Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

forum rules.....

Gilgamesh, eternal. The Forgotten One.

Gil is out classed.

If this is scrub kalibak gil has a change if he fights smart and wears him down

Kalibak on average.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Kalibak on average. Based on?

gilgamesh, unless this kalibak has the OE.

Standard Kalibak with club makes it a good fight. He gets a little underrated (though apparently not on this board) because he consistently loses, but he's generally facing very high level, tip top tier opponents (Orion, Superman). When he's facing slightly less powerful, or less warrior-like, opponents he tends to do better (Sueprmen of America, Kyle, Lightray).

Still, giving him the win seems really far against someone who has gone toe to toe equally with Thor.

Slight edge to Gilgamesh on average.

hero

Originally posted by guy222
hero Beowulf?

One of Gilgamesh's (many) psuedonyms. "Gilgamesh", "Hero", "Hercules", "The Forgotten One", etc.

Standard Kalibak loses more times than not.

Amped Kalibak (as seen toward the end of the most recent Firestorm series) shit-stomps.

Originally posted by Desaad
Standard Kalibak with club makes it a good fight. He gets a little underrated (though apparently not on this board) because he consistently loses, but he's generally facing very high level, tip top tier opponents (Orion, Superman). When he's facing slightly less powerful, or less warrior-like, opponents he tends to do better (Sueprmen of America, Kyle, Lightray).

Still, giving him the win seems really far against someone who has gone toe to toe equally with Thor.

Slight edge to Gilgamesh on average.

He beat Lightray in the Kirby years, beat him half to death iirc. I doubt he can do the same post crisis.

In the early years his battles with Orion were vicious stalemates or near stalemates, not anymore (not unless he has an amp). Kalibak at those Lightray smashing levels would overwhelm Gilgamesh.

He's generally less savage and formidable post crisis.

Originally posted by Allankles
He beat Lightray in the Kirby years, beat him half to death iirc. I doubt he can do the same post crisis.

He DID do the same, in the John Byrne years.



Not really accurate. His pre crisis self was stalemated by Gorilla Grodd. It's more accurate to say he's less formidable outside of Kirby's work, but even there he's generally portrayed as formidable within the New Gods titles themselves.

Originally posted by Desaad
He DID do the same, in the John Byrne years.

You're talking about JKFW? Wastn't that like a retread of the original? Doesn't really count.



Originally posted by Desaad
Not really accurate. His pre crisis self was stalemated by Gorilla Grodd. It's more accurate to say he's less formidable outside of Kirby's work, but even there he's generally portrayed as formidable within the New Gods titles themselves.

No doubt he's fairly formidable in the NG titles but against whom? Most of his battles in the NG titles post crisis are with Orion and without an amp he's been demonstrated as being inferior to his younger brother with only maybe one writer attributing that inferiority to something other than his strength (physicality) but his mind (his over reliance on brute strength). Most every writer implies that he is the physical inferior.

Not so in the Kirby years, he was every bit Orion's match physically, with the Dog of War only getting a slight edge usually because of his guile. It was even conceivable to argue that Kalibak was slightly stronger with Orion being slightly smarter in combat.

Post crisis DC turned him into a tame imitation of his original portrayals.

Originally posted by Galan007
Standard Kalibak loses more times than not.

Amped Kalibak (as seen toward the end of the most recent Firestorm series) shit-stomps.

Originally posted by Allankles
You're talking about JKFW? Wastn't that like a retread of the original? Doesn't really count.

No, it wasn't a retread of the original. The only 'retread' that ever came from Jack Kirby's Fourth World was the retelling of the Jimmy Olsen/Forever People story. This was distinct, and absolutely counts.







My point isn't that Kalibak is some super beast in New God centric titles. My point is that the delineation you make -- that he was really impressive pre crisis but isn't Post-Crisis -- is a fallacy, because probably his worst showings ever came Pre-Crisis. It's more accurate to say that he's not so impressive in his guest appearances - against Superman, especially.




Kirby and Byrne both established that they were physical equals. That was the standard for the character. Yes, over the years Kalibak has proven himself physically inferior, other writers have backed this up, and their comparative performances against heroes (Superman, Kyle) backs that up hugely. But Byrne makes specific effort to say that they are physical equals. Even Starlin makes it clear that Kalibak is as strong as Superman, but speed and maneuverability and skill are what allow him (Superman) to win.



Again, it's not 'pre-crisis', it's "under kirby". Because those that followed Kirby's work most closely backed up the same conclusion. And there were those that didn't even in Pre Crisis, which is what the Gorilla Grodd example illustrates.



It has nothing to do with Crisis.

Originally posted by Desaad
No, it wasn't a retread of the original. The only 'retread' that ever came from Jack Kirby's Fourth World was the retelling of the Jimmy Olsen/Forever People story. This was distinct, and absolutely counts.

