Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
Who said they have to loose .... 😉
You just blew my mind 😐
😛
If they won it wouldn't really be a la Paradise Lost anymore now, would it. It'd be a completely different story. Possibly a good story, but nothing like it anymore.
Or, quite possibly just recreated something akin to the Korvac Saga from the classic Avengers days.
Originally posted by WarlordIt would be nice that after the current events unfold but if he does stay i don't seem him being active right away and good helps us try to figuare out if his powerset is the same once the Void is out of the picture
I for once would like Sentry to remain active after this ark
Originally posted by DarkOdin
It would be nice that after the current events unfold but if he does stay i don't seem him being active right away and good helps us try to figuare out if his powerset is the same once the Void is out of the picture
I think its very hard to redeem a character who has literally ripped a hero in half. Its not the act itself that makes this improbable, its the brutality of the incident. Its a recurring theme in comics, and a lot of fiction, to convey EVIL with brutality. When asked whose more evil; Jack the Ripper of Heinrich Himmler, a child is more likely to respond, Jack the Ripper. There's something about mutilating people to death, that strikes a very primeval instinct of horror, and this is what Bendis, was aiming for. Its not something I endorse though. Shock tactics are good when done in a sophisticated way; Mr Hyde eating the Invisible Man in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Kid Miracle brutally murdering most of London, but most of the time it just seems a lazy way of labelling a character. Oh he's a good character because he eats mutants, etc.
Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
I think its very hard to redeem a character who has literally ripped a hero in half. Its not the act itself that makes this improbable, its the brutality of the incident. Its a recurring theme in comics, and a lot of fiction, to convey EVIL with brutality. When asked whose more evil; Jack the Ripper of Heinrich Himmler, a child is more likely to respond, Jack the Ripper. There's something about mutilating people to death, that strikes a very primeval instinct of horror, and this is what Bendis, was aiming for. Its not something I endorse though. Shock tactics are good when done in a sophisticated way; Mr Hyde eating the Invisible Man in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Kid Miracle brutally murdering most of London, but most of the time it just seems a lazy way of labelling a character. Oh he's a good character because he eats mutants, etc.
Totally agree, unless it's a recurring character trait that defines them, like say Wolverine. Obviously Sentry doesn't fall into that category, though.
Originally posted by roughrider
They've gotten along fine for decades before Sentry showed up. Thor fills that slot, and their direct analogue (Gladiator) is far away in another galaxy.
But, why have a Marvelman analogue when you've got ownership of the real Marvelman now? 👆
For me Thor has always been the powerhouse for Marvel Earth. But lately for some fanboyish reasons...Marvel has been prop Hulk to be their Earth champion.
Figure this logic...we will use the 'STRONGEST THERE IS!!!" and who babbles "ARRRHGH HULK SMASH"... instead of a god who yields thunder and has amazing leadership rank.
Yeah, Hulk is the choice!
Oh, boy...
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
For me Thor has always been the powerhouse for Marvel Earth. But lately for some fanboyish reasons...Marvel has been prop Hulk to be their Earth champion.Figure this logic...we will use the 'STRONGEST THERE IS!!!" and who babbles "ARRRHGH HULK SMASH"... instead of a god who yields thunder and has amazing leadership rank.
Yeah, Hulk is the choice!
Oh, boy...
Just because Hulk is slightly more popular than Thor. 😬
It's an argument, about which duo at Marvel replicates the Batman-Superman dynamic: Spider Man & Wolverine, or Thor & Captain America?
Originally posted by roughrider
Just because Hulk is slightly more popular than Thor. 😬It's an argument, about which duo at Marvel replicates the Batman-Superman dynamic: Spider Man & Wolverine, or Thor & Captain America?
Indeed and that bothers me...I've always loved the leadership of Captain America, Scott Summers, Thor, and even Reed...but I just detest that lesser characters become more popular just over fanboy preference.
Honestly, they need to get back in the commanding chair.
Firstly, I'm gonna prefix this by saying, no, I didn't read it by clicking it. I read the post because it was quoted.
What I find confusing is that WD constantly says he hates Hulk now, that he loves the "glory days" of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby...but the thing he always brings up is Hulk's lack of intelligence.
That has always been there. So...what exactly is he on about? If "GRR! HULK SMASH!" is his problem issue, then why ever like Hulk in the first place? Hulk is, inarguably, way more of a developed, richer character than he was back then. There is way more to him than "HULK SMASH!" now, so it would make MORE sense for WD to dislike the Hulk of old, but...he likes it the most.
Figure out THAT logic. It's all very confusing.
Originally posted by Cartesian Doubt
I think its very hard to redeem a character who has literally ripped a hero in half. Its not the act itself that makes this improbable, its the brutality of the incident. Its a recurring theme in comics, and a lot of fiction, to convey EVIL with brutality. When asked whose more evil; Jack the Ripper of Heinrich Himmler, a child is more likely to respond, Jack the Ripper. There's something about mutilating people to death, that strikes a very primeval instinct of horror, and this is what Bendis, was aiming for. Its not something I endorse though. Shock tactics are good when done in a sophisticated way; Mr Hyde eating the Invisible Man in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Kid Miracle brutally murdering most of London, but most of the time it just seems a lazy way of labelling a character. Oh he's a good character because he eats mutants, etc.
Precisely.
It's not like Sentry silently suffocated him or snapped his neck as you would "humanely" kill a chicken.
He broke his nose, strangled him and then ripped him in two. That wasn't necessary, but he did it anyway.
Trouble is, will they pull the old "It was The Void doing it!" card? I hope not.
