Is The Hulk a Killer?

[Mark (nonick)]

Although there have been various unofficial polls taking place in a couple other threads around the forums, but I was hoping to get a real sense of the Yay! vs. Nay! on this subject.

In the Illuminati and Planet Hulk build up, it is heavily inferred (or outright stated depending on your POV) that The Hulk is responsible for a number of innocent deaths. However, some fans and creators have reacted contrarily, stating that there is no actual printed proof that the Hulk has ever killed an innocent person in his rampages. (at least none that is IN continuity, and has not been retconn'd).

Further, some believe that if he has/does kill people while raging, that Banner's character is ruined because he should have taken his own life years ago.

Personally, I believe that the Hulk has killed people while toppling buildings, highways etc. It's the only logical conclusion for me. And I have always believed it.

And, you know what?

It doesn't ruin Banner for me at all. I think it makes him all the more tragic a character. He wants that cure and final redemption, wants to prove he's not the horrible monster. To say he's a scumbag for not killing himself is little different than saying Spider-Man is a scumbag for not putting his fist through Cletus Kassidy's face, or twisting Electro's head all the way 'round. In any of these cases, leaving the subject alive is GUARANTEED to cause the deaths of innocent people.

Is killing yourself more honorable than killing a guy who has killed, is killing right now, and is going to kill again tomorrow? Heck, if it's against your moral code, but you do it anyways because you know it's the only way, maybe that could be considered MORE honorable. Or maybe only if you then killed yourself afterwards ;)

So, that's me. But what do you guys think?

[Expletive Deleted]

Logic says he has. Suspension of disbelief says he hasn't. So it sort of depends on where you want to draw that particular line. I tend towards the "hasn't" side, but it wouldn't really bother me if a writer decided to go the other way.

On the issue of whether possible deaths would reflect poorly on Banner . . . eh, I don't really think so. He's crazy. He's always been crazy. It's been shown time and time again that his multiple personalities are completely out of his control and numerous stories have featured his failed attempts at ending or resolving his predicament. He'd be no more culpable for killing people than is now for massive property damage.

[Blade X]

A few quick points.

1. The Hulk has NEVER killed any innocent people. It has been stated numerous times in the comics that th Hulk has NEVER any innocent people.

2. It has been stated and shown in the comics numerous times that Bruce has enough subconsous control of the Hulk to prevent him from killing any innocent people.

3. When will SOME fans and SOME creators realize that the HULK does NOT just randomly go around smashing things. The Hulk only lashes out at things and people that try to hurt him.

4. If the Hulk is shown killing innocent people, it would most DEFINITELY ruin the Hulk/Bruce character, because you could NOT sympathize/feel sorry for and/or root for him. Remember, the Hulk is supposed to be a misunderstood tragic anti hero who always ends up doing the right thing. If the Hulk killed any innocent people Bruce would either (a) kill himself (b) turn himself into the authorities or (c) find away to permanently exile himself away from the rest of humanity and any other living creatures.

5. If fans and creators can suspend disbelief and accept that no innocent people have ever been killed every single time that Superman or the Thing punches somebody through a crowded building, then they should be both and willing to accept that the Hulk has not killed any innocent people. If they can accept that Batman's long cape never snags on anything or gets caught in a door, then they should be able to accept that he Hulk has/nt killed any innocent people. If they can accept that non-super powered heroes or those super powered heroes who do not have enhanced strength or a degree of invulnerability like Daredevil, Batman,Robin,Nightwin,and Hawkeye can jump off rooftops and then stop their fall by using their Batlines without ripping their arms out of their socket, then they should be able to accept that he Hulk has'nt killed any innocent people. If they can accept characters who do not have a healing factor getting knocked unconsous numerous times without suffering any brain damage, then they should be able to accept that the Hulk has killed any innocent people.

6. Anyone who can't suspend disbelief and accept the fact that the Hulk has not killed any innocent people needs to stop reading Hulk comics and needs to stop reading all mainstream Marvel and DC comics in general.

[Loestal]

A few quick points.

1. The Hulk has NEVER killed any innocent people. It has been stated numerous times in the comics that th Hulk has NEVER any innocent people.

2. It has been stated and shown in the comics numerous times that Bruce has enough subconsous control of the Hulk to prevent him from killing any innocent people.

3. When will SOME fans and SOME creators realize that the HULK does NOT just randomly go around smashing things. The Hulk only lashes out at things and people that try to hurt him.

4. If the Hulk is shown killing innocent people, it would most DEFINITELY ruin the Hulk/Bruce character, because you could NOT sympathize/feel sorry for and/or root for him. Remember, the Hulk is supposed to be a misunderstood tragic anti hero who always ends up doing the right thing. If the Hulk killed any innocent people Bruce would either (a) kill himself (b) turn himself into the authorities or (c) find away to permanently exile himself away from the rest of humanity and any other living creatures.

5. If fans and creators can suspend disbelief and accept that no innocent people have ever been killed every single time that Superman or the Thing punches somebody through a crowded building, then they should be both and willing to accept that the Hulk has not killed any innocent people. If they can accept that Batman's long cape never snags on anything or gets caught in a door, then they should be able to accept that he Hulk has/nt killed any innocent people. If they can accept that non-super powered heroes or those super powered heroes who do not have enhanced strength or a degree of invulnerability like Daredevil, Batman,Robin,Nightwin,and Hawkeye can jump off rooftops and then stop their fall by using their Batlines without ripping their arms out of their socket, then they should be able to accept that he Hulk has'nt killed any innocent people. If they can accept characters who do not have a healing factor getting knocked unconsous numerous times without suffering any brain damage, then they should be able to accept that the Hulk has killed any innocent people.

6. Anyone who can't suspend disbelief and accept the fact that the Hulk has not killed any innocent people needs to stop reading Hulk comics and needs to stop reading all mainstream Marvel and DC comics in general.


Ehhh...I don't buy it. If he magically never kills anyone during his rampages...then he isn't a threat accept to land lords.

But youre right, he never willingly kills innocents. But when he looses control, destroys half a city....people die, sorry but they do. I know what has been stated...but Wolverine also lost his nose once so eh.

[Shellhead]

Ehhh...I don't buy it. If he magically never kills anyone during his rampages...then he isn't a threat accept to land lords.

But youre right, he never willingly kills innocents. But when he looses control, destroys half a city....people die, sorry but they do. I know what has been stated...but Wolverine also lost his nose once so eh.

If you are so obsessed with realism, why are you reading superhero comics? You want realism? Fine, Wolverine can barely move, due to the weight of all that adamantium, and Cyclops should have a broken neck each time he fires his optic beams. Hank Pym's bones would have snapped the first time he used the Pym particle to become Giant-Man. And speaking of extra mass... where does Hulk get all that height, weight and muscle when he transforms? There's your realism... enjoy it.

[Kevinroc]

No, I've seen no convincing proof that Hulk, when he is not being controlled by outside influences (such as mind-control or the gamma bomb that blew up in his face in Las Vegas), is a killer of "innocents."

Of course, "innocent" is a highly subjective term.

[Loestal]

If you are so obsessed with realism, why are you reading superhero comics? You want realism? Fine, Wolverine can barely move, due to the weight of all that adamantium, and Cyclops should have a broken neck each time he fires his optic beams. Hank Pym's bones would have snapped the first time he used the Pym particle to become Giant-Man. And speaking of extra mass... where does Hulk get all that height, weight and muscle when he transforms? There's your realism... enjoy it.

I never said the word realism, and beyond that...never hinted I was obsessed with anything. You call it suspension of disbelief, I call it ignorance or being gullible. I read comics, well to be honest because I want to and that really should be the only reason I need, it's my money but I'll humor you.

I don't ask for 100% realism, but to say half a city is destroyed (Vegas) and NOBODY was killed...that's too much. I understand about not wanting to ruin the Banner character, but if he never kills anyone...why would he feel guilty? Because he wrecked some guys car, or ruined some old person's fence? Wouldn't it make more sense and have more gravity if he had all those deaths on his hands?

So there you are, my reasons for well...whatever. Next time I hope you can insert yourself into a conversation without leading with your ass and jumping to conclusions or putting words in others mouths.


P.S. Adamantium is almost weightless, and it is lightly laced over Wolverine's bones...it wouldn't be too heavy.

[Mark (nonick)]

If you are so obsessed with realism, why are you reading superhero comics? You want realism? Fine, Wolverine can barely move, due to the weight of all that adamantium, and Cyclops should have a broken neck each time he fires his optic beams. Hank Pym's bones would have snapped the first time he used the Pym particle to become Giant-Man. And speaking of extra mass... where does Hulk get all that height, weight and muscle when he transforms? There's your realism... enjoy it.
I'm not sure that him saying that a building falling down kills people qualifies as "obsessed with realism." But I want to point out a small difference between the Hulk's lethality and your subsequent examples. Your examples involve the superhuman Sci-Fi characters in comics, and people dying when the Hulk topples a city involves US. Regular people.

At least that's a difference to me. When I read comics, I'll often put myself in the place of the "normal" people - to experience the grandeur and majesty on some level. Looking up, seeing the epic in the world right above my head. I dig that aspect of comics. So, to me, if the "real" people in the MU are not in any peril from toppling buildings, then when are they in peril? I guess for me, there has to be the "good" with the "bad."

So, if Graviton pulling the moon out of it's orbit is dangerous, then so is the Hulk smashing a freeway.


Ehhh...I don't buy it. If he magically never kills anyone during his rampages...then he isn't a threat accept to land lords.

But youre right, he never willingly kills innocents. But when he looses control, destroys half a city....people die, sorry but they do. I know what has been stated...but Wolverine also lost his nose once so eh.

[Doom Hammer]

Has he killed anyone, as in grabbed them and broken them in half? No, that'd make him a bad guy.

But indirectly? Certainly. Sorry, if you knock down a building, some people are going to die.

[Loestal]

Has he killed anyone, as in grabbed them and broken them in half? No, that'd make him a bad guy.

But indirectly? Certainly. Sorry, if you knock down a building, some people are going to die.


EXACTLY, thank you. My point is made 3 times over.

[Doom Hammer]

EXACTLY, thank you. My point is made 3 times over.

And it was confirmed by the Illuminati one-shot, so there's really not much of an argument. That's how it is.

[BeastieRunner]

. . . but we don't want our lovable Green Machine to be a killer :( *sniff* *sob*

[Loestal]

. . . but we don't want our lovable Green Machine to be a killer :( *sniff* *sob*


Another point, he has been killing aliens in Planet Hulk left and right. They aren't humans, but regardless killing living intellegent things.

[RichStanz]

If you are so obsessed with realism, why are you reading superhero comics? You want realism? Fine, Wolverine can barely move, due to the weight of all that adamantium, and Cyclops should have a broken neck each time he fires his optic beams. Hank Pym's bones would have snapped the first time he used the Pym particle to become Giant-Man. And speaking of extra mass... where does Hulk get all that height, weight and muscle when he transforms? There's your realism... enjoy it.

There is a difference between realism and logic though. All the things you talk about are logic - they are points of detail, dealing with anatomy.