How wasn't that particular encounter a retread? Keep in mind I haven't read the JKFW incident in question. Kirby is the one that had Kalibak smashing Lightray, the same Lightray that could casually generate the heat of several stars under Kirby. So anything similar in JKFW is basically like a post crisis confidential, which - given the fact that the crisis never affected the NG in the first place - would truly just be a retread.

Originally posted by Desaad
My point isn't that Kalibak is some super beast in New God centric titles. My point is that the delineation you make -- that he was really impressive pre crisis but isn't Post-Crisis -- is a fallacy, because probably his worst showings ever came Pre-Crisis. It's more accurate to say that he's not so impressive in his guest appearances - against Superman, especially.

I didn't intend to imply that that was what you were saying. One bad feat in Pre crisis doesn't match the series of nothing feats in Post Crisis sorry. And yes, maybe I should be more specific by saying "under Kirby" but when you're talking NG, especially pre crisis NG, you're talking Kirby first.

Few of the concepts introduced by other less talented pre crisis writers stuck. Writers like Morrison in tribute, try to echo a bit of Kirby with their NG not the other so so Pre Crisis writers. So my bad for referencing the only Pre Crisis NG title iteration that mattered (I have the others but hardly touch them let alone sift through for feats).




Originally posted by Desaad
Kirby and Byrne both established that they were physical equals. That was the standard for the character. Yes, over the years Kalibak has proven himself physically inferior, other writers have backed this up, and their comparative performances against heroes (Superman, Kyle) backs that up hugely. But Byrne makes specific effort to say that they are physical equals. Even Starlin makes it clear that Kalibak is as strong as Superman, but speed and maneuverability and skill are what allow him (Superman) to win.

Ok. But referencing Bryne's JKFW doesn't help your case, like with the Man of Steel Bryne was trying to go back to the roots of these characters while giving a more modern interpretation. It may be Post Crisis but it's using Pre Crisis portrayals to inform the direction of the characterizations.



Originally posted by Desaad
Again, it's not 'pre-crisis', it's "under kirby". Because those that followed Kirby's work most closely backed up the same conclusion. And there were those that didn't even in Pre Crisis, which is what the Gorilla Grodd example illustrates.



It has nothing to do with Crisis.

It doesn't have anything to do with Crisis so much as it has to do with post Darkness Saga NG, when they were truly opened up to the mainstream and by extension, opened up to more writers. So I used crisis because that's about the time that happened chronologically. Darkness Saga influenced the NG's participation in DC, not the crisis, but GDS coincidentally happened around that time.

The decreasing of his formidability is simply a side effect of the taming of the character. Under Kirby he's the fiercest and cruelest warrior (hence the title Kalibak the cruel) in a planet full of fierce and cruel warriors making him the perfect antagonist for Orion. Yes he's a brute, yes he's susceptible to guile, but where is the savagery? The unrelenting violence? Reduce the intensity of his character and it's easy to take the next step.

Originally posted by Allankles
How wasn't that particular encounter a retread? Keep in mind I haven't read the JKFW incident in question. Kirby is the one that had Kalibak smashing Lightray, the same Lightray that could casually generate the heat of several stars under Kirby. So anything similar in JKFW is basically like a post crisis confidential, which - given the fact that the crisis never affected the NG in the first place - would truly just be a retread.

No, wrong.

JK4W was telling new stories. Totally new stories. It considered Jack Kirby's stuff to be in continuity and canon, and basically ignored everything else (partly because Byrne is a dick, and partly because pretty much everything that happened in between sucked).

It's not a 'retread' in the sense that it's not retelling the same stories in a Post Crisis continuity. It's just another battle, in which Kalibak AGAIN proves his superiority to Lightray, for the same reasons that he proved superiority the first time they encountered each other.

You seem to be implying that JK4W was 'retelling' old Pre Crisis stories. That is only true of issue 20, the final issue of the run, which retold bits and pieces of Forever People 1 and Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen 147. The rest was all brand new.

What you're essentially saying is "Well, Mangog beat Thor the first time they fought because he was way stronger, and all the other times also beat him because he was way stronger, so those don't count, just the first one.".

They're distinct showings. And count as such.

And it's backed up by what happens when Lightray goes insane and warlike, too, I might add. He drops Supertown on Orion, and Orion still no sells him casually when he gets serious. Because for all of Lightray's raw power, he's not a tempered warrior the way Kalibak and Orion are. That's part of the point of the story. What makes Orion so effective, and so dangerous, is that he's the balance between 'light' and 'dark'. No one else in the New Gods universe is ever going to be as deadly as him for that reason -- they're all too purely of one world or the other (though an argument could be made for Mr. Miracle, I suppose, but in a totally different way).





