CBR: Meet Tanarus: Marvel's New God of Thunder

[jphamlore]

Bah, why would they relaunch his series if Thor was going to stay dead longer then one story arc?


He'll be back before the season of Lent.

After the summer movie and with Christmas rapidly approaching the executives at Marvel / Disney can see that many are not fans of Marvel's Thor but are more fans of Marvel's Mjolnir.

One can't even think of a path where one can imagine to become DC's Superman. The best one can get is maybe the Smallville version where Superman gradually comes into his powers starting around high school.

Mjolnir is a much better concept in that sense, "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy" can in theory apply to anyone for imagination purposes.

One can speculate this is the path of the mysterious African-American Marcus Johnson character who will soon be introduced in the miniseries Battle Scars.

[CyberHubbs]

After the summer movie and with Christmas rapidly approaching the executives at Marvel / Disney can see that many are not fans of Marvel's Thor but are more fans of Marvel's Mjolnir.

One can't even think of a path where one can imagine to become DC's Superman. The best one can get is maybe the Smallville version where Superman gradually comes into his powers starting around high school.

Mjolnir is a much better concept in that sense, "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy" can in theory apply to anyone for imagination purposes.

One can speculate this is the path of the mysterious African-American Marcus Johnson character who will soon be introduced in the miniseries Battle Scars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMCki0Z_AlA

[Saku]

This guy looks like one of the toys from Small Soldiers

Laaaaaaaaaaaaame

[Monty_Cristo]

This guy looks like one of the toys from Small Soldiers

Laaaaaaaaaaaaame

i think he looks like Century after hanging out with Mark Maguire and Barry Bonds.


or, if you prefer, the Thor villain; Seth

http://www.comicvine.com/seth/29-12718/images/

[satchmo the dragon]

i think he looks like Century after hanging out with Mark Maguire and Barry Bonds.


or, if you prefer, the Thor villain; Seth

http://www.comicvine.com/seth/29-12718/images/

Why does marvel kill these two characters, thor and bucky, who are at the top of their popularity? We all know they'll be back but the dying and coming back stunt cheapens characters and should only be used for characters on the downside of popularity as a last resort to drum up sales. This is a decision made by a corporate CEO in a boardmeeting who shows a graph that says deaths and rebirths mean increases in sales.

[jphamlore]

Why does marvel kill these two characters, thor and bucky, who are at the top of their popularity?


Marvel for a while has had a Red Skull problem in the sense that one would think he would be a prime character in major crossovers, but the problematic nature of his actually being involved in Marvel's version of Nazi Germany with all of its atrocities makes it seem a bit distasteful to keep pushing him. The best use of Red Skull lately in an event involving the entire Marvel Universe appears to be in Mark Millar's dystopian future Wolverine miniseries. Whether the recent miniseries exploring Johann Schmidt's past indicates Marvel / Disney is changing its mind remains to be seen.

In any case, I believe that Bucky was killed simply to push Sin as the replacement for Red Skull, "to do what her father could never do," to kill Captain America. However as indicated in Fear Itself #7 in no way does Steve Rogers consider Sin to be close to being a peer as an enemy, so it appears inevitable that at some point Johann Schmidt will return fully.

[jphamlore]

Given what happened in Fear Itself #7, I just think what I said a few months ago bears repeating:

Look at the upcoming solicits:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=35054

Matt Fraction's plan all along was to send Thor off to a place where he can really cut loose with his intrinsic powers.

If a character is truly to be considered dead as in not appearing in the books Marvel and DC make some media event out of it as was done with Steve Rogers "death".

[superchick]

What worries me is the God no one remembers because memory erasure has had its day in Thor comics.

[Gamma Burst]

Look at the upcoming solicits:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=35054

Matt Fraction's plan all along was to send Thor off to a place where he can really cut loose with his intrinsic powers.

If a character is truly to be considered dead as in not appearing in the books Marvel and DC make some media event out of it as was done with Steve Rogers "death".

Hopefully we'll really see that.

[pariah-1972]

Thor seems to get "replaced" a lot even more than a regular super-hero or maybe it just seems that way?

I don't know how i feel about this cause Fractions Thor was not working for me but i really don't wanna see him get replaced by some nobody either.