Admitedly, I read it as kind of hokey to show Hulk destroying a city block, and for there to be NOT ONE casualty. To me it doesn't make sense that everybody could dodge debree and fire and broken glass and frayed wires and impact collapses, and the worst thing that happened was a broken leg or a scratch.

Even if Hulk killed somebody, I don't view it as deliberate. When Banner has no control, the hulk is basically a wild animal. If a lion got loose on a city block, and attacked people, I would be amazed if somebody wasn't killed. Secondly, its not like anyone would accuse the lion of being "malicious" or "evil." People might say that a lion shouldn't be in that environment, and it needs to be removed as quickly as possible.

Lastly, I don't think there is anything wrong with realism in superhero comics because who says that superhero comics can or cannot have a certain style? Saying comics shouldn't have realism is as stifling as saying comics should always have realism.

[Alan2099]

The Illuminati stuff and everything that's came from it is horrible writting at some of it's worst. I don't care if they say Hulk has killed somebody. I ignore it. It's less canon to me than the episodes I used to watch with Rick Jones in a cowboy hat.

Besides if you want to argue realism with the Hulk, explain his pants. Why don't they rip? How can he still wear them after turning back into Banner? :p

[RichStanz]

The Illuminati stuff and everything that's came from it is horrible writting at some of it's worst. I don't care if they say Hulk has killed somebody. I ignore it. It's less canon to me than the episodes I used to watch with Rick Jones in a cowboy hat.

Besides if you want to argue realism with the Hulk, explain his pants. Why don't they rip? How can he still wear them after turning back into Banner? :p

Again, that's not realism - its logic.

Secondly, I like the Illuminati stuff, so it can't be argued that its "horrible writing" discredits any theories it might offer. I could say that Slott's recent explanation in She-Hulk that Hulk has never killed anyone is bad writing, so I ignore it. Which means Hulk HAS KILLED. It's opinion. It doesn't make anyone of us more right, than the other.

[Starkicker]

Of courrse people have died because of ol'green jeans but there is a big difference between someone who has caused deaths and a murderer.

The Hulk is not a murderer, he does not intend to kill people, they just die in his wake.
You know how every once in a while a horny gorrilla escapes from the zoo and a few people die in his rampage (oh sure happens all the time). The ape isn't a murderer, it's just an animal. Perhaps not the best example, how about a force of nature, flood, hurricane etc., the Hulk is like a force of nature causing death not murdering.

[Blade X]

There is a difference between realism and logic though. All the things you talk about are logic - they are points of detail, dealing with anatomy.

Admitedly, I read it as kind of hokey to show Hulk destroying a city block, and for there to be NOT ONE casualty. To me it doesn't make sense that everybody could dodge debree and fire and broken glass and frayed wires and impact collapses, and the worst thing that happened was a broken leg or a scratch.

Even if Hulk killed somebody, I don't view it as deliberate. When Banner has no control, the hulk is basically a wild animal. If a lion got loose on a city block, and attacked people, I would be amazed if somebody wasn't killed. Secondly, its not like anyone would accuse the lion of being "malicious" or "evil." People might say that a lion shouldn't be in that environment, and it needs to be removed as quickly as possible.

Lastly, I don't think there is anything wrong with realism in superhero comics because who says that superhero comics can or cannot have a certain style? Saying comics shouldn't have realism is as stifling as saying comics should always have realism.

You do know that a lion (or any dangerous wild animal) that kills someone is imediately killed. The Hulk is a hell of a lot more smarter then a lion.

Like I said in my earlier post, if you're willing to beleave that the Hulk has killed innocent people by knocking down a building, then you have to beleav that Superman and the Thing have also killed innocent people.

[Loestal]

The Illuminati stuff and everything that's came from it is horrible writting at some of it's worst. I don't care if they say Hulk has killed somebody. I ignore it. It's less canon to me than the episodes I used to watch with Rick Jones in a cowboy hat.

Besides if you want to argue realism with the Hulk, explain his pants. Why don't they rip? How can he still wear them after turning back into Banner? :p


That's kind of taking the whole thing out of context don't you think? There is a line that must be drawn at some point. Letting Pym live after growing huge, Wolverine's skeleton, Cyclops' blast....we are told from day ONE they are super people. They are not the norm. But as MANY have said before, when 6 blocks are leveled...normal people WILL die, and HAVE died. I don't care if it's collateral damaged done by Hulk or done by Abomination....it's absurb to say that Hulk hasn't been responsible for deaths. By this train of thought, if it was Hulk who destroyed the school in Stamford...Civil War wouldn't be going on because those 600 people wouldn't of died....give me a break.

[RichStanz]

You do know that a lion (or any dangerous wild animal) that kills someone is imediately killed. The Hulk is a hell of a lot more smarter then a lion.

Is the savage hulk *that* much smarter than a wild animal? I actually don't know. I'm not talking about Banner having any control over hulk, either, just pure rampaging hulk. And the gov't does try to put down the hulk immediately - he's just too strong for them. ;)

Like I said in my earlier post, if you're willing to beleave that the Hulk has killed innocent people by knocking down a building, then you have to beleav that Superman and the Thing have also killed innocent people.

Okay.

[Kevinroc]

Again, that's not realism - its logic.

Secondly, I like the Illuminati stuff, so it can't be argued that its "horrible writing" discredits any theories it might offer. I could say that Slott's recent explanation in She-Hulk that Hulk has never killed anyone is bad writing, so I ignore it. Which means Hulk HAS KILLED. It's opinion. It doesn't make anyone of us more right, than the other.

The "Illuminati" stuff was mentioning a story where Hulk had been caught in the explosion of another gamma bomb and went wild because of that. That's not a normal Hulk rampage. Slott specifically mentioned Hulk where he was not being mind-controlled or an outside explanation for his rage. So the Illuminati story you cite does not count as it falls under the jurisdiction of an "outside force" that made Hulk rampage.

As far as Hulk killing. He has. I've seen him kill on-panel. But he killed would-be rapists. Those are hardly "innocents."

And that's the key point. Has Hulk, under his own control, ever killed an innocent person? And for this, we will use the three main Hulk personalities. The Savage Hulk. Joe Fixit (either in control of the gray Hulk or green Hulk's body). The Professor.

Have any of those three personalites ever killed an innocent person while they were in charge?

[Loestal]

You do know that a lion (or any dangerous wild animal) that kills someone is imediately killed. The Hulk is a hell of a lot more smarter then a lion.

Like I said in my earlier post, if you're willing to beleave that the Hulk has killed innocent people by knocking down a building, then you have to beleav that Superman and the Thing have also killed innocent people.

Welcome to Civil War my friend. This is EXACTLY the sort of the CW is about. Yes, your right...by this logic Thing has had a hand in collateral damage. But if anyone has been harmed or killed by this it's NOT because Thing got mad at somebody and had a "temper tantrum". And to be honest, not alot of super battles happen out in the streets. Granted, there have been plenty...but not as much as you probably think.

Oh, and Superman can suck it.

[Blade X]

I never said the word realism, and beyond that...never hinted I was obsessed with anything. You call it suspension of disbelief, I call it ignorance or being gullible. I read comics, well to be honest because I want to and that really should be the only reason I need, it's my money but I'll humor you.

I don't ask for 100% realism, but to say half a city is destroyed (Vegas) and NOBODY was killed...that's too much. I understand about not wanting to ruin the Banner character, but if he never kills anyone...why would he feel guilty? Because he wrecked some guys car, or ruined some old person's fence? Wouldn't it make more sense and have more gravity if he had all those deaths on his hands?

I don't know about you, but I (and most compasionate human beings) would feel bad if they accidentally destroyed someones home. Making people homeless is most definately something to feel guilty about.

[Loestal]

The "Illuminati" stuff was mentioning a story where Hulk had been caught in the explosion of another gamma bomb and went wild because of that. That's not a normal Hulk rampage. Slott specifically mentioned Hulk where he was not being mind-controlled or an outside explanation for his rage. So the Illuminati story you cite does not count as it falls under the jurisdiction of an "outside force" that made Hulk rampage.

As far as Hulk killing. He has. I've seen him kill on-panel. But he killed would-be rapists. Those are hardly "innocents."

And that's the key point. Has Hulk, under his own control, ever killed an innocent person? And for this, we will use the three main Hulk personalities. The Savage Hulk. Joe Fixit (either in control of the gray Hulk or green Hulk's body). The Professor.

Have any of those three personalites ever killed an innocent person while they were in charge?

Oh come on, this is OBVIOUSLY not about if he has willingly killed innocents out of rage. It's about him being responsible for injury and deaths during one of his episodes, while he is basically out of his mind mad.

[Blade X]

That's kind of taking the whole thing out of context don't you think? There is a line that must be drawn at some point. Letting Pym live after growing huge, Wolverine's skeleton, Cyclops' blast....we are told from day ONE they are super people. They are not the norm. But as MANY have said before, when 6 blocks are leveled...normal people WILL die, and HAVE died. I don't care if it's collateral damaged done by Hulk or done by Abomination....it's absurb to say that Hulk hasn't been responsible for deaths. By this train of thought, if it was Hulk who destroyed the school in Stamford...Civil War wouldn't be going on because those 600 people wouldn't of died....give me a break.

And when people get knocked unconsous numerous times, they suffer brain damage.

[Dr. Banner]

A few quick points.

1. The Hulk has NEVER killed any innocent people. It has been stated numerous times in the comics that th Hulk has NEVER any innocent people.

...

You didn't read the news reporter from Jim Byrne's original run, detailing around issue 322 that people had died due to the Hulks rampage in the town of Jericho.

[XPac]

I was perfectly fine suspending by belief in thinking no one has ever been killed by Hulks rampages (even though logically I assumed that wasn't likely).

That said, if writers do say he's killed people, I'm fine with that too. It does make sense in my head, and I personally don't hold it against Banner since its not something he can completely control.

The only difference in my book now than before is that when I see a rubble of a demolished building I'm assuming there are people beneath it (something I probably would logically assume anyways).

[Blade X]

Welcome to Civil War my friend. This is EXACTLY the sort of the CW is about. Yes, your right...by this logic Thing has had a hand in collateral damage. But if anyone has been harmed or killed by this it's NOT because Thing got mad at somebody and had a "temper tantrum". And to be honest, not alot of super battles happen out in the streets. Granted, there have been plenty...but not as much as you probably think.

Oh, and Superman can suck it.

I don't know what superhero comics you have been reading, but MOST superhero comics I have read show the fighting happening in the streets.

Btw, when the Hulk gets mad at someone, he does'nt randomly start smashing things. His angr is directed solely at the person pr object he is mad at.

Only the CURRENT version of Superman can suck it.

[Blade X]

You didn't read the news reporter from Jim Byrne's original run, detailing around issue 322 that people had died due to the Hulks rampage in the town of Jericho.

No I did'nt read that issue. However, the Hulk from Byrne's first run, was physically seperated from Bruce and was completely MINDLESS. Which was, I beleav, the point of that whole story. A Hulk without the smallest ounce of Bruce's consousness is a murderous monster, but a Hulk with an ounce of Briuce's mind (be it Savag Hulk,Grey Hulk,Proffesor Hulk,or the current Gravage Hulk) will NOT kill innocent people.

