Marvel previews 11/15 - New Avengers #25

[chanzero]

PopCultureShock Previews updated with last minute looks at CW book New Avengers #25 (http://www.popcultureshock.com/index.php?p=40647).

[PatchMadripoor]

Wow, jumping right into the middle of a lot of stories, aren't we?

Okay, I am not drooling to look at the rest of the comic, but I will wait for it.

[Alpow]

Stark in amazing spiderman 535 "This isn't temporary Peter"

Stark in Civil War 5 "This is only a temporary measure".

:rolleyes: Says it all.

[Masamune]

Stark in amazing spiderman 535 "This isn't temporary Peter"

Stark in Civil War 5 "This is only a temporary measure".

:rolleyes: Says it all.

Wow, you're right. Now I'm confused. :confused:
It doesn't show Spidey's reaction to that line, though, which I'd REALLY like to see now.

[Thursaiz]

So, Peter calls Clor a 'cyborg'. So, perhaps he isn't a clone after all?

That would explain why Reed is able to basically shut him off with a few coded words.

[Alpow]

So, Peter calls Clor a 'cyborg'. So, perhaps he isn't a clone after all?

It would appear he is both.

[Alpow]

It doesn't show Spidey's reaction to that line, though, which I'd REALLY like to see now.

He didn't seem to have much reaction to Stark asking to discuss it like adults after he had just been thrown through a wall by Iron man (as shown in ASM).

[theardri]

It would appear he is both.


Perchance some of his "powers" are technological (besides his hammer that is?). I mean cloning an Asgardian possibly does not give him/her all the powers an Asgardian might have?

[[WB]BlackWolf]

I think Tony meant "Temporary until I clone everyone else so it seems like we have all our old friends back but we can say magic words and have them shut up!"

Then again, that's not a half-bad idea...

[Exo]

He didn't seem to have much reaction to Stark asking to discuss it like adults after he had just been thrown through a wall by Iron man (as shown in ASM).

That is true. It's not like Tony beat the teeth out of Peter before resorting to verbal diplomacy. Being thrown through a wooden wall is like shredding through toiletpaper for these guys. I don't think Peter was keen on talking with Tony as he was smuggling him, himself and his family out of Stark Tower. Tony needed to corner him.

[Alpow]

Tony needed to corner him.

No he just needed to walk up to him and ask him to discuss it, he could have even used the Stark Towers PA system (I assume he has one) and said "Peter I know you are trying to escap... I mean leave and I would like a chat first".

[Exo]

No he just needed to walk up to him

He did walk up to him. By 'walk' I mean catch up, tackle through a wall and then talk.

[Thursaiz]

Well, we haven't seen what happens in the next Spider-Man issue, so we have to assume there is going to be some kind of battle.

So, Clor could be a 'Terminator' like being, with flesh on the outside and a metal skeleton? Lovely...

[Magneto Rocks]

I must admit, they pulled that off VERY skillfully. They manage to make it continue directly from ASm 525 yet if you HADN'T read that, it still works. Seriously, I didn't think they were capable of that.

YEah, the temporary thing is a bug. BUT frankly I have to give a big "HAH!" to the guys bulba and I were arguing with so many times. Let me guess- you guys will go with ASM over the OFFICIAL BOOK AND the EDITOR?

In-universe, it's easy to explain. Anyone saying this proves about massive lack of cohesion needs to get a life. This is what marvel have no-prizes for. So that's that- Neg Zone Prison is temporary.

CW continues to impress me :)


PS: Am I the only onewho can't see any New Avengers #25 preview?

[Will.S]

I was surprised that Civil War was going to show the Spider-Man/Iron Man battle but I shouldn't have been since Amazing usually leads into Civil War when it has to do with Spidey.

As for the inconsistency with the Negative Zone being a temporary stop-gap measure, at this point you can point out several books that contradict each other in some level or another. For now I'm just going to keep enjoying the Civil War mini series proper and refer to it when it comes to Iron Man and whatever he has planned since practically every writer has different views on what Tony knows and doesn't know.

[Masamune]

As for the inconsistency with the Negative Zone being a temporary stop-gap measure, at this point you can point out several books that contradict each other in some level or another. For now I'm just going to keep enjoying the Civil War mini series proper and refer to it when it comes to Iron Man and whatever he has planned since practically every writer has different views on what Tony knows and doesn't know.

That's true. I guess when it comes to Civil War, I'll refer to the actual miniseries first. I would just like a definitive answer on Iron Man's intentions, since that's what is confusing me now.

[ivesaidway2much]

How can the negative zone prison be temporary? What Tony said was true, if you put super criminals in Rykers, they'll probably escape in 5 minutes. SHIELD's already tried a few super-max prisons like the Raft and the Ant Farm and none of them have been successful. What's changed?

[The Purple Skull]

I must admit, they pulled that off VERY skillfully. They manage to make it continue directly from ASm 525 yet if you HADN'T read that, it still works. Seriously, I didn't think they were capable of that.

YEah, the temporary thing is a bug. BUT frankly I have to give a big "HAH!" to the guys bulba and I were arguing with so many times. Let me guess- you guys will go with ASM over the OFFICIAL BOOK AND the EDITOR?

In-universe, it's easy to explain. Anyone saying this proves about massive lack of cohesion needs to get a life. This is what marvel have no-prizes for. So that's that- Neg Zone Prison is temporary.

CW continues to impress me :)


PS: Am I the only onewho can't see any New Avengers #25 preview?

New Avengers Preview
http://www.popcultureshock.com/index.php?p=40647


SPOILERS [Highlight]

I hope Jarvis doesn't get killed! :evilangry

[Will.S]

How can the negative zone prison be temporary? What Tony said was true, if you put super criminals in Rykers, they'll probably escape in 5 minutes. SHIELD's already tried a few super-max prisons like the Raft and the Ant Farm and none of them have been successful. What's changed?
Depends in what context "temporary" means.

It could be temporary for the prisoners until they choose to register or it could be temporary until SHIELD and Iron Man have some other plans for them. Hard to say at this point even though JMS's Iron Man said it was the permanent solution until otherwise.

[Effect]

What I found also really interesting about this preview for Civil War #5 was the statein which Invisible Woman was in. Reed is basiclly a wreck at the moment between Sue leaving, Clor killing Goliath, and his talk with Peter in FF and Amazing Spider-man and his talk with Cho in Hulk. I think finding out how Shield were going after Sue (her clothes were torn and see looked pretty out of it when Johnny was carrying her) and Johnny might be the last thing he needs before he turns on Tony.

As for what to consider first when it comes to information. I honestly take the character titles first and then the Civil War mini second. Mainly because the writers of the character titles know the characters best and they aren't so out of character. Also events with those characters are better done. It's just not so with Millars writing. People have commented that he thinks he's writing the Ultimates and I'm seriously beginning to think that is the case in a lot of areas. He's merging the to and while he might not be meaning to I think it's really happening on some levels and I don't like that at all. Not only is it wrong and well personally I just don't like the Ultimates comic and rather not see the 616 turned into it by Millar (especially with his writing style). The character titles are the main reason why I'm reading Civil War anyway since I certainly don't care for how Millar writes or tells his stories (Ultimate X-men for example. His work on it turned me off to the series and my opinion hasn't changed. So much so that I didn't even bother with Ultimates after two issues.)

So in the Spider-man vs. Iron Man I'm going to go with the Amazing Spider-man verison by JMS instead of the Millar version of the fight, especailly with the dialogue.

[Exo]

I'd stick with the core Civil War book in terms of Civil War related issues and information. Mischaracterization or not, it's Millars story and not JMS's.

[Will.S]

I'd stick with the core Civil War book in terms of Civil War related issues and information. Mischaracterization or not, it's Millars story and not JMS's.
Well put.