I try to be open minded and not get all "fanboy-ish" about these kinds of changes especially when we know they won't last and even when they occasionally do (Ult Spider-man)

I personally rather see someone "worthy" to replace him IE: someone he was close to and is worthy of taking his place.

[jphamlore]

Thor seems to get "replaced" a lot even more than a regular super-hero or maybe it just seems that way?


I believe there is quite a large segment of potential fandom who are fans more of the hammer Mjolnir than the Marvel character Thor. Thus Marvel has to cater to fans of the object in addition to catering to fans of the character, perhaps similar to the problem DC sometimes has with Green Lantern.

As far as getting replaced goes in Marvel comics, I'm not sure it has reached the levels of who wields the Phoenix Force this year ...

[Rosebunse]

Thor seems to get "replaced" a lot even more than a regular super-hero or maybe it just seems that way?

I don't know how i feel about this cause Fractions Thor was not working for me but i really don't wanna see him get replaced by some nobody either.

I try to be open minded and not get all "fanboy-ish" about these kinds of changes especially when we know they won't last and even when they occasionally do (Ult Spider-man)

I personally rather see someone "worthy" to replace him IE: someone he was close to and is worthy of taking his place.

Thor has the same problems Sentry and Superman have; they're just too powerful. Especially Sentry and Thor. They're just too strong for most Marvel villains. That's why they killed off Bob for what's hopefully a while.

[Jarocho]

Look at the upcoming solicits:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=35054

Matt Fraction's plan all along was to send Thor off to a place where he can really cut loose with his intrinsic powers.

If a character is truly to be considered dead as in not appearing in the books Marvel and DC make some media event out of it as was done with Steve Rogers "death".

I really want to look on the bright side. From reading Thor and Gillen's Journey into Mystery, I get the feeling that Fraction wants to cut Thor away from prophecy and the thumb of his father on Asgard. Make him a character that is more in charge of his own destiny. Dying allows Fraction to pare away all of those entangling threads and great something new. The problem is Fear Itself proved such a bungled mess and we won't know who is to blame for a long time. From interviews I felt that Fear Itself was a smaller project that was rushed into position as THE summer event. That could explain why they spent months promoting the Mighty and they only appeared in one issue. Maybe they changed things to not get swamped by DC's relaunch in September? People say Axel Alonso's tenure as EIC doesn't officially begin until the Quesada influenced books all finally ship. Fear Itself might just be a soft event that just got caught up in the changing of the guard.

Long rambling to say I'm still on with the book. I want to see Thor on a spaceship full of fallen Gods. That doesn't sound like a a waste of money to m.e

[vitruvian]

I really want to look on the bright side. From reading Thor and Gillen's Journey into Mystery, I get the feeling that Fraction wants to cut Thor away from prophecy and the thumb of his father on Asgard. Make him a character that is more in charge of his own destiny. Dying allows Fraction to pare away all of those entangling threads and great something new.

Didn't JMS already do exactly that, only to have all that ignored with the return of Odin under Fraction?

[Jarocho]

Didn't JMS already do exactly that, only to have all that ignored with the return of Odin under Fraction?

Fraction is the same guy that repeated Pak's Surfer story as soon as it was completed. Fraction doing the story again his own way seems to be a recurring theme, and not a good one...

[Pixie_Solanas]

Tanarus looks like some old coot. Couldn't they have given him horns, fangs, a big fat beak, anything?

[jphamlore]

Didn't JMS already do exactly that, only to have all that ignored with the return of Odin under Fraction?

Fraction hardly ignored anything, he resolved the Odin storyline that JMS introduced.

[Ken Ashcroft]

Fraction hardly ignored anything, he resolved the Odin storyline that JMS introduced.I'm glad he ignored the JMS nonsense about Thor using up all his Odinpower just to fix Mjolnir and having Thor's very life linked to Mjolnir's condition.

[vitruvian]

Fraction hardly ignored anything, he resolved the Odin storyline that JMS introduced.

No, I meant that by having ended the cycle of Ragnaroks (which I should actually credit to Oeming rather than JMS) and then recreated himself and the other Asgardians out of Limbo, Thor should already have been free of any destiny or prophecies. The freeing shouldn't have needed redoing.