[The Scribe]

Hulk kills a clone of Bruce Banner. Hulk #65 (Split Decisions 6/6)

Bruce kills his father!?

http://www.hulknews.com/hulkdatabase/brianbannersdeath.jpg

http://www.hulknews.com/multimedia/images.php

[Kid Bushido]

He doesn't really murder innocents. These just die cause of the rampage. It must happen.

[Mike Smash!]

Depends entirely on the incarnation of the Hulk. Some kill. Some don't.

The Mindless Hulk, Ultimate Hulk? Murderers who wantonly kill, even innocents.

Grey Hulk, Merged/Professor Hulk, Grayvage Hulk? Can be willing to kill or can be pushed to killing. Don't kill innocents.

The Savage Hulk, Banner Hulk? Not killers and would never purposely kill.

[Loestal]

Again, for like th 6th time...I never said Hulk was a killer...but he is responsible for deaths..period. It's cannon.

[Kevinroc]

Oh come on, this is OBVIOUSLY not about if he has willingly killed innocents out of rage. It's about him being responsible for injury and deaths during one of his episodes, while he is basically out of his mind mad.

Imagine if Superman was trying to stop a Red Kryptonite Bomb from exploding in Metropolis. But the bomb ended up blowing up in his face. Superman than becomes a mindless creature until he is calmed by... let's say Wonder Woman. But during Superman's "breakdown", a number of people were killed.

So, would that incident be Superman's fault? I know Superman would blame himself because that's the kind of character he is, but would those deaths really be his fault?

Essentially, that is what you are saying about The Hulk and Las Vegas. Because Las Vegas was not "one of his episodes." There were very special circumstances behind that incident.

[Kevinroc]

Again, for like th 6th time...I never said Hulk was a killer...but he is responsible for deaths..period. It's cannon.

Yes, I said he punched the heads off of would-be rapists.

And that's "cannon."

But the arguement Dan Slott has made is that The Hulk is not responsible for the deaths of any "innocent" people.

[Markavian]

The Hulk has killed at least 27 innocent People that we know of.When John Byrne briefly took over the Book the Hulk killed a young Woman on Doc Samsons Hulkbuster team.And when he throws a Tank or Army truck you dont think the Troops inside arent killed? The Hulk is wildly out of control and not being held to account for his actions.Yes Yes Its all Fantasy but the MU prides itself on realism .Way back in 1981 the Hulk recived a Pardon when Bruce Banner took over the hulks body for the first time. Since then the Hulk has wavered between Supersmart and Strong to SuperSavage and Stupid . Marvel should pick one spot and keep him there. But they shouldnt let him off Easily for his actions nor would a Court of Law. While there wouldnt be an el quickie Ultimate Universe Trial and death sentence for the Hulk if captured. I think he would face the most servere punishment Possible ..Either Death or Exile into somewhere like 42 when convicted. Insanity would not be accepted as a Defense to the point where he gets off. He would MAYBE get a coditional Service Agreement with SHEILD with some sort of arrangment to kill him if and when he lost it again.:)

[bd2999]

It would only make sense that he would be with all the destruction he has casued but for the majority of his existence I would say no because Marvel went out of there way to make it clear that no one died during those tantrums, but it never made any sense.

[XPac]

The Hulk has killed at least 27 innocent People that we know of.When John Byrne briefly took over the Book the Hulk killed a young Woman on Doc Samsons Hulkbuster team.And when he throws a Tank or Army truck you dont think the Troops inside arent killed? The Hulk is wildly out of control and not being held to account for his actions.Yes Yes Its all Fantasy but the MU prides itself on realism .Way back in 1981 the Hulk recived a Pardon when Bruce Banner took over the hulks body for the first time. Since then the Hulk has wavered between Supersmart and Strong to SuperSavage and Stupid . Marvel should pick one spot and keep him there. But they shouldnt let him off Easily for his actions nor would a Court of Law. While there wouldnt be an el quickie Ultimate Universe Trial and death sentence for the Hulk if captured. I think he would face the most servere punishment Possible ..Either Death or Exile into somewhere like 42 when convicted. Insanity would not be accepted as a Defense to the point where he gets off. He would MAYBE get a coditional Service Agreement with SHEILD with some sort of arrangment to kill him if and when he lost it again.:)


Governments tried all that. They've tried caputring him, they've tried killing him. And his own fellow heroes have tried exiliging him... obviously now but at least one other time in the past.

And I'm sure they'll try all those things again when he returns. Hulk is like Marvels version of Godzilla... he's practically a force of nature. Mankind with their gamma tasting let the genie out of the bottle, and they can't put it back in.

[Sparda]

Of all the time I've seen the hulk that I can recall he never killed an innocent. The most he has ever done though is "injure" innocents when he's pissed at army men trying to hurt him. He probably killed a few bad guys (don't remember that one) but that's probably about it.

Ultimate hulk on the other hand is a different story. He may not have that cool ness like his 616 part has but it is fun watching him get angry and thrashing people :)

[XPac]

Of all the time I've seen the hulk that I can recall he never killed an innocent. The most he has ever done though is "injure" innocents when he's pissed at army men trying to hurt him. He probably killed a few bad guys (don't remember that one) but that's probably about it.



Here's the thing... everytime we see a Hulk fight where he's smashed a building, it's reasonable to assume that the building was filled with innocent people that died from it.

Given that this is a comicbook, this can fall under the "suspension of belief" clause where we just assume that it just happened to be empty. I have no trouble with that. But in the same token, if the writers tell us that in fact the building DID have innocent people in it, obviously that's fairly believable as well.

[stormkid]

The only killing I've seen hulk do out of hate is when he destoryed a robot back in esst. Hulk no 3. The adroid begged the hulk not to kill him, then when hulk relized he was not human he tore him to pieces. What puzzled me was that the robot was friendly and hulk considered him a friend.

[Kevinroc]

Here's the thing... everytime we see a Hulk fight where he's smashed a building, it's reasonable to assume that the building was filled with innocent people that died from it.

Given that this is a comicbook, this can fall under the "suspension of belief" clause where we just assume that it just happened to be empty. I have no trouble with that. But in the same token, if the writers tell us that in fact the building DID have innocent people in it, obviously that's fairly believable as well.

It's just acceptable for Hulk?

And not when, say, Iron Man is fighting a bad guy and said fight causes a building to collapse?

[Strannik]

Has he killed anyone, as in grabbed them and broken them in half? No, that'd make him a bad guy.

But indirectly? Certainly. Sorry, if you knock down a building, some people are going to die.

That pretty much describes my position.

And, just for reference, I think it applies to all superheroes. Hulk just has more destructive potential based solely on his strength/endurance.

[Shellhead]

I never said the word realism, and beyond that...never hinted I was obsessed with anything. You call it suspension of disbelief, I call it ignorance or being gullible. I read comics, well to be honest because I want to and that really should be the only reason I need, it's my money but I'll humor you.

I don't ask for 100% realism, but to say half a city is destroyed (Vegas) and NOBODY was killed...that's too much. I understand about not wanting to ruin the Banner character, but if he never kills anyone...why would he feel guilty? Because he wrecked some guys car, or ruined some old person's fence? Wouldn't it make more sense and have more gravity if he had all those deaths on his hands?

So there you are, my reasons for well...whatever. Next time I hope you can insert yourself into a conversation without leading with your ass and jumping to conclusions or putting words in others mouths.


P.S. Adamantium is almost weightless, and it is lightly laced over Wolverine's bones...it wouldn't be too heavy.

You didn't use the word "realism", but you did object to something "magically" happening. While magic and realism are not precisely defined as opposites, most people would consider them incompatible. Magic is very much a part of the Marvel Universe. In fact, one of Hulk's closest allies has been Dr. Strange, the Supreme Sorceror of the 616 dimension. To comment on your apparent disdain for the functioning of the Marvel Universe in this context is neither "leading with your ass and jumping to conclusions or putting words in others mouths."

I haven't read every Hulk issue, but if he did in fact destroy half of Las Vegas, I will reluctantly concede that there must have been some deaths, and Banner would understandably feel guilt about that.

As for inserting myself into a conversation, this is a discussion forum, and I don't require your permission to post here. If we were talking face to face, maybe you could try to suppress my freedom of speech, but I sincerely doubt it, little man.

[Loestal]

[QUOTE=Shellhead]I haven't read every Hulk issue, but if he did in fact destroy half of Las Vegas, I will reluctantly concede that there must have been some deaths, and Banner would understandably feel guilt about that.
QUOTE]

Thanks for playing.

[ednemo]

You didn't use the word "realism", but you did object to something "magically" happening. While magic and realism are not precisely defined as opposites, most people would consider them incompatible. Magic is very much a part of the Marvel Universe. In fact, one of Hulk's closest allies has been Dr. Strange, the Supreme Sorceror of the 616 dimension. To comment on your apparent disdain for the functioning of the Marvel Universe in this context is neither "leading with your ass and jumping to conclusions or putting words in others mouths."

I haven't read every Hulk issue, but if he did in fact destroy half of Las Vegas, I will reluctantly concede that there must have been some deaths, and Banner would understandably feel guilt about that.

As for inserting myself into a conversation, this is a discussion forum, and I don't require your permission to post here. If we were talking face to face, maybe you could try to suppress my freedom of speech, but I sincerely doubt it, little man.

I think the US should bring back dueling. Swords, Guns...or just beating on each other with your fist. The anonymity of the internet leads to too many people talking a lot of smack that they wouldn't say to a person's face. In fact that would make a great comic. The Forum Vigilante. He could go after the people that fight on forums and get them together and see what happens.

Anyway, the Hulk has undoubtedly killed people. However, he has never intentionally set out to kill anybody. Not that I think he cared one way or the other about soldiers getting smashed who were shooting at him. But, dead is dead. If the Hulk was stomping through New York fighting the Army and threw a tank which landed in Central park killing a mother and her two kids. Then the husband would undoubtedly blame the Hulk. (Rightfully so.) And he would then punish them. A person falling asleep at the wheel is responsible for the people they ran over. It wouldn't be murder, it would be man-slaughter. They didn't intend to do it, but they are still responsible. Same thing with the Hulk.

[3D Master]

There's suspension of disbelief, and then there's something so out there you just go :confused:

The Hulk has never killed innocents.

The Hulk however has comitted involuntary manslaughter.

When he picks up a tank that's attacking him, and he randomly throws it away in anger, and it smashing through a building, people in that building die. When he topples a building on something attackin him, or pick it up to smash it against someone or something, people die. If no one ever dies; why bother going after the Hulk? Why's Banner so hell bent on curing himself? The Hulk just saves people, and beats up bad guys and never kills anyone - if I were Banner in that scenario, I'd go: GREAT!

The Hulk's caused people's death, simple.

[Morw]

Just on a note. Why do Hulk only fight in Ghost towns? where people have randomly put up buildings for him to smash?

[Kevinroc]

[QUOTE=Shellhead]I haven't read every Hulk issue, but if he did in fact destroy half of Las Vegas, I will reluctantly concede that there must have been some deaths, and Banner would understandably feel guilt about that.
QUOTE]

Thanks for playing.