When you're talking New Gods IN GENERAL you're talking Kirby first.

But when the entirity of Kalibak's Pre-Crisis showings amount to about 10 distinct appearances, the fact that one of them had him stalemated by a Gorilla brings down his average. Considerably. And the fact that he's had some of his best feats in HISTORY Post-Crisis -- matching Orion in strength, fighting evenly against Superman, destroying Kyle Rayner, totally unstoppable against the Supermen of America, nearly killing Max Mercury -- means that trying to box it up as "Pre Crisis Kalibak" and "Post Crisis Kalibak" doesn't make any sense. You're trying to fit him into labels that are meaningless.



Yeah, it IS your bad, because we're not talking about artistic influence. This is a debate board, so we're talking about SHOWINGS. I don't care that all other Pre-Crisis showings sucked for the New Gods -- I ignore them for my own personality canon, yes, but in a situation like this we're supposed to be ANALYTICAL.

If we took only the showings I thought mattered, then none of the bad showings you're talking about for Kalibak would mean anything either. You think people are going back and looking at OWAW for inspiration on how to deal with the New Gods?

And by the way LOL at the idea that Morrison is channeling Kirby for his New Gods. What he's done is interesting, it's epic. It has virtually no relation to what Kirby did, though, and he's completely changed the characterization of Darkseid, Orion, etc. to suit the greater purpose of his story.








It's post crisis continuity, telling new stories. It wasn't going back and telling old stories. It wasn't 'the all new origin' the way that the Man of Steel was. The fact that current Superman writers are going back and looking at the work of Elliot S! Maggin doesn't change the fact that you're talking about a Post-Crisis story.

Jeez man, you're the one who BROUGHT UP the label. At least understand what they mean, PLEASE. Crisis on Infinite Earths happened in 1986. Everything after that is Post Crisis, everything before is Pre. Everything post Crisis - Every god damn thing - was somehow influenced by Pre Crisis.





The rest is you just saying obvious stuff, so I cut it out. But the bulk of your point makes no sense, and the delineation you're trying to make is a false one. It's okay that you are wrong, but dragging it out like this is just getting annoying.

Originally posted by Desaad
No, wrong.

JK4W was telling new stories. Totally new stories. It considered Jack Kirby's stuff to be in continuity and canon, and basically ignored everything else (partly because Byrne is a dick, and partly because pretty much everything that happened in between sucked).

It's not a 'retread' in the sense that it's not retelling the same stories in a Post Crisis continuity. It's just another battle, in which Kalibak AGAIN proves his superiority to Lightray, for the same reasons that he proved superiority the first time they encountered each other.

I have to read this story.

Originally posted by Desaad
You seem to be implying that JK4W was 'retelling' old Pre Crisis stories. That is only true of issue 20, the final issue of the run, which retold bits and pieces of Forever People 1 and Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen 147. The rest was all brand new.

What you're essentially saying is "Well, Mangog beat Thor the first time they fought because he was way stronger, and all the other times also beat him because he was way stronger, so those don't count, just the first one.".

They're distinct showings. And count as such.

If the battle echoes that Kirby fight in context and content than yeah it would be a retread. As in it wasn't breaking new ground, since I'd favor post crisis Lightray to put the breaks on Kalibak, hard.

Originally posted by Desaad
And it's backed up by what happens when Lightray goes insane and warlike, too, I might add. He drops Supertown on Orion, and Orion still no sells him casually when he gets serious. Because for all of Lightray's raw power, he's not a tempered warrior the way Kalibak and Orion are. That's part of the point of the story. What makes Orion so effective, and so dangerous, is that he's the balance between 'light' and 'dark'. No one else in the New Gods universe is ever going to be as deadly as him for that reason -- they're all too purely of one world or the other (though an argument could be made for Mr. Miracle, I suppose, but in a totally different way).

I don't think those things are set in stone. Under Kirby you had many warriors of Apokolips equipped to handle the likes of Superman or Orion outside of Kalibak and a couple of others.

Yeah sure as bad guys they're destined to lose, but that needn't be the case for a large majority of the time since Apokolips is pretty unique in terms of being a perpetual haven for bad guys who can and will threaten creation.

Post Kirby Apokolips is so reduced that dumb as bricks Doomsday can actually raid the planet successfully. So for me that's just a result of limiting them or perhaps simply poor imagination (or both).





Originally posted by Desaad
When you're talking New Gods IN GENERAL you're talking Kirby first.