(character limit)

[XPac]

One way or the other, Stark blatently lied to Peter. Either he died in the Spiderman book or he lied in Civil War. But he is obviously trying to deceive and manipulate Peter.

And the whole bit about Tony accusing Peter or acting like a Lunatic after Tony attacked Peter is pretty ridiculous too. I love how Tony insists that people just talk AFTER Tony attacks them first. We saw it with Tonys trap for Cap in Civil War, and we're seeing it now. Tony attacks first then accuses the other side of not being reasonable enough to listen. If nothing else, he's a hypocrite. And the worst thing about it is, if you only read Civil War it almost makes it seem like the damage to the room was Peters fault.

[We R. Venom]

Wait a sec. Is Amazing Spider-man coming out tomarrow as well?

[Effect]

I'd stick with the core Civil War book in terms of Civil War related issues and information. Mischaracterization or not, it's Millars story and not JMS's.

Not so much. It isn't as if its his story alone. That he approached Marvel about doing this story. I don't believe it's ever been presented that way. Its his but at the same time as much as everyone else that had a say in it's planning and presentation which includeds other authors. He's just writing one aspect. What he is doing is an overview of the story for the most part. The details are in the other titles and it's the details that make a story I feel.

Ms. Marvel looks interesting. Seems like her clone showed up. I wonder if this will really change her stance on the SHRA if there is a clone of her running around without our knowledge.

[Alpow]

How can the negative zone prison be temporary? What Tony said was true, if you put super criminals in Rykers, they'll probably escape in 5 minutes. SHIELD's already tried a few super-max prisons like the Raft and the Ant Farm and none of them have been successful. What's changed?

Exactly, taking Stark's two premises (no prison on earth is safe and super humans are too dangerous to be running around) the Negative zone prison is the obvious conclusion.

So now we are left to conclude that either Tony means temporary in the sense that they can get out any time they will collaborate with Stark (in which case what he said in ASM stands) or that he doesn't really consider super humans to be too dangerous in which case he has being lying and has some rather dubious ulterior motives for which he is selling his friends down the river.

If true he is moving from being a guy who believes his goal is good to a guy who doesn't believe in his (stated) goal and is doing it for god only knows what reason (fear? a desire for popularity, desire for power?).

[chanzero]

for those who can't read the NA #25 preview, let me know what happens wrong and i'll try to fix it =/

[CaptainCanada]

In the NA #25 preview, I noticed that Cap's portrait is still up on the wall in Stark Tower.

[Slumber Hulk]

Did they pull down the CW5 preview? Did anyone save the images?

[kalorama]

Perchance some of his "powers" are technological (besides his hammer that is?). I mean cloning an Asgardian possibly does not give him/her all the powers an Asgardian might have?

Which would beg the question, "why clone Thor at all?" Aside from the storm control granted him by his enchanted hammer (which the clone/cyborg couldn't access) the only real, innate superpower Thor has is his massive physical strength and resiliency. If the clone didn't have that either, and they had to use tech to duplicate it, what would be the point of him?

[Magneto Rocks]

Some of this is a little ridiculous. In ONE comic, Iron Man says it's temporary. In another he says it's not.

So naturally, Xpac comes to the conclusion he LIED. No other way out of that, nosiree bob.

DON'T YOU PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH ABOUT IRON MAN TO CRITICISE WITHOUT MAKING UP STUFF?

Oh, and the preview has now been taken down. New one over at newsarama- apparantly Cap is losing guys, we see more Thunderbolts and Reed is doubting himself.

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=91035

[CaptainCanada]

If the clone didn't have that either, and they had to use tech to duplicate it, what would be the point of him?
Shock and awe?

[kalorama]

Shock and awe?

They could have achieved the same result by giving Doc Samson or Wonder Man the tech hammer and an image inducer, and saved the tax payers several million (or, more likely, billion) dollars.

[spyridona]

DON'T YOU PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH ABOUT IRON MAN TO CRITICISE WITHOUT MAKING UP STUFF?
http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=91035

:eek: Can we all agree to the fact it's shoddly done and go have a beer?

[XPac]

Some of this is a little ridiculous. In ONE comic, Iron Man says it's temporary. In another he says it's not.

So naturally, Xpac comes to the conclusion he LIED. No other way out of that, nosiree bob.

DON'T YOU PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH ABOUT IRON MAN TO CRITICISE WITHOUT MAKING UP STUFF?

Oh, and the preview has now been taken down. New one over at newsarama- apparantly Cap is losing guys, we see more Thunderbolts and Reed is doubting himself.

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=91035

In one instance he flat out told Peter the negative zone was temporary. And in another that occures later on that day, he says the exact opposite. I think it's fair to argue that he lied in either the first or second instance. Both statements cannot be true if taken at face value, unless in the small gap of time between the first and the second statement the status of the prison changed.

If you came to the conclusion that he was being truthful with Peter on both occasions despite saying completely opposing things then I guess we interpreted the scenes differently.

[Magneto Rocks]

In on instance he flat out told Peter the negative zone was temporary. And in another that occures later on that day, he says the exact opposite. I think it's fair to argue that he lied in either the first or second instance. Both statements cannot be true if taken at face value, unless in the small gap of time between the first and the second statement the status of the prison changed.

If you came to the conclusion that he was being truthful with Peter on both occasions despite saying completely opposing things then I guess we interpreted the scenes differently.

I certainly don't. You are chalking it up far too black and white. It doesn't HAVE to be a lie or the truth. In one instance we have a very angry, very tired, very overstressed Iron Man who is seeing his supposed 'second' turn against him and he's clearly just snapped. In the other, he's had time to prepare his arguments and he knows what he wants to say, he has thought things through.

The reality- it's an editorial mistake.
In-universe- there are a hundred different ways without Tony lying fitting, and since there's no REASON for him to lie and it wouldn't make SENSE for him to lie, it's among the more unlikely ones.

[XPac]

I certainly don't. You are chalking it up far too black and white. It doesn't HAVE to be a lie or the truth. In one instance we have a very angry, very tired, very overstressed Iron Man who is seeing his supposed 'second' turn against him and he's clearly just snapped. In the other, he's had time to prepare his arguments and he knows what he wants to say, he has thought things through.

The reality- it's an editorial mistake.
In-universe- there are a hundred different ways without Tony lying fitting, and since there's no REASON for him to lie and it wouldn't make SENSE for him to lie, it's among the more unlikely ones.

I'd argue he came off more tired and stressed the second time around if he actually bothered smashing Peter through a wall.

But either way, the end result is the same. He lied on one occasion or the other. The fact that he was tired or stressed during the first or second or even both occasions doesn't change the fact that what he said was simply not the truth.

There is no question that he lied... the questionable part is simply WHY he lied. Maybe it was out of anger or frustration, like you said. Or maybe he realized that Peter was going to betray him after he told him the prison was temporary, so he back-peddled and is now changing his story in hopes Peter won't change sides. Or maybe he made the prison sound worse than it was to force the issue... I don't know. All I know is that he said 2 statements which directly contradict one another... meaning ONE is a flat out lie. It's just a question of which was the lie, and what motivated him to do so.

[Magneto Rocks]

I'd argue he came off more tired and stressed the second time around if he actually bothered smashing Peter through a wall.

Actually, the art in CW5 implies Spidey just smashed (a continuity error) through but that's just nitpicking.

But either way, the end result is the same. He lied on one occasion or the other. The fact that he was tired or stressed during the first or second or even both occasions doesn't change the fact that what he said was simply not the truth.

You clearly don't knopw what the word LIE means. Stating an untruth is not a lie. If I say "Spider-Man Unmasked in Civil War #3" by accident, that is not a LIE, unless I deliberately said it. From the dictionary...


"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood"

There was no deliberate attempt to decieve, it was not intentional. Therefore he did not lie.

I know is that he said 2 statements which directly contradict one another... meaning ONE is a flat out lie. It's just a question of which was the lie, and what motivated him to do so.