And yet you ignore that the desctruction of Vegas (Fantastic Four #533-535) was the result of a gamma bomb blowing up in Hulk's face and essentially turning him into a totally mindless beast, which The Hulk is not (The Savage Hulk is stupid but not totally mindless).

[ivesaidway2much]

How can Bruce Banner not be considered evil or a sociopath if the Hulk kills innocent people either intentionally or unintentionally? I can understand how some might think that expecting Banner to kill himself might be too harsh, but at the very least he could turn himself into the authorites. Sure the Hulk would eventually escape and go on a rampage killing more people, but Banner could just turn himself again when the Hulk calms down. Eventually the people in charge of jailing the Hulk would learn ways to at the very least slow down the Hulk and limit the number of people killed in his rampages, or though unlikely maybe even find a way to eliminate the Hulk. But instead of turning himself in Banner just wanders through populated areas feeling guilty about the Hulk killing thousands if not millions of innocent bystanders. If the Hulk kills innocent people how is Banner not the most selfish/evil person in the MU for not turning himself and at least slowing down one of the most prolific mass murderers in MU Earth history? And I haven't even mentioned the numerous times Banner has been cured only to choose to become the Hulk again.

As for logic in regards to the Hulk's killings. Logically, Bruce Banner is dead. A normal person caught in the blast of a gamma bomb would be vaporized instantly. Logically, he certainly wouldn't create new mass for himself that is about 7-10 times their original mass, and he wouldn't be able to lift weights that even a million normal people working together couldn't, because that would violate just about every fundamental law of science. But even if someone claimed that Bruce Banner is a special case and somehow he's not a normal person, that still doesn't explain Rick Jones. Logically crouching inside a ditch would not leave a normal person at ground zero of gamma bomb explosion unscathed. In the MU Rick Jones is a normal guy who frequently hangs out with superheroes, in our world Rick Jones would be the invincible, unquestioned ruler of the Earth given his immunity to nuclear-level attacks. If you want to know how normal people survive the Hulk's rampages, given the impossible feats of people with fairly normal bodies like Hawkeye, Daredevil, and Rick Jones logically it follows that normal people in the MU are way, WAAAAYYY tougher than normal people in our world. Either that or logically Bruce Banner, Rick Jones, Peter Parker, and any other normal person in the MU who gained powers through physically impossible means is dead.

[3D Master]

How can Bruce Banner not be considered evil or a sociopath if the Hulk kills innocent people either intentionally or unintentionally. I can understand how some might think that expecting Banner to kill himself might be too harsh, but at the very least he could turn himself into the authorites. Sure the Hulk would eventually escape and go on a rampage killing more people, but Banner could just turn himself again when the Hulk calms down. Eventually the people in charge of jailing the Hulk would learn ways to at the very least slow down the Hulk and limit the number of people killed in his rampages, or thhough unlikely maybe even find a way to eliminate the Hulk. But instead of turning himself in Banner just wanders through populated areas feeling guilty about the Hulk killing thousands if not millions of innocent bystanders. If the Hulk kills innocent people how is Banner not the most selfish/evil person in the MU for not turning himself and at least slowing down one of the most prolific mass murderers in MU Earth history? And I haven't even mentioned the numerous times Banner has been cured.

Ah, yes, and that's exactly the beauty of the Hulk/Bruce Banner. The human is a monster, and always has been, he's a manufacturer of mass destruct weapons after all. It's this very monstrousness, that produces an actual monster; a monster that is more human than the human could ever be, and the human is more monstrous than the monster. That's the beautiful irony of the Hulk.

[Ian Boothby]

If Hulk is a killer then so is Thor, Namor, the Thing and another else who's ever brought down buildings during a fight. And Spider-Man must have given at least a few dozen people brain damage from all the kicks to mugger's heads.

When you bring logic into it, none of the heroes powers would work and dozens to hundreds of bystanders would be killed with each fight. So you put that up on the shelf. You choose what to believe and what not to believe. "Realistically" can't always enter into a storyline that at it's core is unrealistic. As a writer you pick and choose what works and certain gaps have to be left unfilled.

Realistically the gamma bomb would have killed him. But what fun would that have been?

[ivesaidway2much]

Ah, yes, and that's exactly the beauty of the Hulk/Bruce Banner. The human is a monster, and always has been, he's a manufacturer of mass destruct weapons after all. It's this very monstrousness, that produces an actual monster; a monster that is more human than the human could ever be, and the human is more monstrous than the monster. That's the beautiful irony of the Hulk.
That's my problem with making the Hulk a mass murderer; it strips away all the irony. Now it's just a story about a guy who goes around killing people and another who doesn't care enough to stop the slaughter. Not very compelling, IMO.

[Doom Hammer]

If Hulk is a killer then so is Thor, Namor, the Thing and another else who's ever brought down buildings during a fight. And Spider-Man must have given at least a few dozen people brain damage from all the kicks to mugger's heads.

Thor and the Thing are not known for their mindless rampages across the city, and their frequent battles with, say, the U.S. Armed Forces.

(Namor kind of is, but he's the King of Atlantis and sometimes he has to declare war just for the hell of it.) ;)

The point is, people die in super-fights. With massive property damage comes a couple falling bricks that crush a couple heads. This is how it is. If people didn't die in super-fights, why would anybody care about registering and monitoring heroes? What's the point of super-heroes, if not to fight super-crime and prevent the injury and death that results from it? When you're knocking down buildings, people die, but you can't blame the people trying to stop the fight or stop the rampage, like Thor and the Thing.

But Hulk, he starts fights. He's a mindless beast at times. He rampages from time to time. And that's why he's more accountable for the deaths inflicted in his fights than other heroes are.

[XPac]

That's my problem with making the Hulk a mass murderer; it strips away all the irony. Now it's just a story about a guy who goes around killing people and another who doesn't care enough to stop the slaughter. Not very compelling, IMO.

So if you were to look back through past Hulk stories with the realization that there were dead bodies beneath the piles of rumble in the background of a battle, would that knowledge somehow make the story you're reading any less compelling?

[3D Master]

If Hulk is a killer then so is Thor, Namor, the Thing and another else who's ever brought down buildings during a fight. And Spider-Man must have given at least a few dozen people brain damage from all the kicks to mugger's heads.

When you bring logic into it, none of the heroes powers would work and dozens to hundreds of bystanders would be killed with each fight. So you put that up on the shelf. You choose what to believe and what not to believe. "Realistically" can't always enter into a storyline that at it's core is unrealistic. As a writer you pick and choose what works and certain gaps have to be left unfilled.


Yes, and? What are they supposed to do otherwise? Giant evil is planning on leveling a city with the ground just for the heck of it, and they just stand there and watch? I can see the conversation now:

Bystander: "Thor, stop that thing!"

Thor: "No, sorry, can't. I might accidentally get people killed. And I'm a good guy, you know I don't kill, not even accidentally, therefor I shall not fight it."

Bystander: "So you're just going to let it kill everybody?"

Thor: "Yep, sorry about that, but I'm a good guy you see, and I can't risk killing people. See ya, I'll be outside of the blast radius." Flies off.

Of course Thor and the others kill people when they smash an evil guy hard enough to go through a building. And it'll hurt them grately. But they can't stand by and let the bad guys wreck even greater damage. That's one thing that's compelling; how much damage are you forced to do to stop someone, and when do you attack that someone to minimize the damage. They probably didn't show enough bystanders getting killed in the past, and the good guys helping with the people trapped in the damage caused by the fight with the bad guy. Things would be a good stuff more compelling - you know: with great power comes great responsibility.

It also perfectly explains Civil War. I've heard people say it was out of character because the heroes always save the people; yeah, except those who get caught in the crossfire. Not the heroes fault, it's the villain, but it's still happening, and seeing Speedball go: "Ah, we can handle them, even if they're out of our league. It'll be great for the ratings." was the final straw. When you remember all the toppled buildings, missed energy blasts that had to smash somewhere, all the deaths over the past 40 years of comic book history - you very quickly see why the people want some measure taken that glory hounds like Speedball get stopped from going on. That these super humans get proper training, tactical and strategic insight in also knowing when to strike and when not. If the bad guy lives out of town and he's stealing something and he has some very powerful powers, then let him get out of the city first before one takes him down for example. It's all about minimizing the deaths of bystanders, about handling it responsibly, and not simply start firing down lightning bolts at the bad guys just because you can and there are some bad guys to thrown lightning bolts at.

That's my problem with making the Hulk a mass murderer; it strips away all the irony. Now it's just a story about a guy who goes around killing people and another who doesn't care enough to stop the slaughter. Not very compelling, IMO.

No, it doesn't. The Hulk is still more human than the moster that Bruce Banner. Hell, if he doesn't kill, there's no real irony anyway. Just because the Hulk is gets pissed off when you attack him, and becomes an engine of destruction and death, doesn't make the Hulk any less human.

[Arilou]

Logically, yeah, Hulk has killed people.

Not deliberately, but just by his sheer destructiveness. That is the tragedy of the Hulk, and what makes him so dangerous. If provoked he will harm people, not deliberately, but they'll still be just as dead.

[ivesaidway2much]

So if you were to look back through past Hulk stories with the realization that there were dead bodies beneath the piles of rumble in the background of a battle, would that knowledge somehow make the story you're reading any less compelling?
Yeah, as a matter of fact it would. Whenever the Hulk asks why the puny humans won't leave him alone, the obvious answer becomes because he is murdering their friends and family. When Juggernaut cheapshots the Hulk and nearly kills him, I'd now realize that Juggernaut has been trying to become a superhero for several decades. When Spider-man uppercuts the Hulk into space, I'd be wondering why Spidey didn't finally end the massive killing spree with his Cosmic powers. Whenever someone tried to use mind control on the Hulk, I'd honestly have to consider whether the world would be better off with the Leader or Tyrannus controlling the Hulk. And of course everytime Bruce was freed from the Hulk and then chose to become him again it would just reinforce what a cold-blooded sociopath he was to actually want to become a mass murderer again.
No, it doesn't. The Hulk is still more human than the moster that Bruce Banner. Hell, if he doesn't kill, there's no real irony anyway. Just because the Hulk is gets pissed off when you attack him, and becomes an engine of destruction and death, doesn't make the Hulk any less human. I don't know where you come from, but where I live humans don't go killing thousands of people because they stubbed their toe, spilled some milk, or got stuck in traffic. The only humans I know that go on mass killing sprees when they get angry are crazy pyschopaths and terrorists. Where's the irony when regardless of whether he is the Hulk or just a guy, Bruce Banner is still a monster? To me that makes him just another supervillian.

[ivesaidway2much]

Of course Thor and the others kill people when they smash an evil guy hard enough to go through a building. And it'll hurt them grately. But they can't stand by and let the bad guys wreck even greater damage. That's one thing that's compelling; how much damage are you forced to do to stop someone, and when do you attack that someone to minimize the damage. They probably didn't show enough bystanders getting killed in the past, and the good guys helping with the people trapped in the damage caused by the fight with the bad guy. Things would be a good stuff more compelling - you know: with great power comes great responsibility.