[Majinoaw]

No, I meant that by having ended the cycle of Ragnaroks (which I should actually credit to Oeming rather than JMS) and then recreated himself and the other Asgardians out of Limbo, Thor should already have been free of any destiny or prophecies. The freeing shouldn't have needed redoing.

He will never be free.

[Monty_Cristo]

Tanarus looks like some old coot. Couldn't they have given him horns, fangs, a big fat beak, anything?

his look is thorrible.

[Frank]

I'm not gonna read the comic but it seems interesting. It's like if Thor was 100% a tech God completly removed from his Norse/Earthly inspiration.

[Alan2099]

Does he remind anybody else of Terrax or is it just me?

[Will.S]

Does he remind anybody else of Terrax or is it just me?
Somewhat yeah.

[jphamlore]

I'm not gonna read the comic but it seems interesting. It's like if Thor was 100% a tech God completly removed from his Norse/Earthly inspiration.

I have read a certain well-respected creator who has written many Marvel comics issues argue convincingly that it is not established that Thor is even bulletproof.

Modern writers and artists do well to sidestep the issue by showing the gods wearing plenty of armor.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

He's not even the real Celtic God of Thunder... :frown:

[jphamlore]

He's not even the real Celtic God of Thunder... :frown:

Why can't Tanarus be some version of the Celtic God of Thunder?

[Ravin' Ray]

Why can't Tanarus be some version of the Celtic God of Thunder?
Yeah, I mean Herakles/Hercules, Tanaris/Taranus…

[Superbeast]

Why can't Tanarus be some version of the Celtic God of Thunder?

Because we've already seen Taranis in the MU. We've met the Celtic Pantheon that live on Avalon before and that is not Taranis.

Just like he did with Simonson's run and use of Jormagund, he's now choosing to ignore the previous portrayal of Taranis because he'd rather try smash this square peg of his own creation into the round hole of the MU rather than just use the existing character. Same deal as Jormagund and Cul.

[Chase_Stein]

I guess this makes up 4 the Bishop loss over at the X-front.

[The Sword Is Drawn]

Because we've already seen Taranis in the MU. We've met the Celtic Pantheon that live on Avalon before and that is not Taranis.

Just like he did with Simonson's run and use of Jormagund, he's now choosing to ignore the previous portrayal of Taranis because he'd rather try smash this square peg of his own creation into the round hole of the MU rather than just use the existing character. Same deal as Jormagund and Cul.

This. All of this.

[jphamlore]

Because we've already seen Taranis in the MU. We've met the Celtic Pantheon that live on Avalon before and that is not Taranis.


Why does there have to be only one Celtic Pantheon. Why can't there be secrets in such a Pantheon about who or who isn't a member. Why can't there be beings who are disguising themselves from previous identities.




Just like he did with Simonson's run and use of Jormagund, he's now choosing to ignore the previous portrayal of Taranis because he'd rather try smash this square peg of his own creation into the round hole of the MU rather than just use the existing character. Same deal as Jormagund and Cul.


When Jormangund encountered Thor in Simonson's run, it at first disguised itself as Fin Fang Foom. The concept of not knowing the exact identity of what is portrayed is not exactly a new one in Marvel Thor comics let alone comics in general.

The notion that there is anything binding on Fraction as to the characterization of Taranus based on previous brief appearances of another character Taranis many years ago is simply laughable and is part of what discredits comic fandom among the general populace.

[Ravin' Ray]

I wonder if The Mighty Thor #8 will show a meeting of all the thunder deities from the different pantheons. Surely the choice of Tanarus is more than just a case of geographic/cultural proximity of the Celtic and Asgardian worshippers.

[Gamma Burst]

Well, we're assuming this Tanarus is the Celtic God, but it could be a new character.

[Soundrave]

The notion that there is anything binding on Fraction as to the characterization of Taranus based on previous brief appearances of another character Taranis many years ago is simply laughable and is part of what discredits comic fandom among the general populace.


A shared universe, like any fictional construct, hinges on suspension of disbelief. When continuity is tossed away, it tatters the construct. Undermines it.
--Peter A. David

That's the quote that comes to mind whenever someone makes the argument that "Writer X isn't bound by details that occurred in Book Y 20 years ago." Or when someone says that, "When continuity is tossed away, it frees writers to write stories." In my view, those arguments are usually made by apologists for lazy and/or uncreative writers.