No, not true at all.

[XPac]

Actually, the art in CW5 implies Spidey just smashed (a continuity error) through but that's just nitpicking.



You clearly don't knopw what the word LIE means. Stating an untruth is not a lie. If I say "Spider-Man Unmasked in Civil War #3" by accident, that is not a LIE, unless I deliberately said it. From the dictionary...


"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood"

There was no deliberate attempt to decieve, it was not intentional. Therefore he did not lie.



No, not true at all.

I outright saw Iron Man smash Peter through a wall. Perhaps at a later moment, Peter smashed a wall as well. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

And if Tony knowingly states an untruth, then it's a lie. If he knows the prison is temporary but tells Peter it's not, then it's a lie. Conversely, if he knows the prison is NOT temporary but tells him it is, then it's a lie.

And YES I think it's deliberate because I don't think he's stupid enough to accidentally forget that the prison was or was not temporary.

[kalorama]

I certainly don't. You are chalking it up far too black and white. It doesn't HAVE to be a lie or the truth. In one instance we have a very angry, very tired, very overstressed Iron Man who is seeing his supposed 'second' turn against him and he's clearly just snapped. In the other, he's had time to prepare his arguments and he knows what he wants to say, he has thought things through.

But that doesn't explain why he gives different answers to the same basic factual question. Imagine your wife asks if you're having an affair under two different circumstances: one when she takes you by surprise and you blurt out "yes"; the other when you know she suspects and you have an answer prepared and say "no." Whether or not you're having an affair is a matter of basic fact. The reason for the different answers is the circumstance of the question. When she takes you by surprise you don't have enough wits about you to lie. But citing the circumstances doesn't change the fact that one of the answers is, in fact, a lie. Same principle applies here.

The reality- it's an editorial mistake.
In-universe- there are a hundred different ways without Tony lying fitting, and since there's no REASON for him to lie and it wouldn't make SENSE for him to lie, it's among the more unlikely ones.

How do you know there's no reason for him to lie, having not read the entire story? It could be that the descrepancy was intentional on the part of the writers and points to some unrevealed issue concerning Tony's true goal or motivation.

[TheCrow13]

Why does it say it was taken down?

[XPac]

How do you know there's no reason for him to lie, having not read the entire story? It could be that the descrepancy was intentional on the part of the writers and points to some unrevealed issue concerning Tony's true goal or motivation.

There are plenty of hypothetical issues I can think of where he might lie.

THe most obvious would be that he told Peter the truth in the negative zone, and when he realized Peter was going to leave he decided to change his story to keep Peter from leaving.

Alternatively, he could have lied in the negatize zone to try and scare Peter into not betraying him (though if he honestly believed that would work, then he didn't learn a dam thing about Peter in the time they spent together).

Or he could have taken a page from Maria Hills play book and lied to Peter in the negatize zone to force the issue one way or the other. If Peter is going to betray him, might as well be on his terms.

There are several reasons why he might lie to Peter... all of them in my opinon are far more believable than Tony forgeting whether the prison was temporary or not and accidetnally telling Peter the wrong thing.

[Magneto Rocks]

There are plenty of hypothetical issues I can think of where he might lie.

THe most obvious would be that he told Peter the truth in the negative zone, and when he realized Peter was going to leave he decided to change his story to keep Peter from leaving.

And you can argue away as long as you wish, but frankly it's wishful thinking. The official book says it's temporary. The EDITOR says it's temporary. It IS temporary. Therefore, since the mistake was in ASM, Tony is telling the truth in the main book. That is the real life explanation. Plus new readers who haven't READ ASM will clearly see him say it's temporary and not permanent- it's what they intended us to see.

But since you anti-reggers so often refuse to GO for that- consider that it wouldn't really make ANY sense to tell him that if it wasn't true in this instance- Peter doesn't leave. Then, y'know, as soon as he realises it WASN'T temporary... he does.

Alternatively, he could have lied in the negatize zone to try and scare Peter into not betraying him (though if he honestly believed that would work, then he didn't learn a dam thing about Peter in the time they spent together).

Possibly, though there are many other explanations.

Or he could have taken a page from Maria Hills play book and lied to Peter in the negatize zone to force the issue one way or the other. If Peter is going to betray him, might as well be on his terms.

Hill didn't lie significently to Cap that I can remember.

There are several reasons why he might lie to Peter... all of them in my opinon are far more believable than Tony forgeting whether the prison was temporary or not and accidetnally telling Peter the wrong thing.

When you say 'forgetting'.... I'm not saying he wracked his brains. It's a heated , on the spot argument he wasn't ready for and he is flustered and angry. He's going to snap in anger and say things he wouldn't say rationale. It's what we call HUMANITY- that thing you guys love to forget Stark has in bucketloads.


The simple truth is this: The Neg Zone Prison is temporary. Tom B said it was temporary and people shouted "WE NEED IT IN THE COMICS" Now it is and people have the fantastic excuse of... "Tony's lying." You can make all the in-comic arguments you want; the reality is that your best case scenario is that he lied in the NEg Zone Prison. You're talking about perception, what matters is the reality.

[TotalWorldDomination]

Can't we all just agree that discrepancies are going to happen in an event this size since every author of every book has to play with a storyline they did'nt create themselves.

No matter who writes what, this is Mark Millars plot, he's been given the story to write by Marvel. JMS, Paul Jenkins, Bendis, Reg Hudlin, they all have to play by the rules that HE puts out. They probably do there best to make sure that the plot stays coherant across the line, but problems do occur. First we had our 2 versions of the N-Zone Fortress Insano, now we have IM saying 2 different things. In the case of Fortress Insano, it was 2 tie-ins battling, so it was a bust- neither one had anymore athority then the other.

HOWEVER, when a tie-in goes up against the main line, the Main Line wins. It's just that simple.

[kalorama]

And you can argue away as long as you wish, but frankly it's wishful thinking. The official book says it's temporary. The EDITOR says it's temporary. It IS temporary.

Doesn't matter who says what anywhere outside of the actual books. For the last 25 years, John Byrne and Chris Clarement have been telling every interviewer they talk to that Sabretooth is Wolverine's father. But until Marvel actually publishes a story that says so, he isn't.

Therefore, since the mistake was in ASM, Tony is telling the truth in the main book.

Which means he was lying in ASM, when he said it was permanent.

That is the real life explanation. Plus new readers who haven't READ ASM will clearly see him say it's temporary and not permanent- it's what they intended us to see.

Just as those who read ASM were intended to see him say it was permanent. Unlkess JSM sends his scripts directly to the printer woithout bothering to submit them for editorial review beforehand.

But since you anti-reggers so often refuse to GO for that- consider that it wouldn't really make ANY sense to tell him that if it wasn't true in this instance- Peter doesn't leave. Then, y'know, as soon as he realises it WASN'T temporary... he does.

Or he tells him it's not permanent, Peter doesn't leave, and he doesn't find out it is permanent until he wakes up from the receiving end of a repulsor blast locked in one of the cells.

When you say 'forgetting'.... I'm not saying he wracked his brains. It's a heated , on the spot argument he wasn't ready for and he is flustered and angry. He's going to snap in anger and say things he wouldn't say rationale. It's what we call HUMANITY

And human beings quite frequently lie to cover their own asses.

[spyridona]

So it’s A) Iron Man lied, or B) the editing is sloppy and Tom needs to be jabbed with pens.

If it’s A), then it makes Iron Man compelling and makes the story not suck as much.

If it’s B), the writing and editing is sloppy and thus poor quality all around.

Either way, dude, take a chill pill.

[XPac]

And you can argue away as long as you wish, but frankly it's wishful thinking. The official book says it's temporary. The EDITOR says it's temporary. It IS temporary. Therefore, since the mistake was in ASM, Tony is telling the truth in the main book. That is the real life explanation. Plus new readers who haven't READ ASM will clearly see him say it's temporary and not permanent- it's what they intended us to see.