It also perfectly explains Civil War. I've heard people say it was out of character because the heroes always save the people; yeah, except those who get caught in the crossfire. Not the heroes fault, it's the villain, but it's still happening, and seeing Speedball go: "Ah, we can handle them, even if they're out of our league. It'll be great for the ratings." was the final straw. When you remember all the toppled buildings, missed energy blasts that had to smash somewhere, all the deaths over the past 40 years of comic book history - you very quickly see why the people want some measure taken that glory hounds like Speedball get stopped from going on. That these super humans get proper training, tactical and strategic insight in also knowing when to strike and when not. If the bad guy lives out of town and he's stealing something and he has some very powerful powers, then let him get out of the city first before one takes him down for example. It's all about minimizing the deaths of bystanders, about handling it responsibly, and not simply start firing down lightning bolts at the bad guys just because you can and there are some bad guys to thrown lightning bolts at.
That's the problem with bringing logic and realism into a completely unrealistic fictional universe. By your same line of reason Bruce Banner would have died in the gamma blast that spawned the Hulk, so he can't be killing people.

[Jmacq1]

Of course Thor and the others kill people when they smash an evil guy hard enough to go through a building. And it'll hurt them grately. But they can't stand by and let the bad guys wreck even greater damage. That's one thing that's compelling; how much damage are you forced to do to stop someone, and when do you attack that someone to minimize the damage. They probably didn't show enough bystanders getting killed in the past, and the good guys helping with the people trapped in the damage caused by the fight with the bad guy. Things would be a good stuff more compelling - you know: with great power comes great responsibility.

It also perfectly explains Civil War. I've heard people say it was out of character because the heroes always save the people; yeah, except those who get caught in the crossfire. Not the heroes fault, it's the villain, but it's still happening, and seeing Speedball go: "Ah, we can handle them, even if they're out of our league. It'll be great for the ratings." was the final straw. When you remember all the toppled buildings, missed energy blasts that had to smash somewhere, all the deaths over the past 40 years of comic book history - you very quickly see why the people want some measure taken that glory hounds like Speedball get stopped from going on. That these super humans get proper training, tactical and strategic insight in also knowing when to strike and when not. If the bad guy lives out of town and he's stealing something and he has some very powerful powers, then let him get out of the city first before one takes him down for example. It's all about minimizing the deaths of bystanders, about handling it responsibly, and not simply start firing down lightning bolts at the bad guys just because you can and there are some bad guys to thrown lightning bolts at.

No, I'm sorry, but no. To me, it's no more "unrealistic" to believe that Norse Gods fly around and fight bad guys or that people are randomly born with the ability to shoot laser beams from their nostrils than it is to believe that "bystander deaths" are minimal to nonexistent in most superhero fights.

Because quite frankly: If people were dying in the kinds of numbers that most city-shaking battles would produce, the SHRA (or something similar) would have showed up around, oh...."Fantastic Four #2".

Sorry, I don't buy the idea that the "superheroes" are really just "the lesser of two evils." It kind of undermines the whole premise and spirit of the stories we're reading. Bystanders may occasionally die in the big superhero slam-bang fights in the MU, but usually it's a plot point when they do (See: Stamford).

Seriously, do we -need- this level of "realism" in our comics? Do we honestly -want- it? I can see stories of innocent civilians getting killed every day, I just need to turn on CNN or open my newspaper. I don't need to be inundated with it every time I open up my little flipbook of supposedly-escapist superhero fantasy. -Sometimes- it's OK (again, when it's a plot point), but if Marvel were to come out and make a definitive statement saying "Oh yeah, dozens or hundreds have died every time Thor and Absorbing Man duked it out in Manhattan" that's a one-way ticket out of reading -anything- Marvel puts out.

Comics should be, to some degree, "better" than the real world, or at least more hopeful. Yes, they can have moments of darkness and dystopia, but the whole basic premise is that most of the time the "good guys" are there to save the day in the end.

Now all that having been said: The Hulk is likely the primary (if not sole) exception to this rule, simply because Banner shouldn't be nearly as frightened/remorseful about the Hulk's actions if after all these years, all he'd done is commit lots of property damage. Hulk as an inadvertent killer adds to the tragedy of the character, and to me -doesn't- take away from the spirit of the character as initially envisioned.

[PastePotPete]

This is one of those questions that, if you look too closely, it ruins the fun of the character.

It's like the old G.I. Joe cartoons. Every battle had thousands of bullets flying...but you never saw anyone get shot. When an aircraft went down, you always saw the pilot parachute away. Fine by me. It's called suspension of disbelief.

Sure, you throw a tank with people inside it as many times as Hulk has, somebody is going to take a dirt nap.

But so far, Marvel writers haven't really focused on those guys inside the tank. The Hulk, for all his savagery, is intended as a heroic figure. The stories side-step the questions we're asking here so that the heroism of this afflicted and conflicted character can be highlighted instead. It's really a question of focus.

I think Dan Slott is a gifted writer and She-Hulk is one of the best Marvel books in years. But I do think it was a mis-step on his part to do the story focusing on whether or not the Hulk is a killer because he stated so definitively that he wasn't. It's such a literal-minded question. Each writer should be able to decide for himself whether or not the Hulk is a killer of innocents, indirectly or otherwise. But they should maintain the integrity of the character by side-stepping the issue as previous writers have. It should color the tone of the tale but not be a plot point.

[Mark (nonick)]

Again, I have to throw this out there: if there is no genuine peril for the "people" of Earth 616 from falling buildings, then where is the majesty and awe of Spider-Man or the Fantastic Four? What are they saving me from? I don't just read these things to see who punches who this week. I read them to believe in a world with heros that can stop a comet or dodge a hail of gunfire - in order to save me, or a city, or all of us.

But in order to believe in the frailty of humanity, there has to be a clear sense of peril.

To volley up the "If we want logic then banner didn't survive the gamma bomb" every time we mention "logic" is missing the point. These are two vastly different levels of suspension of disbelief.

How about saying it this way: Consistency of logic.

In the MU, it has been established that the RULE is: various types of Radiation can grant super powers to people. Good people, bad people, animals, men, women and children. It's all over the d@mn place. But it's a consistent rule that I can accept at the outset, and suspend my disbelief thereon, based on that rule. There is an absolute measurable consistency to that rule.

But this idea that falling buildings are not lethal when fell by heros is utterly inconsistent, and follows no consistency of logic. By this token: A friend and I are walking down two different streets in Earth 616. Suddenly, The Abomination pushes down the building next to me (from the other side) and it falls on me, and I'm dead. On my friend's street, The Hulk is the one to push the building over, and he is okay? Is that the rule?

[XPac]

Yeah, as a matter of fact it would. Whenever the Hulk asks why the puny humans won't leave him alone, the obvious answer becomes because he is murdering their friends and family. When Juggernaut cheapshots the Hulk and nearly kills him, I'd now realize that Juggernaut has been trying to become a superhero for several decades. When Spider-man uppercuts the Hulk into space, I'd be wondering why Spidey didn't finally end the massive killing spree with his Cosmic powers. Whenever someone tried to use mind control on the Hulk, I'd honestly have to consider whether the world would be better off with the Leader or Tyrannus controlling the Hulk. And of course everytime Bruce was freed from the Hulk and then chose to become him again it would just reinforce what a cold-blooded sociopath he was to actually want to become a mass murderer again.


I'd have doubts about Juggernauts motives were heroic even in the context of Hulk causing any deaths.

And I'm not sure Leader or Tyrannus controlling the Hulk would be dong anyone any favors either.

But as for the general dealing with the Hulk, there had to be a reason why the army was chasing after Hulk for decades BEYOND the simple fact that Thunderbolt Ross didn't like him.

[Arilou]

I don't know where you come from, but where I live humans don't go killing thousands of people because they stubbed their toe, spilled some milk, or got stuck in traffic. The only humans I know that go on mass killing sprees when they get angry are crazy pyschopaths and terrorists. Where's the irony when regardless of whether he is the Hulk or just a guy, Bruce Banner is still a monster? To me that makes him just another supervillian.

Except that humans do so. QUite often in fact. Not thousands of people, but murders are committed over more trivial things.

It is evil, it is stupid, it is also fundamentally human.

[Mark (nonick)]

Seriously, do we -need- this level of "realism" in our comics? Do we honestly -want- it? I can see stories of innocent civilians getting killed every day, I just need to turn on CNN or open my newspaper. I don't need to be inundated with it every time I open up my little flipbook of supposedly-escapist superhero fantasy. -Sometimes- it's OK (again, when it's a plot point), but if Marvel were to come out and make a definitive statement saying "Oh yeah, dozens or hundreds have died every time Thor and Absorbing Man duked it out in Manhattan" that's a one-way ticket out of reading -anything- Marvel puts out.

Comics should be, to some degree, "better" than the real world, or at least more hopeful. Yes, they can have moments of darkness and dystopia, but the whole basic premise is that most of the time the "good guys" are there to save the day in the end.

In our world, when a Tsunami hits Asia, all we can do is watch and weep when the death toll numbers in the thousands roll in. Because no one can get there in time with any way of actually helping those people.

In the MU, when a Tsunami is headed for Asia, Storm can try to create a counter wave, or Ice Man can freeze the ocean, or the Speedsters can ferry people away, saving a large percentage of those people. Some will probably drown, but isn't that still a better world than ours?

[Jmacq1]

In our world, when a Tsunami hits Asia, all we can do is watch and weep when the death toll numbers in the thousands roll in. Because no one can get there in time with any way of actually helping those people.

In the MU, when a Tsunami is headed for Asia, Storm can try to create a counter wave, or Ice Man can freeze the ocean, or the Speedsters can ferry people away, saving a large percentage of those people. Some will probably drown, but isn't that still a better world than ours?

No, not really when apparently dozens/hundreds are dying every other day in NYC. We don't exactly have to worry about the Absorbing Man rampaging through Queens in the real world. Any deaths "prevented" amidst natural disasters are balanced out (or even outweighed) by the civilians that supposedly die every time someone throws down on Long Island/wherever.

In fact, if people are dying all the time when these buildings get knocked down, NYC would/should be a ghost town, since it's "Ground Zero" for 75% of the big fights in the Marvel Universe.

Seriously, if dozens/hundreds of people are dying practically every other week, would anyone -really- still live in the city? I don't think so. Peter Parker would never have to worry about affording rent, because property values would be so abysmally low that he could probably have a Manhattan Penthouse for a pittance.

If Marvel wants to be "realistic" then they should be realistic. Either we suspend disbelief, or we don't. Making nearly every single superhero battle a tragedy in the making doesn't make comics more "accessible" or more desireable to read for me, it makes them depressing and disheartening.

Think of it this way: If all these people are dying in these large battles, how can we ever say that the heroes are truly "winning?". Hell, it'd probably cost less lives to -let- the bad guy conquer the world/rob the bank/whatever, rather than risk all the civilian deaths trying to stop him would entail. What's the point in fighting if fighting is likely to cause more death than letting the bad guy go? Relatively few villains just randomly rampage through public areas, and even if they do it's not usually with the sole purpose of causing as much death as possible.