My favorite writers in the industry today (guys like Dan Slott, Kurt Busiek, PAD, Kieron Gillen, Geoff Johns, Christos Gage) take the time to research the history of the characters that they’re working with and craft their stories around the established continuity. With the online resources available today, it’s not all that hard to do. If they find something that doesn’t gel with the story they originally intended to tell, they don’t throw their hands up in the air and say, “Oh well, my hands are tied.” They don’t say “these previous stories are interfering with my ability to tell the story I originally wanted to tell, so I’m simply going to ignore the previous stories.” They find a way to make it work, and the extra research and work that they do really shows in their final product. Grant it, to do this, you need a certain level of creativity and ingenuity that not all writers possess. Talented writers can write stories without having to toss away continuity.

If you want an example of how a Thor book should be written, take a look at some of Kieron Gillen’s recent work.

Oh, and for your reference, this is what the Marvel Universe Taranis looks like . . .


http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/77/1165564-taranis__earth_616__large.png
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_zHgD_9vc3DU/S0uUYCFLoBI/AAAAAAAAamo/90HmRZ6H-NI/taranis12.png

[pariah-1972]

so is it Tanarus or Taranus? me is confused :confused:

[vitruvian]

--Peter A. David

That's the quote that comes to mind whenever someone makes the argument that "Writer X isn't bound by details that occurred in Book Y 20 years ago." Or when someone says that, "When continuity is tossed away, it frees writers to write stories." In my view, those arguments are usually made by apologists for lazy and/or uncreative writers.

My favorite writers in the industry today (guys like Dan Slott, Kurt Busiek, PAD, Kieron Gillen, Geoff Johns, Christos Gage) take the time to research the history of the characters that they’re working with and craft their stories around the established continuity. With the online resources available today, it’s not all that hard to do. If they find something that doesn’t gel with the story they originally intended to tell, they don’t throw their hands up in the air and say, “Oh well, my hands are tied.” They don’t say “these previous stories are interfering with my ability to tell the story I originally wanted to tell, so I’m simply going to ignore the previous stories.” They find a way to make it work, and the extra research and work that they do really shows in their final product. Grant it, to do this, you need a certain level of creativity and ingenuity that not all writers possess. Talented writers can write stories without having to toss away continuity.

If you want an example of how a Thor book should be written, take a look at some of Kieron Gillen’s recent work.

Oh, and for your reference, this is what the Marvel Universe Taranis looks like . . .


http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/77/1165564-taranis__earth_616__large.png
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_zHgD_9vc3DU/S0uUYCFLoBI/AAAAAAAAamo/90HmRZ6H-NI/taranis12.png

While I agree with you about continuity in general, it's also not out of order to suppose that the Celtic gods have some shapeshifting capability and flexibility in how they manifest themselves to mortals, or that they might use alternative names that were, after all, used in their real world worship.

[Superbeast]

Why does there have to be only one Celtic Pantheon. Why can't there be secrets in such a Pantheon about who or who isn't a member. Why can't there be beings who are disguising themselves from previous identities.



When Jormangund encountered Thor in Simonson's run, it at first disguised itself as Fin Fang Foom. The concept of not knowing the exact identity of what is portrayed is not exactly a new one in Marvel Thor comics let alone comics in general.

The notion that there is anything binding on Fraction as to the characterization of Taranus based on previous brief appearances of another character Taranis many years ago is simply laughable and is part of what discredits comic fandom among the general populace.

... You keep citing the Fing Fang Foom thing but you also state ONCE IT WAS DONE IT WAS ESTABLISHED HE WAS JORMAGUND, NOT FIN FANG FOOM.

You are undermining your own argument again and again by stating Jormagund exists in the MU and is seperate from Fin Fang Foom but then want to say "Well, Cul is The Midgard Serpent too". No. Jormagund is. You've said that yourself. He's not Fing Fang Foom, he's Jormagund and Jormagund is not Cul.

Seriously, can you not see how you keep undermining your point by restating Jormagund, a creature that pretended to be but was revealed to not be Fin Fang Foom, exists? If not, I seriously can't argue with you because you're literally to posit an argument that makes any sense since your destroying your own credibility repeating the same evidence that proves Jormagund is neither Cul nor Fing Fang Foom.