But since you anti-reggers so often refuse to GO for that- consider that it wouldn't really make ANY sense to tell him that if it wasn't true in this instance- Peter doesn't leave. Then, y'know, as soon as he realises it WASN'T temporary... he does.



Possibly, though there are many other explanations.



Hill didn't lie significently to Cap that I can remember.



When you say 'forgetting'.... I'm not saying he wracked his brains. It's a heated , on the spot argument he wasn't ready for and he is flustered and angry. He's going to snap in anger and say things he wouldn't say rationale. It's what we call HUMANITY- that thing you guys love to forget Stark has in bucketloads.


The simple truth is this: The Neg Zone Prison is temporary. Tom B said it was temporary and people shouted "WE NEED IT IN THE COMICS" Now it is and people have the fantastic excuse of... "Tony's lying." You can make all the in-comic arguments you want; the reality is that your best case scenario is that he lied in the NEg Zone Prison. You're talking about perception, what matters is the reality.


I'm not arguing whether the prison is or isn't temporary... I'm merely exploring possible reasons why he might lie. If you want to complain about anti-reggers believing one thing or the other, fine... but that's not really a conversation you need to have with me. If that's the only conversation you're capable of having, let me know and I'll happile bow out.

And no, Hill did not lie to Cap. The comparrison there was purely Hills rationale of wanting to know up front whether Cap was an enemy or not. That's a possible scenario Tony might lie to Peter in the negative Zone... to make things sound worse than they are so he'll react one way or the other.

And as for the humanity arguement... part of humanity is LYING. Again, lying out of anger or frustration is certainly not an invalid theory on WHY he might lie... that doesn't change the fact that he did (which is the idea you seemed to have a problem with).

[garin]

The line about the prison is pretty glaring, but I think it's just a natural result of Millar trying to write a reasonable Tony and JMS wanting to write a malevolent one. I don't think it's especially useful to try and come up with explanations for why Tony might lie, any more than trying to explain why, say, Captain America was wearing the wrong color boots in a miscolored panel. It's simply a mistake.

Perhaps you could look at ASM as Peter's recollection of events, and Civil War as Tony's. Maybe the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[Cthulhudrew]

Which would beg the question, "why clone Thor at all?" Aside from the storm control granted him by his enchanted hammer (which the clone/cyborg couldn't access) the only real, innate superpower Thor has is his massive physical strength and resiliency.

Thor is the thunder god- he doesn't need Mjolnir to use his weather control powers, it just helps. (As evidenced by his frying Durok in Thor v.3 #82

[Effect]

Wasn't Civil War #5 actually delayed though? Also Amazing Spider-man #535 came out a a full month or two ago right?

Isn't that enough time for editors and Millar himself to see what was said in Amazing Spider-man and clearly make a better connection or Marvel at least to say something in general instead of causing this confusion?

The book was delayed for a reason right or does Millar simply not bother reading the other titles that are taking place in this story that deal with the major characters?

[XPac]

Wasn't Civil War #5 actually delayed though? Also Amazing Spider-man #535 came out a a full month or two ago right?

Isn't that enough time for editors and Millar himself to see what was said in Amazing Spider-man and clearly make a better connection or Marvel at least to say something in general instead of causing this confusion?

The book was delayed for a reason right or does Millar simply not bother reading the other titles that are taking place in this story that deal with the major characters?

I'm less suprised that the writers might not read other writers work, and more suprised that the editors apparently don't read the other writers work.

Though in all fairness I suppose there's a possibility it's not a mistake and there was a reason Tony lied. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.

[kalorama]

Thor is the thunder god- he doesn't need Mjolnir to use his weather control powers, it just helps. (As evidenced by his frying Durok in Thor v.3 #82

The only time Thor was able to control the weather without Mjolnir was after Odin died and Thor inherited the Odin Force. Since the DNA sample Stark used to make the clone almost certainly came before that period (and since the Odin Force is mystical not physical and couldn't be derived from his DNA anyway) the clone would lack those powers without access to Mjolnir, just as Thor did.

[ivesaidway2much]

Thor is the thunder god- he doesn't need Mjolnir to use his weather control powers, it just helps. (As evidenced by his frying Durok in Thor v.3 #82 The real hammer helps A LOT. (As evidenced by the Hulk whooping his hammerless butt in the best Hulk-Thor fight ever in Thor #385) I still don't understand why they bothered to clone Thor at all. Without Mjolnir, Thor simply isn't anywhere near as dangerous. For instance, I'd take a couple of Iron Man suits over cloned Thor everytime, and they're probably much cheaper to make.

[kidpernicious]

Oh, and the preview has now been taken down. New one over at newsarama- apparantly Cap is losing guys, we see more Thunderbolts and Reed is doubting himself.

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=91035
Is that the same stuff previewed originally at PopCultureShock, or did PCS actually have full page scans like they do for all their other previews? If so, anyone manage to save them?

And by the by, at some point somewhere editorial probably just failed to catch a discrepency. In fact, Marvel editorial have failed to catch a LOT of discrepencies, which is understandable for such a massive crossover effort. Luckily I don't regularly buy any ongoing Marvel titles so I can just buy Civil War, occasionally flip through the tie-ins at the rack, and not want to get involved in arguably THE MOST POINTLESS ARGUMENT EVER.

Reality is, because editorial probably let something slip they should have straightened out, Iron Man is depicted saying conflicting things between two books. Not the end of the world, whether he's deliberately lying or not. And maybe the rest of Civil War's story will explain things that will make the discrepency make sense (wouldn't expect as much), but as it stands, all it is is one more way Marvel could have done a little better in telling a more cohesive overall story.

[kalorama]

And by the by, at some point somewhere editorial probably just failed to catch a discrepency. In fact, Marvel editorial have failed to catch a LOT of discrepencies, which is understandable for such a massive crossover effort.

I disagree strongly with this. If anything, they should make an effort to be even more careful and vigilant in checking and proofing this story because it is so big and there are so many parts with so much margin for error. Getting it right isn't optional. It's their jobs. Besides, they should have plenty of time for extra proofing. It's not like the books are coming out every month or anything.

BTW, unless you're new around here, you know full well that this isn't even close to the most pointless argument ever.

[Haunt]

The real hammer helps A LOT. (As evidenced by the Hulk whooping his hammerless butt in the best Hulk-Thor fight ever in Thor #385) I still don't understand why they bothered to clone Thor at all. Without Mjolnir, Thor simply isn't anywhere near as dangerous. For instance, I'd take a couple of Iron Man suits over cloned Thor everytime, and they're probably much cheaper to make.


tell that to Bill Foster.

[overmind]

Stark in amazing spiderman 535 "This isn't temporary Peter"

Stark in Civil War 5 "This is only a temporary measure".

:rolleyes: Says it all.

Bloody Hell!:mad:

[XPac]

tell that to Bill Foster.

Truthfully though, if that was just the hammer ANYONE could have killed Bill. A SHIELD agent could have held that thing and kill him.

Though I suppose it's possible that it wasn't just the hammer, and the Thor clone possibly can channel lightning with the aid of the hammers tech.

[Haunt]

Truthfully though, if that was just the hammer ANYONE could have killed Bill. A SHIELD agent could have held that thing and kill him.

yes, but your average SHIELD agent isn't worthy of being cloned. a norse god is. think of the kickback on a weapon that powerful. you want an average-dude-clone wielding that thing or someone who could also take a punch from Hercules?

[ivesaidway2much]

yes, but your average SHIELD agent isn't worthy of being cloned. a norse god is. think of the kickback on a weapon that powerful. you want an average-dude-clone wielding that thing or someone who could also take a punch from Hercules?
Yes, but what's to stop Hercules from simply taking the hammer from clone Thor seeing as how he was literally born yesterday whereas Hercules has thousands of years of experience? Honestly to me it would just make more sense to give the hammer to Iron Man and not bother with the Thor clone at all. With all the resources of the pro-regs the clone is pretty useless, oh and he's also pyschotic.