But when the entirity of Kalibak's Pre-Crisis showings amount to about 10 distinct appearances, the fact that one of them had him stalemated by a Gorilla brings down his average. Considerably. And the fact that he's had some of his best feats in HISTORY Post-Crisis -- matching Orion in strength, fighting evenly against Superman, destroying Kyle Rayner, totally unstoppable against the Supermen of America, nearly killing Max Mercury -- means that trying to box it up as "Pre Crisis Kalibak" and "Post Crisis Kalibak" doesn't make any sense. You're trying to fit him into labels that are meaningless.

Those labels aren't meaningless since they coincidentally coincide with how the character's portrayals were opened to change. As far as his better post crisis feats go, I was aware of them. He's had is weakest portrayals in Post Crisis. Getting treated like a pest rather than a threat by Superman or Orion is far more damaging to his reputation than having some weird Pre Crisis stalemate with Grodd, afterall some of the lowest showings by some of the most powerful beings happened in Pre Crisis.

Basically, there's room for leniency when talking about Pre Crisis, there was less consistency from writers who didn't take the medium as seriously then as they do now.



Originally posted by Desaad
Yeah, it IS your bad, because we're not talking about artistic influence. This is a debate board, so we're talking about SHOWINGS. I don't care that all other Pre-Crisis showings sucked for the New Gods -- I ignore them for my own personality canon, yes, but in a situation like this we're supposed to be ANALYTICAL.

If we took only the showings I thought mattered, then none of the bad showings you're talking about for Kalibak would mean anything either. You think people are going back and looking at OWAW for inspiration on how to deal with the New Gods?

Eeh! Can you point out any relevant Kalibak feats (by relevant I mean combat feats) for post crisis Kalibak outside of Kirby? Ignoring the largely one off Grodd incident? If not, then how the bloody hell is anything outside of Kirby in pre crisis relevant to this character? I mean we know he was far more fierce and formidable under Kirby any other authors depict him differently pre crisis? With the exception of the all so important Grodd fight?

Originally posted by Desaad
And by the way LOL at the idea that Morrison is channeling Kirby for his New Gods. What he's done is interesting, it's epic. It has virtually no relation to what Kirby did, though, and he's completely changed the characterization of Darkseid, Orion, etc. to suit the greater purpose of his story.

He does have his own ideas largely (which is why I love his NG) but he also does tribute to Kirby by portraying them as personifications of concepts (positive and negative) rather than simply alien superbeings that label themselves gods (unlike most of the authors that have dealt with them, even the likes of Bryne & Simonson to different extents).



Originally posted by Desaad
It's post crisis continuity, telling new stories. It wasn't going back and telling old stories. It wasn't 'the all new origin' the way that the Man of Steel was. The fact that current Superman writers are going back and looking at the work of Elliot S! Maggin doesn't change the fact that you're talking about a Post-Crisis story.

I made those comments in reference to the Kalibak- Lightray fight in JKFW. I'll read to see any similarities.

Originally posted by Desaad
Jeez man, you're the one who BROUGHT UP the label. At least understand what they mean, PLEASE. Crisis on Infinite Earths happened in 1986. Everything after that is Post Crisis, everything before is Pre. Everything post Crisis - Every god damn thing - was somehow influenced by Pre Crisis.

What made you think I didn't understand the meaning of the labels? Didn't I just say I was talking about post GDS New Gods, an event which influenced the participation of the NG in the DC mainstream. Chronoligcally the crisis came about around this point (GDS) making it valid as a reference point for me. I mean really, what's escaping your comprehension here? Pre post Crisis are valid labels because before that point the NG were not really a main stream title and so their characters were not as commonly seen outside of the NG title itself.



Originally posted by Desaad
The rest is you just saying obvious stuff, so I cut it out. But the bulk of your point makes no sense, and the delineation you're trying to make is a false one. It's okay that you are wrong, but dragging it out like this is just getting annoying.

Yeah whatever. I was talking about the only Kalibak iteration with any relevant consistent combat portrayals. I'm surprised at you, that is, that in making your point about the distinction of "under Kirby" and pre crisis Kalibak you gave no more than one combat feat for Kalibak, a feat that doesn't really affect how he's portrayed on average through the Kirby titles.

I don't think one stalemate with Grodd can realistic even come into the picture when discussing averages. I mean really, one feat significantly affecting his average?

If you have more than one such poor display by all means point them out, it would certainly have stopped this discussion a while back. Until then "under Kirby" is all we bloody well need, in regards to pre crisis Kalibak combat feats.

And Desaad, Morrison's characterization of DS doesn't vary that much from Kirby's when comparing them. Especially when reading Hunger Dogs Darkseid. Unless you're one of those guys who doesn't think that DS was the god of evil under Kirby?

I remember a guy on another forum who used to argue that. DS has always been a god of evil - he was trying to argue that he was initially just a dark war god, not so, always the lord of evil. It was Kirby who wrote in one story that all who worshiped death and holocaust worshiped DS.