-AC
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
Indeed and that bothers me...I've always loved the leadership of Captain America, Scott Summers, Thor, and even Reed...but I just detest that lesser characters become more popular just over fanboy preference.Honestly, they need to get back in the commanding chair.
It's exactly like Batman. He has no powers, and thinks that throwing around small metal objects puts him on par with characters like Superman. The reality of the situation is that he should be shot, stabbed or smooshed every single issue, and that's not even the issues which come even remotely close to addressing the fact that he "adopts" and dresses up young boys in garishly bright hotpants and sends them out to fight criminals.
But like Marvel and every other company that ever owned a character, DC put him with the bigshots because of his popularity.
Originally posted by willRules
It's exactly like Batman. He has no powers, and thinks that throwing around small metal objects puts him on par with characters like Superman. The reality of the situation is that he should be shot, stabbed or smooshed every single issue, and that's not even the issues which come even remotely close to addressing the fact that he "adopts" and dresses up young boys in garishly bright hotpants and sends them out to fight criminals.But like Marvel and every other company that ever owned a character, DC put him with the bigshots because of his popularity.
Should Hulk be getting shot, stabbed or smooshed in every issue?
I'm confused as to who you were referring to here, Will Smith.
-AC
Originally posted by willRules
It's exactly like Batman. He has no powers, and thinks that throwing around small metal objects puts him on par with characters like Superman. The reality of the situation is that he should be shot, stabbed or smooshed every single issue, and that's not even the issues which come even remotely close to addressing the fact that he "adopts" and dresses up young boys in garishly bright hotpants and sends them out to fight criminals.But like Marvel and every other company that ever owned a character, DC put him with the bigshots because of his popularity.
Correction!
He's on the top not just because of his popularity.
He's a comic book icon.
He's a peak human in form of athletics, academics, and charity.
He's proof that you can fight crime without killing.
He uses his mind (as you say without super powers) to solve crimes.
Etc..etc..etc... wanna try again?
Oh, and did I mention leadership skills and more than 60 years of evolving the character?
There is a solid good reason why he is popular. See, what happens when you stick to Morrison's philosophy? you lose track of the traits of the characters. Go Clobbering Time!
I love this sensitive mentality of some people! "OH JOO TALK ABOOT MARVEL THEN I'M TAKING ABOUT DC!" YAY!
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriI think he's referring to the general idea of popularity taking precedence over common sense.
Should Hulk be getting shot, stabbed or smooshed in every issue?I'm confused as to who you were referring to here, Will Smith.
-AC
Also, a big "lol" that WD thinks that by commenting on Batman, Will's demonstrating a sensitive mentality and Marvel fanboyism.
"I love this sensitive mentality of some people! "OH JOO TALK ABOOT MARVEL THEN I'M TAKING ABOUT DC!" YAY!"
WD criticizing company fanboyism... a comment spurred on by somebody simply talking about a DC character...
I'm not entirely sure where to begin with that.
Originally posted by roughrider
Just because Hulk is slightly more popular than Thor. 😬It's an argument, about which duo at Marvel replicates the Batman-Superman dynamic: Spider Man & Wolverine, or Thor & Captain America?
This going to sound a bit weird, but I don't mind it that Thor isn't Marvels top DAWG - or as u put it as popular as the Hulk. What I think u mean is that he doesn't get as much of the lime light ? However, he is basically a plagiarized character. I don't know what it is, but I don't think I would have enjoyed Lord of the Rings as much if Gandalf was Merlin. If u know what I mean ? I know there's lots of fiction that re-invigorates, mythological, fictional and non fictional characters (League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen comes to mind), but his history as basically been copied and pasted from another source. I don't think a plagiarized character should have the spotlight as much as an original one. I suppose that's just me ??? I do FAR prefer Thor as a character to the Hulk, but Ithink he's better as a Marvel (A-) List celebrity, if u know what I mean? Also I kind of have problems with a heroe who also claims to be a God, in the traditional sense. Its just too Arrogant !
Originally posted by willRules
It's exactly like Batman. He has no powers, and thinks that throwing around small metal objects puts him on par with characters like Superman. The reality of the situation is that he should be shot, stabbed or smooshed every single issue, and that's not even the issues which come even remotely close to addressing the fact that he "adopts" and dresses up young boys in garishly bright hotpants and sends them out to fight criminals.But like Marvel and every other company that ever owned a character, DC put him with the bigshots because of his popularity.
But its done well. Originally he was placed with the big shots because of his ppopularity, but now its because he has an essential social role to play in the group. When its done well, Batman is the most interesting character on the J.L.A. He had all the best moments during the Morisson's run. And look how important Cap is to the Avengers, and Mister Terrific to the J.S.A. Stories aren't all about CRASH, BANG wallop, u have to have personalities making the whole story digestive. Look at the most recent Star Wars films, there isn't a single memorable character. The Films are basically a series of organized battles. You might as well be watching someone else playing a video game.
I thought it was pretty clear that the Sentry that's been seen doing Norman's dirty work is the Void "side" of his personality, and not the idealized "Golden Guardian" side, but it seems that most people disagree with me.
Based on the latest Dark Avengers, I thought it was basically decided that Norman's been able to manipulate the Void by essentially taking advantage of his drug addiction. And in turn, the Void--as in the darker, drug addicted part of Bob's personality--has been the one Norman's been ordering around. Am I missing something?
EDIT: Also, I don't know if this has been mentioned, but in one of the panels where Sentry punches Ares away, you can see a black tentacle emerging from, presumably, the injury on his stomach. Isn't this meant to signal the Void?