[kalorama]

yes, but your average SHIELD agent isn't worthy of being cloned. a norse god is. think of the kickback on a weapon that powerful. you want an average-dude-clone wielding that thing or someone who could also take a punch from Hercules?

Which goes back to my earlier point. They could have gotten the same results by giving the hammer to one of the superhumans in the Pro-Reg forces already on their squad, like Samson or Wonder Man.

Actually, the results probably would have been a little different, because those guys wouldn't have been likely to murder one of their own friends/colleagues in cold blood

[kidpernicious]

I disagree strongly with this. If anything, they should make an effort to be even more careful and vigilant in checking and proofing this story because it is so big and there are so many parts with so much margin for error. Getting it right isn't optional. It's their jobs. Besides, they should have plenty of time for extra proofing. It's not like the books are coming out every month or anything.
I'm just referring to reality, not the standards by which comic book crossovers would ideally be held. It's understandable, I didn't say it's laudable.

And pardon my hyperbole.

[kalorama]

I'm just referring to reality, not the standards by which comic book crossovers would ideally be held. It's understandable, I didn't say it's laudable.

I'm referring to reality as well. The reality is that, when faced with a particularly important or impactful job (esp. a job with a greater capacity for things to go wrong) people who actually care about the work they do are generally more inclined to put in the effort to make sure they get it right. It's only understandable if you assume and accept that the editors don't care how shoddy the finished product looks.

We're not talking about a mionr typo or printing error. We're talking about two pivotal scenes in interlocking issues that directly and significantly contradict one another. Keeping stuff like that straight would be priority number one for the editor of a crossover like that. If, in fact, the discrepancy is an error, it can't be written of as a minor editorial mistake. It's a MAJOR editorial mistake that can't really be overlooked.

Again, assuming it was a mistake (which I'm not yet convinced it is).

[kidpernicious]

I'm referring to reality as well. The reality is that, when faced with a particularly important or impactful job (esp. a job with a greater capacity for things to go wrong) people who actually care about the work they do are generally more inclined to put in the effort to make sure they get it right. It's only understandable if you assume and accept that the editors don't care how shoddy the finished product looks.
Um, it's understandable if you look at the reality of having to coordinate an extremely large number of titles together. Figure it out, it's a difficult undertaking. Saying it's understandable isn't defending mistakes. It's saying that it's not ridiculous to see them happen. Get over it.

[XPac]

Um, it's understandable if you look at the reality of having to coordinate an extremely large number of titles together. Figure it out, it's a difficult undertaking. Saying it's understandable isn't defending mistakes. It's saying that it's not ridiculous to see them happen. Get over it.

There are some mistakes I would blow off as understandable.

But I would think the issue of what happens to the captured heroes is a big enough issue and an important enough question for the editors to go out of their way to make sure everyone was on the same page.

This isn't a minor thing that should have fallen through the cracks especially if delays occured which gave them a few extra months to catch. To me a mistake like this would fall into the ridiculous category.

Though I still wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility that this wasn't an editorial mistake and Stark was outright lying to Peter to manipulate him.

[kalorama]

Um, it's understandable if you look at the reality of having to coordinate an extremely large number of titles together. Figure it out, it's a difficult undertaking. Saying it's understandable isn't defending mistakes. It's saying that it's not ridiculous to see them happen. Get over it.

It appears you're the one in need of getting over something. You need to calm down, it's really not worth getting that excited over.

As to the point at hand: As someone who has actually coordinated large publications on deadline, major mistakes that undermine the quality of the final product are rarely understandable or acceptable to the people who pay the bills or the paying customers. A mistake as major as this one (again, assuming it is a mistake) would be considered ridiculous by almost every editor I've ever known. As a general rule, people who get paid to catch mistakes and correct errors for a living are expected to ... well... catch mistakes and correct errors. Telling the boss, "I'm sorry there were so many mistakes in the book but the job was so big thaere was no way I could find them all" will rarely be a workable excuse. At least that's true where most of the people I know work.

But, as I said in my earlier post, I'm not convinced yet it was a mistake/oversight.

Oh, and before I forget... Um. (It cracks me up when people do that.)

[kidpernicious]

A bit worked up aren't you? It appears you're the one in need of getting over something. You need to calm down, it's really not worth getting that excited over.
Not quite excited, no. In fact not at all. You've clearly got the hang-up here but if you want to keep asserting otherwise go for it.
As to the point at hand: As someone who has actually coordinated large publications on deadline, major mistakes that undermine the quality of the final product are rarely understandable or acceptable to the people who pay the bills or the paying customers. A mistake as major as this one (again, assuming it is a mistake) would be considered ridiculous by almost every editor I've ever known. As a general rule, people who get paid to catch mistakes and correct for a living are expected to ... well... catch mistakes and correct errors. Telling the boss, "I'm sorry there were so many mistakes in the book but there were just too many for me to fix" will rarely be a workable excuse. At least that's true where most of the people I know work.
Again, me being interested in reality, I've got to point out that we're talking about comic books here, not books, not newspapers, not magazines. Comic books. And if you really want to argue about the history of editorial missing mistakes in comic books, well, that's a toughy. Good luck.

Comic book editors miss things. This is a fact. In a large crossover event, which exponentially increases the chances of discrepencies and errors cropping up, my statement that seeing a mistake happen is understandable ain't nothing but accurate. It isn't even contentious, it's just stating the obvious, I haven't once defended the idea of editors making mistakes or the way Marvel's run Civil War. In fact I outright stated that the discrepency we're talking about is an example of how they could be doing their jobs better. I have no idea why you'd want to waste so much effort arguing about it, but that's your prerogative. Have fun with it.

[Haunt]

Which goes back to my earlier point. They could have gotten the same results by giving the hammer to one of the superhumans in the Pro-Reg forces already on their squad, like Samson or Wonder Man.

Actually, the results probably would have been a little different, because those guys wouldn't have been likely to murder one of their own friends/colleagues in cold blood

i'm pretty sure that they used Thor to intimidate the anti-side. you'll notice that their side pretty much went to pieces when he arrived. Doc Samson couldn't have done that. Wonderman sure as heck couldn't have.

[kalorama]

i'm pretty sure that they used Thor to intimidate the anti-side. you'll notice that their side pretty much went to pieces when he arrived. Doc Samson couldn't have done that. Wonderman sure as heck couldn't have.

If the only goal was to have someone who (A) looked like Thor and (B) was strong enough to wield the hammer, Wonder Man with an image inducer could have done the same at a fraction of the price.

[Red Orion]

The only time Thor was able to control the weather without Mjolnir was after Odin died and Thor inherited the Odin Force. Since the DNA sample Stark used to make the clone almost certainly came before that period (and since the Odin Force is mystical not physical and couldn't be derived from his DNA anyway) the clone would lack those powers without access to Mjolnir, just as Thor did.

Wrong. During the Oeming run the Odinforce had left him and he was able to control the weather against Durok. He also shot lightning from his fingertips during the Lee and Kirby days and in Thor: Blood Oath which is set back when he was still Donald Blake he controlled the weather without his hammer.

[Haunt]

If the only goal was to have someone who (A) looked like Thor and (B) was strong enough to wield the hammer, Wonder Man with an image inducer could have done the same at a fraction of the price.

Clor cleared the battlefield. Wonderman didn't. the anti-side seriously thought that they were all going to die. just look at their faces.

[kalorama]

Not quite excited, no. In fact not at all. You've clearly got the hang-up here but if you want to keep asserting otherwise go for it.

The obvious level of anger and frustration in your tone and word choice is a clear signal to the contrary, but whatever you need to tell yourself to get through...

