a book you enjoy)
Thanks, EmmettHulk. The thing is I generally like She-Hulk, but just because I like a book doesn't mean that a scene within it can't be flawed. And just because I like a book doesn't mean I can't point out and/or criticize that flaw.
Sandy Hausler
EmmettHULK
08-18-2006, 02:17 PM
Thanks, EmmettHulk. The thing is I generally like She-Hulk, but just because I like a book doesn't mean that a scene within it can't be flawed. And just because I like a book doesn't mean I can't point out and/or criticize that flaw.
Sandy Hausler
I understand.
I have noticed this with most critically acclaimed books that have a small but rabid fanbase:The moment anyone tries to point out a perceived flaw on it, the other fans get defensive to the point of being annoying and even insulting... (I see this particularly with She-Hulk and Nextwave)
All opinions are supposed to be welcome in any discussion, as long as they aren't personal attacks.
Dermie
08-18-2006, 03:34 PM
She-Hulk was right there with Ruby and instread of clocking her, she went after Hellcat.
Yes, because Two-Gun was taking care of Ruby. There was no need for She-Hulk to deal with Ruby, because that situation was already well in hand.
Meanwhile, Hellcat was technically also a criminal at the moment, who also needed to be dealt with...and I think Jen would rather get Patsy registered quickly, rather than give the SHIELD 'cape killers' a chance to get her instead.
And yes, Ruby did get caught, but leaving her to Mat, a man with no super powers, is a little riskier than taking her out when you have the chance.
Two-Gun Kid is a fellow Avenger who was perfectly qualified to handle Ruby on his own, and was armed with weapons specifically designed for taking down super-criminals. There was no 'extra risk' involved.
Soundrave
08-19-2006, 06:50 PM
I still don't see exactly how that makes it funny, but to each their own.
That's your opinion.
I am sure some people think She-hulk is a terrible book.
I'm sure some people think New Avenegers is brilliant.
Black Panther too.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, if some people want to "rip-apart" She-hulk, I don't see what the big deal is...
But I don't see why you need to attack Sandy on a personal level in order to get your points acrosss( Actually, there's no point...you just don't want anybody to "rip apart" a book you enjoy)
It wasn't meant as a personal attack. It's just that I was and am still astounded that someone with the intelligence to pass the NY bar exam can find himself so consumed by a few insignifcant panels in a comic book that was meant to be funny. If you didn't find it funny, fine. I could care less about who likes She-Hulk and who doesn't. But it's absolutely insane to be going on arguing about it like this. It was a small, comical, introduction scene that will have absolutely no long-term ramifications on the character. It's like criticizing the Lord of the Rings in its entirety because you didn't think something Pippin did on page 1032 was funny or made sense. If the Simpsons Comic Book Guy were reading this thread, I think he'd even be rolling his eyes. I've been reading comic book message boards for a long time, and I believe this is a new low as far as fan criticism (slightly below the people who argue about who should win fights).
So I guess that's the point I was trying to get across. It's more like feeling sorry for someone than hostility.
Sandy Hausler
08-19-2006, 08:39 PM
Yes, because Two-Gun was taking care of Ruby. There was no need for She-Hulk to deal with Ruby, because that situation was already well in hand.
Meanwhile, Hellcat was technically also a criminal at the moment, who also needed to be dealt with...and I think Jen would rather get Patsy registered quickly, rather than give the SHIELD 'cape killers' a chance to get her instead.
Two-Gun Kid is a fellow Avenger who was perfectly qualified to handle Ruby on his own, and was armed with weapons specifically designed for taking down super-criminals. There was no 'extra risk' involved.
I guess we'll have to leave this with our disagreeing. Two Gun Kid has not super powers, and while he's able to take care of himself, it would have made a lot more sense for She-Hulk to take her out and then talk with Hellcat.
Sandy Hausler
Sandy Hausler
08-19-2006, 08:42 PM
It wasn't meant as a personal attack. It's just that I was and am still astounded that someone with the intelligence to pass the NY bar exam can find himself so consumed by a few insignifcant panels in a comic book that was meant to be funny. If you didn't find it funny, fine. I could care less about who likes She-Hulk and who doesn't. But it's absolutely insane to be going on arguing about it like this. It was a small, comical, introduction scene that will have absolutely no long-term ramifications on the character. It's like criticizing the Lord of the Rings in its entirety because you didn't think something Pippin did on page 1032 was funny or made sense. If the Simpsons Comic Book Guy were reading this thread, I think he'd even be rolling his eyes. I've been reading comic book message boards for a long time, and I believe this is a new low as far as fan criticism (slightly below the people who argue about who should win fights).
So I guess that's the point I was trying to get across. It's more like feeling sorry for someone than hostility.
You appear to be easily astounded.
And if you think arguing about insignificant points is insane, you probably shouldn't be posting in this forum. I just give my opinion, and if someone disagrees, I will respond. That's the fun of participating.
Sandy Hausler
bulbasteve
08-19-2006, 09:25 PM
You appear to be easily astounded.
And if you think arguing about insignificant points is insane, you probably shouldn't be posting in this forum. I just give my opinion, and if someone disagrees, I will respond. That's the fun of participating.
Sandy Hausler
I'm astounded that Dan Slott posts in the thread and it's no big thing, but your being a lawyer has brought on some weird fanboy/stalker vibe.
So let's try and get back to normal:
DAN I LOVE YOU WILL YOU HAVE MY BABY!?
Oh yeah Hulk totally killed people and the old artist was way better.
Does Thor swear by the Bible when he goes to court?
whew I feel much better.
EmmettHULK
08-20-2006, 07:16 PM
I'm astounded that Dan Slott posts in the thread and it's no big thing, but your being a lawyer has brought on some weird fanboy/stalker vibe.
:eek:
I am astounded that someone dislikes a scene (not even the book, Sandy IS a fan of She-Hulk ) in a Dan Slott book, and the fact that she/he expresses it actually makes some people accuse her/him of stalking...
Are Dan Slott fans the next Browncoats in their overzealous, blindly bordering-on-psychotic "defense" of the man's work?
Jeez...
Conn Seanery
08-20-2006, 07:52 PM
Before a whole whack of people start dropping from being so easily astounded, how about we limit the commentary to the book and not the each other. M'kay? M'kay.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.