[Mark (nonick)]

Think of it this way: If all these people are dying in these large battles, how can we ever say that the heroes are truly "winning?". Hell, it'd probably cost less lives to -let- the bad guy conquer the world/rob the bank/whatever, rather than risk all the civilian deaths trying to stop him would entail.
Winning only equals no casualties? And we should let someone take over the world??? I know of a planet named earth that thinks the "good" guys won WWII. And I'm pretty sure those people are pretty happy we didn't just "let" Hitler win.
Relatively few villains just randomly rampage through public areas, and even if they do it's not usually with the sole purpose of causing as much death as possible.OK, I can agree with that. But I don't understand how that ties into the argument?

[3D Master]

Yeah, as a matter of fact it would. Whenever the Hulk asks why the puny humans won't leave him alone, the obvious answer becomes because he is murdering their friends and family. When Juggernaut cheapshots the Hulk and nearly kills him, I'd now realize that Juggernaut has been trying to become a superhero for several decades. When Spider-man uppercuts the Hulk into space, I'd be wondering why Spidey didn't finally end the massive killing spree with his Cosmic powers.

Spider-man doesn't have cosmic powers, he was bitten by a radioactive spider and gained some strength. None of them, can even come close to killing the Hulk, it might very well be impossible. The Hulk is just plain too powerful, heals too fast even from massive trauma that has a normal human dead a 1,000 times over. If you can actually kill the Hulk, I don't think there's anyone on Earth with enough power to do so.

Whenever someone tried to use mind control on the Hulk, I'd honestly have to consider whether the world would be better off with the Leader or Tyrannus controlling the Hulk.

:rolleyes: Of course not, they'd have the Hulk not smash occasionally, but start smashing and never stop until they're the rulers of the Earth.

And of course everytime Bruce was freed from the Hulk and then chose to become him again it would just reinforce what a cold-blooded sociopath he was to actually want to become a mass murderer again.

Bruce has wanted to become the Hulk? That's a new one.

I don't know where you come from, but where I live humans don't go killing thousands of people because they stubbed their toe, spilled some milk, or got stuck in traffic.

Neither does the Hulk.

The only humans I know that go on mass killing sprees when they get angry are crazy pyschopaths and terrorists. Where's the irony when regardless of whether he is the Hulk or just a guy, Bruce Banner is still a monster? To me that makes him just another supervillian.

In a very big way, he is. To the public and the military in the MU, he is. To the Hulk humans are insects; how many insects of you swatted or trampled? Especially after they've been buzzing around you and stung you? Are you a pure evil psychopath?

[Sparvid]

I remember reading an article years ago which mentioned two times where heroes apparently killed other living beings - one was Thor fighting some trolls or something who worked for Loki, and the other was Hulk destroying some Russian submarine. I could've sworn it was on spiderfan.org, but I can't find it there... IIRC, this would've been in some quite early issues of their titles.

[Jmacq1]

Winning only equals no casualties? And we should let someone take over the world??? I know of a planet named earth that thinks the "good" guys won WWII. And I'm pretty sure those people are pretty happy we didn't just "let" Hitler win.

Not every would-be-conquerer in the Marvel Universe is a genocidal madman. Dr. Doom doesn't seem to be. Nor does Magneto (usually). Not even Baron Zemo seems to advocate mass-exterminations. In other words, short of the Red Skull and Apocalypse, comparing most Marvel villains; outlook to Hitler is a flawed analogy. Most "conquerers" simply want power, not mass death and destruction. Heck, that's been part of the whole "Doom mystique" for -years-.... the possibility that just -maybe- he'd do a really good job of ruling the world. And yes, victory should equal zero or -very few- casualties unless those casualties are a necessary plot point.

OK, I can agree with that. But I don't understand how that ties into the argument?

Simple: If the aim of the villain is -not- to cause innocent deaths, than more deaths will be avoided by allowing the villain to do what he or she wants rather than engaging them and risking casualties in the course of the battle (however inadvertently). Therefore once again, the world is safer if the heroes are inactive rather than actively attacking some villains while they're "in the act"/trying to prevent the act in the first place.

Contrast this with the "rampaging" villain, which is basically the only villain type that the whole argument of "oh well it's not that innocent people aren't dying in these battles, it's that the heroes are -minimizing- how many people die" applies to. Basically, if the aim of the villain is not one that will result in a significant number of deaths or widespread destruction in and of itself, it's potentially more "evil/irresponsible" (in a sense of lives lost) for the heroes to try to prevent them from accomplishing that aim than it is to simply let them go.

Hence, the basic premise of comics is largely ruined by the introduction of widespread "unspoken" bystander deaths in the midst of major superhero battles. Because the heroes technically have more incentive to do -nothing- than to actually try to stop most villains. And most higher-powered villains just have set up shop in a heavily populated area and they should never have to worry about getting attacked (once again see: Stamford).

The bottom line (for me) is that if Marvel wants to claim that they're being "realistic" than they should go all-out with it, and see how fast they lose sales. Because being "realistic" only as far as it supports one side of the current whiz-bang summer crossover is a cheap cop-out.

[Doom Hammer]

We have to remember it's not everyday that these huge, earth-shaking battles take place. Normally they're on a much smaller scale, with say Spider-Man punching the Kangaroo's head off. There's no falling buildings in that fight.

[Hombre]

To the Hulk humans are insects; how many insects of you swatted or trampled? Especially after they've been buzzing around you and stung you?

I suppose that's the Illuminati Hulk or the JMS Hulk or whatever... because that's been the case only during limited periods, when his human psyche has been totally submerged and he's become a mindless beast.

For the most part, the Hulk has been a gentle, misunderstood creature, capable of love and friendship.

He could not consider the puny humans as insects, because in spite of all he's done in order to protect himself, by the humans who would hurt him physically and emotionally, and not vice versa, he's always left himself open in small ways, to connect with others.

As with any other human being, it's the bonds of friendship and love he's created over the years that have given his life meaning and direction. With Betty Ross, with Marlo Chandler, with Jarella, with Rick Jones, with Jim Wilson, with the Defenders, with the Pantheon...

[Mark (nonick)]

We have to remember it's not everyday that these huge, earth-shaking battles take place. Normally they're on a much smaller scale, with say Spider-Man punching the Kangaroo's head off. There's no falling buildings in that fight.
I was just typing this idea with different phrasing. Typically, the populated building-falling-battles take place when there IS a giant/rampaging villain/monster/invasion. In my own memory, the occurrences of heros causing escalation are rare.

[ivesaidway2much]

Again, I have to throw this out there: if there is no genuine peril for the "people" of Earth 616 from falling buildings, then where is the majesty and awe of Spider-Man or the Fantastic Four? What are they saving me from? I don't just read these things to see who punches who this week. I read them to believe in a world with heros that can stop a comet or dodge a hail of gunfire - in order to save me, or a city, or all of us.

But in order to believe in the frailty of humanity, there has to be a clear sense of peril.

To volley up the "If we want logic then banner didn't survive the gamma bomb" every time we mention "logic" is missing the point. These are two vastly different levels of suspension of disbelief.

How about saying it this way: Consistency of logic.

In the MU, it has been established that the RULE is: various types of Radiation can grant super powers to people. Good people, bad people, animals, men, women and children. It's all over the d@mn place. But it's a consistent rule that I can accept at the outset, and suspend my disbelief thereon, based on that rule. There is an absolute measurable consistency to that rule.

But this idea that falling buildings are not lethal when fell by heros is utterly inconsistent, and follows no consistency of logic. By this token: A friend and I are walking down two different streets in Earth 616. Suddenly, The Abomination pushes down the building next to me (from the other side) and it falls on me, and I'm dead. On my friend's street, The Hulk is the one to push the building over, and he is okay? Is that the rule?
I think you missed my point about introducing realism and logic into a completely unrealistic fictional universe. To further illustrate my point let me show you how your new consistency of logic rule proves that normal people in the MU are immune to things like falling buildings, being in a flying tank, or any property damage from the result of a Hulk rampage. First, in Hulk vol. 1 #152 the Hulk was put on trial with the death penalty being a possible sentence if he were found guilty. But the crimes he was charged with were only conspiracy to destroy public property and endangering human lives. By even a conservative estimate by this point in time the Hulk had thrown at least 20 tanks, yet apparently no one died or the Hulk would have been charged with murder. So by your consistency of logic rule people in the MU must be impervious to being in Hulk-thrown tanks.

Second, as late as issue #11 of the current volume of Incredible Hulk, Bruce Banner, Tyrannus, She-Hulk, Doc Samson, Nick Fury, The Avengers, The FF, Wolverine, and the U.S. Federal Justice System all believed the Hulk had never killed an innocent person. After he was once again put on trial this time for murder, and then proved to be innocent. By your consistency of logic rule, given the large number of buildings the Hulk has knocked down(and the 30-35 years he'd been at it by this point) this proves that as a rule people in the MU are immune to Hulk-toppled buildings. And if you condsider the nearly non-existant number of deaths resulting from buildings falling on people in the MU this rule could be extended to any toppled building in general.

Do you see how your own rule contradicts the point you were trying to make? This is the point I'm trying to make about introducing realism and logic into superhero comics. It forces you to pick and choose which rules you want to apply logically, and all of it is a house of cards. If you pick at even the smallest points of your logic everything falls apart.

[Markavian]

:confused:

P.S. Adamantium is almost weightless, and it is lightly laced over Wolverine's bones...it wouldn't be too heavy.[/QUOTE]
Adamantium is not almost Weightless. In the First Handbook to the Marvel Universe Wolverines weight was given at 495 pounds with the Bulk of it comming from the Super Dense Metal

[Jmacq1]

:confused:

P.S. Adamantium is almost weightless, and it is lightly laced over Wolverine's bones...it wouldn't be too heavy.
Adamantium is not almost Weightless. In the First Handbook to the Marvel Universe Wolverines weight was given at 495 pounds with the Bulk of it comming from the Super Dense Metal[/QUOTE]

Yeah, by all accounts, Adamantium is pretty darn heavy. Probably because it's arguably the densest material on Marvel-Earth.

[ivesaidway2much]

Spider-man doesn't have cosmic powers, he was bitten by a radioactive spider and gained some strength. None of them, can even come close to killing the Hulk, it might very well be impossible. The Hulk is just plain too powerful, heals too fast even from massive trauma that has a normal human dead a 1,000 times over. If you can actually kill the Hulk, I don't think there's anyone on Earth with enough power to do so.
For a short while in the 1980's Spider-man did have cosmic powers, and during an issue of the Incredible Hulk(i think?) he threw the Hulk around like a rag doll, and then uppercutted him into outerspace. It was no Thor #385 or Hulk #300, but it was a pretty cool Hulk fight.



:rolleyes: Of course not, they'd have the Hulk not smash occasionally, but start smashing and never stop until they're the rulers of the Earth.Besides the taking over the world part how is this any different from the Hulk usually. I mean, at least with one of them controlling the Hulk occasionally the Hulk would stop smashing because the normal Hulk never stops.



Bruce has wanted to become the Hulk? That's a new one.In the beginning Banner invented a device that could turn himself into the Hulk(the anger thing was less reliable) whenever he felt the Hulk was needed. And somewhere between Hulk #322 and #331, after Banner was separated from the Hulk for months he chose to become him once again. Those were just the first two examples to pop into my head, I'm positive there ar several more.

[BigBoss]

I really havent seen any proof whatsoever that states he is a killer.