Again, me being interested in reality, I've got to point out that we're talking about comic books here, not books, not newspapers, not magazines. Comic books.

Again, me being the one who actually knows what editors do, I've got to point out that comic book editors are professionals, just like magazine and book editors. In fact, many of them were magazine and book editors before coming to comics and will be again after they leave. You act like there's some kind of qualitative difference in the expectation of quality work. There isn't. The job is essentially the same, regardless of the medium. If you can't comprehend that, then I guess I can't help you. I can only assume you've never worked in or near andy kind of editorial or publishing invironment at any level and have no idea how it works. If you had or did, you wouldn't be expending so much fruitless energy defending an indefensible position.

As near as I can tell (and to reference my earlier your point) your stance would seem to be that you do, in fact, expect and accept shoddy work. If that works for you, fine, I guess. Most consumers I know expect a certain level of acceptable quality production in the products they buy.

Comic book editors miss things. This is a fact.

All editors miss things. That's a fact. What's also a fact is that while some misses (like typos or minor mispellings) are acceptable some (like major errors or flaws in the cohesion of story, narrative, or document) are not. This is just as true in comics as it is in prose fiction, journalism, or business editing. An editor's job is to make sure those things are caught and corrected. Period. Ain't nothing but fact.

In a large crossover event, which exponentially increases the chances of discrepencies and errors cropping up, my statement that seeing a mistake happen is understandable ain't nothing but accurate.

Only if the mistake is a minor error that slips through the cracks. If we're talking about major fundamental errors in story construction (and we are; the kind of thing that's item one on any fictioon editor's job description) your statement ain't nothing but off the mark and besides the point.

I haven't once defended the idea of editors making mistakes or the way Marvel's run Civil War.

And I haven't once claimed you were. I have no idea why you'd want to waste so much effort being so clearly upset and angry over being accused of something that I've never come close to accusing you of.

Have fun with it.

Oh, don't worry, I am.

(And, again, I'm still not convinced it actually was a mistake.)

[XPac]

Clor cleared the battlefield. Wonderman didn't. the anti-side seriously thought that they were all going to die. just look at their faces.

I the point was if Wonderman with an image inducer making him look like Thor was on the battlefield, they might get the same results.

Though the reality is they wouldn't. Unlike Clor, Simon is sane and wouldn't kill people, motivating people on his side to jump ship.

[kalorama]

Clor cleared the battlefield. Wonderman didn't. the anti-side seriously thought that they were all going to die. just look at their faces.


He cleared the battlefield because he looked like Thor. Wonder Man with an image inducer set to mimic Thor's appearance and a copy of Thor's hammer would have served the same purpose. And Wonder Man (a trained actor) probably would have done a better job of actually mimicing Thor's speech patterns and not coming off like a back alley brawler straight outta Brooklyn.

[XPac]

He cleared the battlefield because he looked like Thor. Wonder Man with an image inducer set to mimic Thor's appearance and a copy of Thor's hammer would have served the same purpose. And Wonder Man (a trained actor) probably would have done a better job of actually mimicing Thor's speech patterns and not coming off like a back alley brawler straight outta Brooklyn.

If nothing else, Simon despite being a mediocre actor would have remembered to speak in old english.

Course, Simon might not have been willing to pose as Thor. Tony, Reed, and Hank obviously had no problem using the memory of their dead friend as a weapon... but Simon might. They might have had to black mail his cooperation there too.

[kalorama]

If nothing else, Simon despite being a mediocre actor would have remembered to speak in old english.

Course, Simon might not have been willing to pose as Thor. Tony, Reed, and Hank obviously had no problem using the memory of their dead friend as a weapon... but Simon might. They might have had to black mail his cooperation there too.

In which case they would have just (A) exerted more blackmail pressure on him (which is how they got him to cooperate in the first place) or Reed would have whipped up some kind of mind control gizmo (because if they had no qualms about cloning Thor or allying themselves with convicted murderers, I doubt they'd have any about sapping Simon's free will) that would have cost a small fortune less than the Thor clone/cyborg/hybrid/whatever the hell it was.

[Haunt]

I the point was if Wonderman with an image inducer making him look like Thor was on the battlefield, they might get the same results.

Though the reality is they wouldn't. Unlike Clor, Simon is sane and wouldn't kill people, motivating people on his side to jump ship.

that and Simon doesn't have the stones to be that intimidating. they needed Clor to accomplish that. he had no emotional ties to any of the anti-regs, so he just came in, threw that hammer (knocking everyone over), and dispensed with the smiting.

[kalorama]

Wrong. During the Oeming run the Odinforce had left him and he was able to control the weather against Durok. He also shot lightning from his fingertips during the Lee and Kirby days and in Thor: Blood Oath which is set back when he was still Donald Blake he controlled the weather without his hammer.

Haven't read Blood Oath, but since it's a story written in the modern day that covers past events, it falls into the category of retcon. I'm talking about history established in regular continuity. To wit: I'm fairly certain that Thor never shot lightning out of his hands during the Lee/Kirby days, when he was not in possession of the hammer. If you have a specific story reference to the contrary, please share.

And the Oeming run happened after Thor had internalized the Odin Force. Even if he didn't have full possession of it anymore, there would undoubtedly be some lingering trace of it. Even if the energy wasn't stored directly in his body anymore, it would still exist (law of conservation of energy) and he'd still be the only one who could control it (Odin being dead and all).

And that's not to mention the fact that his entries in the Official Handbook and his bio on the Marvel web site say specifically that it's the hammer that gives him the ability to control the weather.

[kidpernicious]

The obvious level of anger and frustration in your tone and word choice is a clear signal to the contrary, but whatever you need to tell yourself to get through...
I'd love to see a quote of me that actually comes off that way here. I'm not going to respond to everything because honestly, you're either not paying attention to the actual words I've been saying or you're refusing to objectively read my posts without insisting on also reading this nonexistent anger into everything, and I'm not interested in any more squabbling. Would like to point out though, nothing you've stated has anything to do with refuting the notion that seeing Marvel editorial miss something is entirely unsurprising. And my stating it's understandable to see it happen (because of reality, history, circumstances, you know... facts) is not me stating that I accept shoddy work. On the other hand, if you don't expect Marvel editorial to ever screw up in the midst of a major storyline, then your expectations are somewhat naive, you're bound for disappointment. Don't read into that for anything more than what it is, either- that's not saying we can't or shouldn't demand better, and I strongly agree that Marvel editorial should do a better job. Insane not to. But the fact that a superfluous tie-in potentially flubbed a line during a major comics event, pertaining to something important... nah, not worth any outrage. Someone already said it before, superfluous tie-in loses to primary book hands down, and that's it. Good bye potentially flubbed line, you are completely dismissed from my mind, here's hoping editorial does a better job next time.

It's just simply, once again, reality. I'm done wasting time talking about this.

[Red Orion]

Haven't read Blood Oath, but since it's a story written in the modern day that covers past events, it falls into the category of retcon. I'm talking about history established in regular continuity. To wit: I'm fairly certain that Thor never shot lightning out of his hands during the Lee/Kirby days, when he was not in possession of the hammer. If you have a specific story reference to the contrary, please share.

And the Oeming run happened after Thor had internalized the Odin Force. Even if he didn't have full possession of it anymore, there would undoubtedly be some lingering trace of it. Even if the energy wasn't stored directly in his body anymore, it would still exist (law of conservation of energy) and he'd still be the only one who could control it (Odin being dead and all).

And that's not to mention the fact that his entries in the Official Handbook and his bio on the Marvel web site say specifically that it's the hammer that gives him the ability to control the weather.

The same handbooks that say says Thor is dead? Or that the Thing is class 80 when he's been lifting things that weigh well over a hundred tons since the eighties? The same handbooks that say the Silver Surfer can only go 99.c in real space even though the stories themselves show him going well beyond light speed in real space? The handbooks are chock full of info that doesn't agree with the stories the characters have appeared in.