Why can there only be one celtic pantheon? Because there aren't multiple versions of Thor or Hercules, ergo there are not multiple pantheons of any gods.

I'm going to stop trying to argue my point with you because clearly you're trying to argue against me while actually reaffirming my points and God knows how you think that equates to defending your points when you're reinforcing mine.

Discredits comic fans amongst the general populace? So your point is "You guys care what happens in your stories and expect them to stick, therefore you're looked down upon by everyone else." Hey, not to be too big of a dick here, but EVERYONE WHO READ HARRY POTTER CARED ABOUT THE ONGOING PLOTLINES. They liked Snape's true nature revealed after all the misdirection because then they could go back and look at his actions as part of the bigger picture and get what was going on. And that's the most popular series of novels in recent times. So the general populace cares about continuity just as much as anyone else. That you think otherwise doesn't make it so and to suggest people looking for higher standards to be applied are somehow faulted or lesser people because of it is not only incredibly smug but also clearly wrong.

Just because you will swallow the swill regardless doesn't mean some of us would rather people respect the toys they are playing with rather than mash them into another shape for their own ends because they don't want to play nice and have their own way. If Fraction doesn't want to use the existing character, he should create another, not use the existing characters name slapped on some new creation.

[jphamlore]

... You keep citing the Fing Fang Foom thing but you also state ONCE IT WAS DONE IT WAS ESTABLISHED HE WAS JORMAGUND, NOT FIN FANG FOOM.

You are undermining your own argument again and again by stating Jormagund exists in the MU and is seperate from Fin Fang Foom but then want to say "Well, Cul is The Midgard Serpent too". No. Jormagund is. You've said that yourself. He's not Fing Fang Foom, he's Jormagund and Jormagund is not Cul.

Seriously, can you not see how you keep undermining your point by restating Jormagund, a creature that pretended to be but was revealed to not be Fin Fang Foom, exists? If not, I seriously can't argue with you because you're literally to posit an argument that makes any sense since your destroying your own credibility repeating the same evidence that proves Jormagund is neither Cul nor Fing Fang Foom.

Why can there only be one celtic pantheon? Because there aren't multiple versions of Thor or Hercules, ergo there are not multiple pantheons of any gods.

I'm going to stop trying to argue my point with you because clearly you're trying to argue against me while actually reaffirming my points and God knows how you think that equates to defending your points when you're reinforcing mine.

Discredits comic fans amongst the general populace? So your point is "You guys care what happens in your stories and expect them to stick, therefore you're looked down upon by everyone else." Hey, not to be too big of a dick here, but EVERYONE WHO READ HARRY POTTER CARED ABOUT THE ONGOING PLOTLINES. They liked Snape's true nature revealed after all the misdirection because then they could go back and look at his actions as part of the bigger picture and get what was going on. And that's the most popular series of novels in recent times. So the general populace cares about continuity just as much as anyone else. That you think otherwise doesn't make it so and to suggest people looking for higher standards to be applied are somehow faulted or lesser people because of it is not only incredibly smug but also clearly wrong.

Just because you will swallow the swill regardless doesn't mean some of us would rather people respect the toys they are playing with rather than mash them into another shape for their own ends because they don't want to play nice and have their own way. If Fraction doesn't want to use the existing character, he should create another, not use the existing characters name slapped on some new creation.

Given that the comics featuring Tanarus have not even seen print yet, and given that the solicits hint that Loki may be investigating Tanarus' identity, I find this outrage inexplicable.

[Rollo Tomassi]

I've got a question and I don't if it's been brought up elsewhere.
If Tanarus is the new God of Thunder, and in everybody's minds he has ALWAYS been the God of Thunder since the Avengers joined. And then over in Avengers and New Avengers, Osborn is putting his new Dark Avengers together, including Ragnarok, the Clone Thor from Civil War.

So, isn't everybody going to be looking at the Clor and thinking 'who the hell is that guy supposed to be??'
Nobody knows Thor. They've only ever known Tanarus.