[Mark (nonick)]

It forces you to pick and choose which rules you want to apply logically, and all of it is a house of cards. If you pick at even the smallest points of your logic everything falls apart.

Sort of. It forces me to pick and choose which writer's story-lines I buy into, and which I don't. In Hulk Annual #18 1992, Doc Samson sure believes the Hulk "...killed thousands." The Illuminati Special believes he's killed innocent people. So, it's a foregone conclusion that I already have to choose between two printed interpretations. Which is right? The story from 1972, the story from 1992, the story from 1999, or 2006? And that's what this thread is about, which writer's interpretations work for you, and which don't?

My own logic (my own Suspension of Disbelief) is what is at stake here. When I read the comic, and I observe what is happening, what do I believe I am seeing? If I see the Hulk destroy a tank that was just firing at him, I see dead soldiers. If I see him knock down a city, I see dead civilians. I'm not happy about it, it makes me sad and conflicted about the Hulk, but that's what my internal crapometer tells me is happening.

And if the writer then shows me 4 tank operators and 34,000 people dusting off their pants saying "Man that was a close one!" it's far, FAR FAR more likely to lose me as a reader than if they show me weeping family members.

[ivesaidway2much]

Sort of. It forces me to pick and choose which writer's story-lines I buy into, and which I don't. In Hulk Annual #18 1992, Doc Samson sure believes the Hulk "...killed thousands." The Illuminati Special believes he's killed innocent people. So, it's a foregone conclusion that I already have to choose between two printed interpretations. Which is right? The story from 1972, the story from 1992, the story from 1999, or 2006? And that's what this thread is about, which writer's interpretations work for you, and which don't?
The Illuminati special never actually says that the Hulk killed anyone. It was left intentionally vague according to Tom Brevoort. So basically you are choosing between one issue of annual from 20 years ago that has since been retconned by the man(John Byrne) who wrote the story than annual references, or the other more than 500 issues of Hulk comics. Where as late as the Bruce Jones run which ended about 20 months ago, Bruce Banner believed that the Hulk had never killed innocent bystanders.

[Mark (nonick)]

My own logic (my own Suspension of Disbelief) is what is at stake here. When I read the comic, and I observe what is happening, what do I believe I am seeing? If I see the Hulk destroy a tank that was just firing at him, I see dead soldiers. If I see him knock down a city, I see dead civilians. I'm not happy about it, it makes me sad and conflicted about the Hulk, but that's what my internal crapometer tells me is happening.

See above.

[Xanrn]

2 Points.

As said several times in this post.

IF the Hulk only destroyed stuff, they would not have shot him into space. They would not chase him with Brigades worth of troops.

The rest of the Villians/Heroes rarely have fights anywhere as destructive as the Hulk.

[Kevinroc]

2 Points.

As said several times in this post.

IF the Hulk only destroyed stuff, they would not have shot him into space. They would not chase him with Brigades worth of troops.

The rest of the Villians/Heroes rarely have fights anywhere as destructive as the Hulk.

1: They have chased Hulk with troops since Incredible Hulk (vol. 1) #1. Ever since the army first saw him, they have tried to fight him.

2: How many fights do you want me to name to disprove this?

Kang destroyed Washington DC and enslaved the world. Lots of destruction there.

Thor and Iron Man's fight caused a lot of concern for the general area during Avengers: Standoff.

Magneto's fight with The X-Men nearly destroyed New York.

Nick Fury's The Secret War nearly destroyed New York.

The Fantastic Four's fight against Terrax nearly caused mass destruction in New York City.

The Juggernaut knocked down The World Trade Center.

I could start naming many more fights that do worse than the average Hulk rampage.

[XPac]

1: They have chased Hulk with troops since Incredible Hulk (vol. 1) #1. Ever since the army first saw him, they have tried to fight him.

2: How many fights do you want me to name to disprove this?

Kang destroyed Washington DC and enslaved the world. Lots of destruction there.

Thor and Iron Man's fight caused a lot of concern for the general area during Avengers: Standoff.

Magneto's fight with The X-Men nearly destroyed New York.

Nick Fury's The Secret War nearly destroyed New York.

The Fantastic Four's fight against Terrax nearly caused mass destruction in New York City.

The Juggernaut knocked down The World Trade Center.

I could start naming many more fights that do worse than the average Hulk rampage.


Yeah, but the thing is if Kang invades the earth the person that's really responsible for the damage isn't the Avengers, it's Kang. It's not the Avengers that go around rampaging through NY like Hulk does.

Hulk is an instance where he can actually be the cause of the rampage, rather than just being the cause of calateral damage from someone elses attack. So the mindset of accountability is different.

Because Hulk is a hero there are times that the fight NOT his fault. But there are inceidents where it is, and that's not something you can say about other heroes. Hulk is like the Godzilla of the marvel universe... yes he'll fight the evil monsters to and save the world, but he at times is a threat to the populace even when he's not fighting to stop a larger threat.

[Mark (nonick)]

Hulk is like the Godzilla of the marvel universe... yes he'll fight the evil monsters to and save the world, but he at times is a threat to the populace even when he's not fighting to stop a larger threat.
100% right. I kept thinking King Kong, but really King Kong is too benign of an analogy. Godzilla is perfect.

[3D Master]

I suppose that's the Illuminati Hulk or the JMS Hulk or whatever... because that's been the case only during limited periods, when his human psyche has been totally submerged and he's become a mindless beast.

For the most part, the Hulk has been a gentle, misunderstood creature, capable of love and friendship.

He could not consider the puny humans as insects, because in spite of all he's done in order to protect himself, by the humans who would hurt him physically and emotionally, and not vice versa, he's always left himself open in small ways, to connect with others.

As with any other human being, it's the bonds of friendship and love he's created over the years that have given his life meaning and direction. With Betty Ross, with Marlo Chandler, with Jarella, with Rick Jones, with Jim Wilson, with the Defenders, with the Pantheon...

:confused: "Why can't puny humans leave Hulk alone! Hulk SMASH!"

That's Hulk's standard operating procedure when he's attacked; aka stung by a bee. The fact that the Hulk can have friendships with these 'puny humans/insects' is exactly why the Hulk is less of a monster than Bruce Banner, and most of humanity.

But we're still insects. And when us insects sting the Hulk, Hulk will smash.

I think you missed my point about introducing realism and logic into a completely unrealistic fictional universe. To further illustrate my point let me show you how your new consistency of logic rule proves that normal people in the MU are immune to things like falling buildings, being in a flying tank, or any property damage from the result of a Hulk rampage. First, in Hulk vol. 1 #152 the Hulk was put on trial with the death penalty being a possible sentence if he were found guilty. But the crimes he was charged with were only conspiracy to destroy public property and endangering human lives. By even a conservative estimate by this point in time the Hulk had thrown at least 20 tanks, yet apparently no one died or the Hulk would have been charged with murder. So by your consistency of logic rule people in the MU must be impervious to being in Hulk-thrown tanks.

Second, as late as issue #11 of the current volume of Incredible Hulk, Bruce Banner, Tyrannus, She-Hulk, Doc Samson, Nick Fury, The Avengers, The FF, Wolverine, and the U.S. Federal Justice System all believed the Hulk had never killed an innocent person. After he was once again put on trial this time for murder, and then proved to be innocent. By your consistency of logic rule, given the large number of buildings the Hulk has knocked down(and the 30-35 years he'd been at it by this point) this proves that as a rule people in the MU are immune to Hulk-toppled buildings. And if you condsider the nearly non-existant number of deaths resulting from buildings falling on people in the MU this rule could be extended to any toppled building in general.

Do you see how your own rule contradicts the point you were trying to make? This is the point I'm trying to make about introducing realism and logic into superhero comics. It forces you to pick and choose which rules you want to apply logically, and all of it is a house of cards. If you pick at even the smallest points of your logic everything falls apart.

No, simple logic says that those people are either stupid beyond belief, or when they're talking about "killing an innocent bystander" it's actually outright killing them, by smashing them with his hands. or picking them up and throwing them at other people. Not an indirect result of the Hulk's actions.

Soldiers in tanks that attack the Hulk and he defends himself, does not murder make, even less of innocent people.

[3D Master]

For a short while in the 1980's Spider-man did have cosmic powers, and during an issue of the Incredible Hulk(i think?) he threw the Hulk around like a rag doll, and then uppercutted him into outerspace. It was no Thor #385 or Hulk #300, but it was a pretty cool Hulk fight.

Still not enough power to actually kill the Hulk.

Besides the taking over the world part how is this any different from the Hulk usually. I mean, at least with one of them controlling the Hulk occasionally the Hulk would stop smashing because the normal Hulk never stops.

Until someone decides they don't want to live in constant fear, and totally without freedom and try to fight back; at which point the Hulk will immediately start to smash again until the opposition is killed. The difference is that the Hulk will only occasionally go on a rampage, and isn't out to directly inflict pain, suffering and death; while the guy in control will have the Hulk go out to specifically cause pain, suffering and death. The Hulk without control will cause much less damage, suffering and death, even when he is rampage about without guidance.

In the beginning Banner invented a device that could turn himself into the Hulk(the anger thing was less reliable) whenever he felt the Hulk was needed. And somewhere between Hulk #322 and #331, after Banner was separated from the Hulk for months he chose to become him once again. Those were just the first two examples to pop into my head, I'm positive there ar several more.

Separated; so that means the Hulk is free to smash 24/7, as opposed to only occasionally. Taking the Hulk back inside of him, would be a way to contain the monster. The first bit is what I call 60's mindset comics: utterly ridiculous.

[ivesaidway2much]

No, simple logic says that those people are either stupid beyond belief, or when they're talking about "killing an innocent bystander" it's actually outright killing them, by smashing them with his hands. or picking them up and throwing them at other people. Not an indirect result of the Hulk's actions.
No simple logic says that normal people in the MU are way tougher than people in our world. Otherwise with the exception of the mutants(Wanda and Wolverine) and maybe the U.S. Federal justice System everyone I listed that believed the Hulk never killed an innocent would either be dead or powerless.

Soldiers in tanks that attack the Hulk and he defends himself, does not murder make, even less of innocent people.
So if a cop spots a known murderer and tries to arrest him but gets killed, is criminal innocent of the cop's murder if the cop fires his gun first?

[Kevinroc]

Yeah, but the thing is if Kang invades the earth the person that's really responsible for the damage isn't the Avengers, it's Kang. It's not the Avengers that go around rampaging through NY like Hulk does.

Hulk is an instance where he can actually be the cause of the rampage, rather than just being the cause of calateral damage from someone elses attack. So the mindset of accountability is different.

Because Hulk is a hero there are times that the fight NOT his fault. But there are inceidents where it is, and that's not something you can say about other heroes. Hulk is like the Godzilla of the marvel universe... yes he'll fight the evil monsters to and save the world, but he at times is a threat to the populace even when he's not fighting to stop a larger threat.

It was merely stated by another poster that other conflicts don't tend to be as destructive as a Hulk rampage and I was pointing out that such a thing was false.

As far as a Hulk rampage, you also have to remember that Banner would have been antagonized enough to transform into The Hulk. If someone is acting like a jerk to Banner and he transforms, is that to say that The Hulk is completely at fault. Isn't it a lesson that people should be nicer to each other?