During Oeming's run the Odinpower was inhabiting the body of a dead Asgardian boy and Thor laments the Odinpower leaving him totally after the last story arc and retcon or not Blood Oath is canon. I've attached a scan from Journey into Mystery #93 where Thor shoots lightning at the Radioactive Man after Mjolnir has been deflected.

[Cthulhudrew]

The only time Thor was able to control the weather without Mjolnir was after Odin died and Thor inherited the Odin Force.

Nope. In issue 82, Thor calls down lightning and fries Durok. As he says there, "A hammer is but a tool! Even Mjolnir!" The Odin power at that time was incarnate within the orphan boy; Thor had been without it since issue #79.

[solarstorm]

The events of ASM "Road to Civil War" led directly into Civil War. Virtually every second is recorded in ASM.

There was no opportunity to fight the Iron Men from "Execute Program" (which was one of many continuity errors in that story).

There was no opportunity to fight Dr. Stegron, Vermin, and the Lizard from Spectacular Spiderman.

There was no time to fight future Hobgoblins, Luchadores, etc... from Friendlt Neighborhood.

The Avengers were pretty much together in all stories above. The Avengers had no opportunity to act as a team with the Iron Spider.He also was not public in those stories. Again, not possible timeline wise.


That goes without mention of two different neg. zone prisons.

Two different versions of Sue leaving.

Dropped plotlines like Baron Zemo offering the key out of the new prison.

The manner of Bill Foster's death varies in illustration.

Young Avengers/Runaways barely fits in anywhere in the timeline.

Differing rhetoric from various characters.

Luke Cage being there in Wolverine to argue about Sentinels and Crosses (He should have been assaulted at home by that point).

The way Damage Control being the "Masterminds" (in a sense) behind the war is never even mentioned as an issue.

Etc...


This crossover is no way near consistent.
And the 20 or so comics that should be published monthly (old titles plus new ones) are a lot to keep track of for every minute detail.

Stop worrying about minor details.
Tony is a hero. He has been one since Marvel really became the Marvel we know today.
Stick with Civil War characterization.

[bulbasteve]

I must admit, they pulled that off VERY skillfully. They manage to make it continue directly from ASm 525 yet if you HADN'T read that, it still works. Seriously, I didn't think they were capable of that.

YEah, the temporary thing is a bug. BUT frankly I have to give a big "HAH!" to the guys bulba and I were arguing with so many times. Let me guess- you guys will go with ASM over the OFFICIAL BOOK AND the EDITOR?

In-universe, it's easy to explain. Anyone saying this proves about massive lack of cohesion needs to get a life. This is what marvel have no-prizes for. So that's that- Neg Zone Prison is temporary.

CW continues to impress me :)

I'm not sure what Jarvis being shot at has to do with me being right but hey I'll take what I can get :P

Although I'm not spoiling myself that does get my hopeful that somehow they could possibly work that dangling Zemo key thread in...but man that would be REALLY hard to explain.

As for ASM, I blame the totem thing, maybe you shouldn't be looking at Tony and Extremis for mischaracterization but to Spidey! I mean come on, he "forgets" Tony knew about his spidey sense already? But seriously...JMS just isn't that great at jelling and we have to cover for him, your right it's no big whoop.

[kalorama]

I'd love to see a quote of me that actually comes off that way here.

Since you asked...

Figure it out, it's a difficult undertaking. Saying it's understandable isn't defending mistakes. It's saying that it's not ridiculous to see them happen. Get over it.

I have no idea why you'd want to waste so much effort arguing about it, but that's your prerogative. Have fun with it.

Now that we've got that out of the way ...

Would like to point out though, nothing you've stated has anything to do with refuting the notion that seeing Marvel editorial miss something is entirely unsurprising.

And I, in turn, will point out that that was never my position. You've clearly and repeatedly been refuting arguments and assertions I have not, in fact made.

And my stating it's understandable to see it happen (because of reality, history, circumstances, you know... facts) is not me stating that I accept shoddy work.

But it is you failing, even a little, to comprehend the basic facts of what an editor's job is.

The idea that it is understandable for major (not minor or insignificant, but major, quality impeding mistakes) to occur on a large project is the kind of argument that, if presented to a boss after such mistakes have occurred, will get you fired from 90% of work places. While it is certainly true that the larger the project the greater the potential for mistakes, it's the job of the editor to take specific measures to avoid such major mistakes, particularly because the potential for them is so much greater. In simple fact, the kinds of mistakes you would expect to see more of (and be more willing to accept) on a major project are small insignificant ones (typos, mispellings, etc.) specifically because the bulk of the editor's focus would be on the larger issues of story coordination and "fact"-checking that would be more obvious and more damaging if not caught. Talk to any editor in any environment and they will tell you the same thing.

On the other hand, if you don't expect Marvel editorial to ever screw up in the midst of a major storyline, then your expectations are somewhat naive, you're bound for disappointment.

Disappointment is the cost of living.

And, once again, you're arguing a point I have never made. At no point did I say or even imply that I didn't expect people to make mistakes. The issue you raised was not whether mistakes of this kind (if it was a mistake) were "expected" it's whether they were "understandable" or "acceptable." They are neither, becuase on a project of this magnitude the first thing the editor should have done was assemble a story and coordination plan that would allow him to work closely with the writers specifically to avoid such glaring story errors (again, assuming it is an error, which i'm still not sure it actually is).

But the fact that a superfluous tie-in potentially flubbed a line during a major comics event, pertaining to something important... nah, not worth any outrage. Someone already said it before, superfluous tie-in loses to primary book hands down, and that's it. Good bye potentially flubbed line, you are completely dismissed from my mind, here's hoping editorial does a better job next time.

And it's here that your argument loses what little traction it may have had. "Superflous tie-in"? That's a joke right? It's a tie-in featuring their most famous, popular, marketable, and profitable character. A character whose public unmasking early in the story was the subject of major mainstream media coverage. The flagship character of the entire comic line. A character whose actions and decisions sit at the very center of the story. A character with a $100+ million dollar movie on the runway preparing for takeoff (for which his involvement in this story serves as collateral marketing). Superfluous? Seriously? Wow.

It's just simply, once again, reality.

And the reality is, your interpretion of my argument is either a willful misinterpretation or a gross misreading. And your own argument has no relation to or understanding of the reality of how a professional editor (or a professional anything) would be expected to manage the workflow on the company's biggest, most publicized project of the year.

I'm done wasting time talking about this.

I truly hope you mean that.

See ya. Moving on (hopefully).

[kidpernicious]

lol, anybody else find kalorama hilariously delusional?

[kalorama]

Nope. In issue 82, Thor calls down lightning and fries Durok. As he says there, "A hammer is but a tool! Even Mjolnir!" The Odin power at that time was incarnate within the orphan boy; Thor had been without it since issue #79.

And, again, that story took place after he'd already possessed the Odin Force. Even if the power was no longer resident in his body, it's reasonable to believe possessing that much power would have left lingering effects. My point still remains: Prior to his inheriting the Odin Force, there's no documented evidence to support (and plenty to refute) the idea that Thor could control the elements without the hammer. And since the clone was almost certainly made from cells taken from Thor prior to that, there's no way he/it would have acces to that power either.

[ColdFury]

And, again, that story took place after he'd already possessed the Odin Force. Even if the power was no longer resident in his body, it's reasonable to believe possessing that much power would have left lingering effects. My point still remains: Prior to his inheriting the Odin Force, there's no documented evidence to support (and plenty to refute) the idea that Thor could control the elements without the hammer. And since the clone was almost certainly made from cells taken from Thor prior to that, there's no way he/it would have acces to that power either.

See, now I like the part where the dude showed you a link to an image from Journey into Mystery #80 or #90something, where Thor was clearing using his powers without the hammer and you're totally ignoring it.