[Ravin' Ray]

They'll remember him as the clone of Tanarus. We should then retcon our own minds and nickname Ragnarok as Clonarus, then. :wink:

[vitruvian]

They'll remember him as the clone of Tanarus. We should then retcon our own minds and nickname Ragnarok as Clonarus, then. :wink:

Somebody should have told the artist to draw him to look like Tanarus, then. And the letterer to remove the references to Thor in the word balloons.

[Ravin' Ray]

Somebody should have told the artist to draw him to look like Tanarus, then. And the letterer to remove the references to Thor in the word balloons.
http://i524.photobucket.com/albums/cc323/RavinRay/Comics/Dagger.jpg

Damned right there's something wrong. Dagger's the Layla Miller of Civil War.

[Will.S]

--Peter A. David

That's the quote that comes to mind whenever someone makes the argument that "Writer X isn't bound by details that occurred in Book Y 20 years ago." Or when someone says that, "When continuity is tossed away, it frees writers to write stories." In my view, those arguments are usually made by apologists for lazy and/or uncreative writers.

My favorite writers in the industry today (guys like Dan Slott, Kurt Busiek, PAD, Kieron Gillen, Geoff Johns, Christos Gage) take the time to research the history of the characters that they’re working with and craft their stories around the established continuity. With the online resources available today, it’s not all that hard to do. If they find something that doesn’t gel with the story they originally intended to tell, they don’t throw their hands up in the air and say, “Oh well, my hands are tied.” They don’t say “these previous stories are interfering with my ability to tell the story I originally wanted to tell, so I’m simply going to ignore the previous stories.” They find a way to make it work, and the extra research and work that they do really shows in their final product. Grant it, to do this, you need a certain level of creativity and ingenuity that not all writers possess. Talented writers can write stories without having to toss away continuity.

If you want an example of how a Thor book should be written, take a look at some of Kieron Gillen’s recent work.

Oh, and for your reference, this is what the Marvel Universe Taranis looks like . . .


http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/77/1165564-taranis__earth_616__large.png
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_zHgD_9vc3DU/S0uUYCFLoBI/AAAAAAAAamo/90HmRZ6H-NI/taranis12.png

Fraction arbitrarily altering characters or character names such as the Frigga/Freyja thing and Tanarus does annoy me but I suppose he just doesn't have the more continuity conscious in mind when he makes these changes.

For people new to the book nothing will really seem out of place so they'll just wonder what all the fuss is about when the come to this board. That being said, I suppose Tanarus could be Taranis but in another form or perhaps he's some other Celtic God of Thunder not previously seen.

[jpbl1976]

*** SPOILER***

After Mighty Thor 8, this whole debate is moot: Tanarus isn't Celtic or anything. He's Ulik! I may have already posted earlier in this thread that he had super-villain in disguise painted all over him.

[vitruvian]

*** SPOILER***

After Mighty Thor 8, this whole debate is moot: Tanarus isn't Celtic or anything. He's Ulik! I may have already posted earlier in this thread that he had super-villain in disguise painted all over him.

The part about how Karnilla's memory charm is actually supposed to work is not moot, however. Either it works on man and god alike, or it doesn't, and meantime we have Osborn recognizing Thor's clone and the Avengers remembering Thor and that he's dead in their title.

[Predabot]

But wouldn't that be more of a Bendis-problem than a Fraction-problem?

If I was to wager a guess, the Avengers-issues may take place after the spell has worn off, or some such, and they did it like that to simplify things for the readers.
( kind of would have been cool to see the Avengers interact with an @$$-hat gung-ho thunder god tho'. Perhaps sometimes standing about and questioning themselves: Is this guy REALLY an Avenger??)

[vitruvian]

But wouldn't that be more of a Bendis-problem than a Fraction-problem?

If I was to wager a guess, the Avengers-issues may take place after the spell has worn off, or some such, and they did it like that to simplify things for the readers.
( kind of would have been cool to see the Avengers interact with an @$$-hat gung-ho thunder god tho'. Perhaps sometimes standing about and questioning themselves: Is this guy REALLY an Avenger??)

Could be that. Of course, that would mean that Ulik's tenure as Taranus was really short.

[Will.S]

*** SPOILER***

After Mighty Thor 8, this whole debate is moot: Tanarus isn't Celtic or anything. He's Ulik! I may have already posted earlier in this thread that he had super-villain in disguise painted all over him.

Well that makes a lot more sense.

Nice twist.