Granted, there are examples where Banner transforms into Hulk due to stress (such as when Jen Walters was having health problems in the Giant-Size Hulk story involving The Champions). But in those kinds of situations, Hulk doesn't "smash" until something or someone antagonizes him.

[ivesaidway2much]

Until someone decides they don't want to live in constant fear, and totally without freedom and try to fight back; at which point the Hulk will immediately start to smash again until the opposition is killed. The difference is that the Hulk will only occasionally go on a rampage, and isn't out to directly inflict pain, suffering and death; while the guy in control will have the Hulk go out to specifically cause pain, suffering and death. The Hulk without control will cause much less damage, suffering and death, even when he is rampage about without guidance. Is it really unintentional when the Hulk kills people? The Hulk is no genius but he's not completely retarded either. He seems to be able to recognize patterns such as the puny humans won't leave him alone, or people are always afraid of him, or the Hulk is the strongest one there is. Even if the Hulk completely loses his mind during his rampages, there has to be some point just before he goes crazy with anger or at the end while he is calming down that he notices there are a bunch of dead bodies all around him. At some point he would have to realize everytime he goes on a rampage lots of people die. And yet he keeps on doing it. That seems pretty intentional to me.

[XPac]

It was merely stated by another poster that other conflicts don't tend to be as destructive as a Hulk rampage and I was pointing out that such a thing was false.

As far as a Hulk rampage, you also have to remember that Banner would have been antagonized enough to transform into The Hulk. If someone is acting like a jerk to Banner and he transforms, is that to say that The Hulk is completely at fault. Isn't it a lesson that people should be nicer to each other?

Granted, there are examples where Banner transforms into Hulk due to stress (such as when Jen Walters was having health problems in the Giant-Size Hulk story involving The Champions). But in those kinds of situations, Hulk doesn't "smash" until something or someone antagonizes him.

Well, it depends.

There's a limit to how much damage can be justified by the excuse that he was antagonized (let alone how many lives are lost if that is indeed the case).

[Loestal]

This really isn't that hard to understand. The whole arguement, was initially, about if Hulk killed innocent people...for whatever reason, intentionally. I see too many other things being drug into the topic that really don't answer the original arguement. And the general idea is...even for me, is that NO the Hulk hasn't willingly killed innocent people...period. Nobody, from what I have seen, is supporting that idea.

But to claim that there have been no deaths that directly relate to Hulk's rampages is rediculous. AGAIN...people die when Hulk rampages, but he is not willingly killing them...he is out of control.

And the whole thing about "I have to accept Thing and Thor as killers too"...no, I don't. As a poster before me stated, Thing and Thor don't go on "rampages" in one of the most populated areas in the MU. If Thor or Thing bring down a building, it's surely by accident or in the act of taking down a great threat. And yeah, Hulk usually doesn't rampage unless he is being provoked...well really, it doesn't take much sometimes.

This is something I am not sure of, but has Grey Hulk ever killed anyone. If so, then...yeah, that adds a different twist on things.

[Crash-Man]

I'm not prepared to accept Hulk's responsibility for deaths for a few significant (imo) reasons.

Firstly, claims of Hulk's responsibility for deaths are vastly outnumbered by stories that emphasize that Hulk is not directly or indirectly responsible for deaths.

Secondly, Hulk (in all but one of his incarnations) has been shown to be intelligent, lucid, and compassionate enough to avoid killing people. And he's always been shown to rescue people who are indirectly threatened by his rampages.

The fight/rampage scenes I've read have always given civilians enough time to evacuate the immediate vicinity before things get really heated. This is a basic superhero mainstay, so I don't know why it shouldn't apply to Hulk. By the logic of some folks in this thread, Superman and Spidey should have quite a bodycount as well...and accidental or not, it should be as defining a part of their lives as Hulk's supposed own has supposedly become.

I appreciate Ultimate Hulk a lot and think that that take on the character should be further explored (in that universe and that context), but this sudden Civil War-induced trend of calling Hulk a mass murderer is little more than annoying.

I expect it to fade away sooner or later like the huge develoments of The Other.

[Hombre]

Secondly, Hulk (in all but one of his incarnations) has been shown to be intelligent, lucid, and compassionate enough to avoid killing people. And he's always been shown to rescue people who are indirectly threatened by his rampages.



I agree. Even in his most simple-minded incarnation, his decision to kill someone was conscious, a deliberate response to someone he felt deserved it.

In the classic Hulk #215-216, for example, he's abucted by Thunderbolt Ross and Shield in order to have him stop the Bi-Beast, who had seized control of the Helicarrier, from destroying the world.

His first reaction is that he wants to get rid of Ross once and for all. But all it takes for him to help willingly is to explain calmly what is at stake.

But he's a force of nature, and once he's set loose, there's bound to be collateral damage. That's why, even though he's not to blame for his misfortune, Banner, Samson and so many others have tried either to contain him or to stop him when he's on a rampage.

That's the story of his life. And the most logic and humane answer to the moral and practical issues related to the Hulk's predicament has always been to harness his latent potential for being a beneficial force.

More in general, even in the fictional context of the MU, collateral damage and responsibility in the use of super powers has always been a concern. Remember when Johnny Storm went nova on the premises of Empire State in De Falco's run? Or the accusations leveled at the X-Men, back when the mutant powers Registration Act was first passed into law, for the exact same purposes of the CW related legislation?

And in point fact, as far back as 1975, Marv Wolfman was devoting an issue of Daredevil to deal with the human suffering that may occur in the wake of careless superhero mayhem:

http://www.milehighcomics.com/cgi-bin/backissue.cgi?action=fullsize&issue=21267019774%20127

[3D Master]

No simple logic says that normal people in the MU are way tougher than people in our world. Otherwise with the exception of the mutants(Wanda and Wolverine) and maybe the U.S. Federal justice System everyone I listed that believed the Hulk never killed an innocent would either be dead or powerless.

If that were true, what's the point? Than there are no super humans in the Marvel Universe, just extra-ordinary humans. If every human in the MU is strong enough to not die from a building toppling on him, strong enough to be a super human themselves, Thor, Captain America, the Hulk aren't super human, they're just the Einsteins of the MU. They're never in any danger, and the stories are a bunch of bogus bullshit that has nothing to say, nothing interesting going on, there's nothing in there, nada, zilch, zero.

So if a cop spots a known murderer and tries to arrest him but gets killed, is criminal innocent of the cop's murder if the cop fires his gun first?

1. A cop is not the military. Military are valid targets.

2. They're not innocent; they shoot, they fire, they're not simple bystanders.

Is it really unintentional when the Hulk kills people? The Hulk is no genius but he's not completely retarded either. He seems to be able to recognize patterns such as the puny humans won't leave him alone, or people are always afraid of him, or the Hulk is the strongest one there is. Even if the Hulk completely loses his mind during his rampages, there has to be some point just before he goes crazy with anger or at the end while he is calming down that he notices there are a bunch of dead bodies all around him. At some point he would have to realize everytime he goes on a rampage lots of people die. And yet he keeps on doing it. That seems pretty intentional to me.

No, his intentions is to stop the military from constantly firing shells at him, that hurt and try to kill him. In his rage to stop them, the bystanders just get in the way. That's not intentional. Intentional would be going up to those bystanders, pick them up, and outright wrench them limb from limb. THAT is intentional. Attacking and throwing around the military causing bystander deaths; the bystanders are just collatorl damage.

:scratches head: Why can't one delete a post?

[3D Master]

Is it really unintentional when the Hulk kills people? The Hulk is no genius but he's not completely retarded either. He seems to be able to recognize patterns such as the puny humans won't leave him alone, or people are always afraid of him, or the Hulk is the strongest one there is. Even if the Hulk completely loses his mind during his rampages, there has to be some point just before he goes crazy with anger or at the end while he is calming down that he notices there are a bunch of dead bodies all around him. At some point he would have to realize everytime he goes on a rampage lots of people die. And yet he keeps on doing it. That seems pretty intentional to me.

No, his intentions is to stop the military from constantly firing shells at him, that hurt and try to kill him. In his rage to stop them, the bystanders just get in the way. That's not intentional. Intentional would be going up to those bystanders, pick them up, and outright wrench them limb from limb. THAT is intentional. Attacking and throwing around the military causing bystander deaths; the bystanders are just collatorl damage.

[ivesaidway2much]

If that were true, what's the point? Than there are no super humans in the Marvel Universe, just extra-ordinary humans. If every human in the MU is strong enough to not die from a building toppling on him, strong enough to be a super human themselves, Thor, Captain America, the Hulk aren't super human, they're just the Einsteins of the MU. They're never in any danger, and the stories are a bunch of bogus bullshit that has nothing to say, nothing interesting going on, there's nothing in there, nada, zilch, zero.
This has been my point all along. If you apply simple logic to a completely unrealistic fictional universe like the MU things stop making sense. And since you mentioned Einstein. What sense does it make that Reed Richards, Tony Stark, or heck even Peter Parker could build in a day or two 40 years ago what teams of hundreds of scientists working in our world today couldn't even design in a decade? What meaning does logic have in world where the most fundamental laws of physcis, chemistry, and biology are broken every single day just by certain people existing at all?



1. A cop is not the military. Military are valid targets.

2. They're not innocent; they shoot, they fire, they're not simple bystanders.

1. When the Hulk is involved the military is acting as a law enforcement agency, since I doubt any police department in the world would be equipped to stop the Hulk on a rampage.

2. Ok they aren't innocent bystanders. But isn't it still murder if the Hulk kills them, since they are just trying to enforce the law? Namely preventing someone from murdering a bunch of innocent civilians.

No, his intentions is to stop the military from constantly firing shells at him, that hurt and try to kill him. In his rage to stop them, the bystanders just get in the way. That's not intentional. Intentional would be going up to those bystanders, pick them up, and outright wrench them limb from limb. THAT is intentional. Attacking and throwing around the military causing bystander deaths; the bystanders are just collatorl damage.
What I'm saying is that if the Hulk kills, he's been doing it for 40 years. I could understand if the first few times he rampaged back in year one, he claimed he didn't know his getting angry would kill lots and lots of innocent bystanders. But much sooner than later, probably while he's calming down after a rampage, the Hulk is going to notice that there are dozens if not hundreds of dead completely innocent people around him every time he gets angry. After a year or two of this even if the Hulk is really, really stupid he's going to realize that everytime he goes wild with anger tons of innocent people die. At what point does it stop being, "It was an accident, I didn't mean to kill them I was just so mad", and start being "Yeah I know when I get mad innocent people will probably die, but I don't care I'll get mad whenever I feel like it"?

[3D Master]

This has been my point all along. If you apply simple logic to a completely unrealistic fictional universe like the MU things stop making sense. And since you mentioned Einstein. What sense does it make that Reed Richards, Tony Stark, or heck even Peter Parker could build in a day or two 40 years ago what teams of hundreds of scientists working in our world today couldn't even design in a decade? What meaning does logic have in world where the most fundamental laws of physcis, chemistry, and biology are broken every single day just by certain people existing at all?

No, the Marvel Universe is not supposed to be a completely unrealistic universe. Just a universe that's pretty much ours with some super