Now I agree, this scene has likely been 'retconned' as Thor does not typically go all Palpatine on super villains. But since you have dismissed such 'retcons' in a previous post, this stands as a proving you wrong.

I'm sure that we could've dressed up the Population of New York city in Thor halloween costumes, or whatever your 'better' plan is than cloning Thor, but did you ever consider that maybe Hank & Tony made Clor because A.) They needed the extra man power. or B.) Maybe in part, they wanted their friend back? As a way to latch on to the 'old days' where things were simpler and they were right?

But sure, they could've made Robo-Thor. Halloween-Thor. They could've given reed a Thor cap and sent him at it, and I'm sure that'd be more 'efficient'. But since when does comic book science depend upon budgets?

I think you maybe over thinking this one, Kal.

[Cthulhudrew]

And, again, that story took place after he'd already possessed the Odin Force. Even if the power was no longer resident in his body, it's reasonable to believe possessing that much power would have left lingering effects.

It may seem like a reasonable assumption, but it's one that isn't backed by the source material in question. Those final issues of Thor v.3 state clearly that the Odinpower is gone from Thor. Doesn't say anything about it lingering. In fact, what it does say (about the deed in question) is: "Having seen friend and family die, and knowing these are the end days, Thor reaches deep into himself for a strength never fully realized before."

The wording of that "never fully realized" would seem to imply, IMO, that it was something always within him, not something left over from the Odinforce.

My point still remains: Prior to his inheriting the Odin Force, there's no documented evidence to support

What about Red Orion's scan in the post above mine?

(and plenty to refute) the idea that Thor could control the elements without the hammer.

I'll agree with you on there being plenty of evidence to refute it, sure. But from the last we'd seen of Thor- in his own book- it was pretty clear that he was intended to have the power within himself, and not because of the Odinforce (or lingering aftereffects). That appears to be the status quo of the character as last written, so it isn't unreasonable to assume that that might be the thought going into the whole Thor-clone thing.

And since the clone was almost certainly made from cells taken from Thor prior to that, there's no way he/it would have acces to that power either.

Again, it depends on which notion of the character they take.

[kalorama]

I've attached a scan from Journey into Mystery #93 where Thor shoots lightning at the Radioactive Man after Mjolnir has been deflected.

Nice. But out of context. Where's the hammer? Is he channeling energy from the hammer through his body (which he has been shown to do before) even though the hammer's not in his hand? And didn't he change back to Don Blake after 60 seconds back then if lost contact with the hammer? So either the hammer is very nearby (like in his belt on the other side or on the ground near him) or in a few seconds he's about to change and be burnt to a crisp. I freely admit he can channel power from the hammer through his body and vice versa. My point is, without the hammer around at all, he has no access to the elemental control power, which means neither does the clone (since the clone doesn't have the real hammer anywhere near him).

[kalorama]

See, now I like the part where the dude showed you a link to an image from Journey into Mystery #80 or #90something, where Thor was clearing using his powers without the hammer and you're totally ignoring it.

See previous post.

[kalorama]

It may seem like a reasonable assumption, but it's one that isn't backed by the source material in question. Those final issues of Thor v.3 state clearly that the Odinpower is gone from Thor. Doesn't say anything about it lingering. In fact, what it does say (about the deed in question) is: "Having seen friend and family die, and knowing these are the end days, Thor reaches deep into himself for a strength never fully realized before."

The wording of that "never fully realized" would seem to imply, IMO, that it was something always within him, not something left over from the Odinforce.

Then it's a matter of differing interpretations. I think it's more likely to refer to the fact that being merged with the Odin Force released reserves of power he didn't know he had. Guess we'll never know.

And, since I don't have the issue in front of me (and you appear to, based on being able to pull a quote) where is the hammer in relation to Thor at that time?

[kalorama]

Maybe in part, they wanted their friend back? As a way to latch on to the 'old days' where things were simpler and they were right?

Ahhh, the good old days, when Thor was a mindless, part cyborg zombie killing machine that we could turn on and off with a flick of a switch. Remember all those times we laid him on his side and drilled into he brain through his ear while he lay motionless with a creepy grin on his face?

Good times. Good times.

[DoctorDoom]

Hrm...how about those previews? Good stuff.

You may now return to your Thor talk and private civil wars,

[Red Orion]

Nice. But out of context. Where's the hammer? Is he channeling energy from the hammer through his body (which he has been shown to do before) even though the hammer's not in his hand? And didn't he change back to Don Blake after 60 seconds back then if lost contact with the hammer? So either the hammer is very nearby (like in his belt on the other side or on the ground near him) or in a few seconds he's about to change and be burnt to a crisp. I freely admit he can channel power from the hammer through his body and vice versa. My point is, without the hammer around at all, he has no access to the elemental control power, which means neither does the clone (since the clone doesn't have the real hammer anywhere near him).

On it's way back after being deflected.

[Red Orion]

Then it's a matter of differing interpretations. I think it's more likely to refer to the fact that being merged with the Odin Force released reserves of power he didn't know he had. Guess we'll never know.

And, since I don't have the issue in front of me (and you appear to, based on being able to pull a quote) where is the hammer in relation to Thor at that time?

Mjolnir was broken earlier in the arc. And Oeming confirmed over at Alvero's board that Thor was controlling the lightning himself without the help of Mjolnir.

[garin]

Clor's hammer is technological, but that doesn't mean it's just a laser gun that anyone could use. It could be at least partially powered by the clone's own abilities.

Though I still wouldn't put it outside the realm of possibility that this wasn't an editorial mistake and Stark was outright lying to Peter to manipulate him.How would that work, though? I'm pretty sure the visit to the Negative Zone prison (and the earlier conversation) takes place on the same day as the scene from the CW preview. Why would Tony possibly think blatantly contradicting himself within the space of a few hours like that would be effective?

[Exo]

Not so much. It isn't as if its his story alone.

No really, it is Millar's story. True, the mini-series are ment to complement the core book. And if you'd like an indepth look into some character, the mini-series is your #1 ticket.

But lets get a few things into perspective here; Millar writes the main story and the other writers work their way around it. JMS can't just change the utilitarian purpose of 42 or the implementation of the act in his book. If Millar says that it's only a temporary solution then the other writers affirm that assessment in their respective books. Not contradict it, which is the case here.

But I point the finger at the editor for this minor atrocity. It's his job to keep it together.

[The Foreigner]

WOLVERINE SPOILERS


The way Damage Control being the "Masterminds" (in a sense) behind the war is never even mentioned as an issue.


Well, it wasn't really Damage Control; but Declan alone, who was killed by Wolverine. And "masterminding" an entire war is a bit of an overstatement-- He hit up Nitro with some drugs; never was it his intention for this to spark the Civil War.

[XPac]

How would that work, though? I'm pretty sure the visit to the Negative Zone prison (and the earlier conversation) takes place on the same day as the scene from the CW preview. Why would Tony possibly think blatantly contradicting himself within the space of a few hours like that would be effective?

I've argued possible arguements on why he might lie.

If he hypothetically was telling the truth in the negative zone, and he realized that the truth turned Peter he might try to back peddle to get Peter to reconsider.

If he was lying in the negative zone, that might be to scare Peter into NOT leaving. And when he realizes that Peter is leaving because of the lie, he might change his tune.

Or he might have lied to force Peter to play his hand, so he'd know once and for all whether Peter was going to betray him or not. If he's going to do it, better that it happen on HIS terms rather than Peters.

Again, I don't know... I'm just throwing out possible theories on the matter (which is the fun part about boards like this, or at least that's what I think).

[Exo]

Again, I don't know... I'm just throwing out possible theories on the matter (which is the fun part about boards like this, or at least that's what I think).

Seems it was an error that was passed by the editor IMO. Another example would be in CW#5 where Peter states that his family's in a safe place (whereas in ASM, they were just a few bedrooms away).

Bad Brevoort. :mad: