Best character portrayal throughout "Civil War"

[Nutcase65]

Who do you think was the most fun character to follow throughout this series?

My vote is,.... Susan Richards

reasons why,..
"Reed, you just made a fist. Either use it, put it away, or I take it off at the wrist"

Also "Do I look like I need protecting"

She stood up for standing up for what you thought was right whatever the cost.

She realized that her children were better protected with Reed and left them in his care rather than subjecting them to danger.

Knocking the drink out of Tony's hand. That was a huge moment. A drunk Tony Stark would have been easier to fight. In her eyes he was responsible for a much of her hurt. But he still had a history of being a friend and she wouldn't let him do that to himself,.. again she stood up for what she thought was right

Big time, the look in taskys eyes when he realized he had just messed up HUUUGE when she was looking his way

Lastly,... she looks HOT all the time

[Doctor Bong]

I agre with you, nutcase65, 'cause IMO the Invisible Woman was one of the few main Marvel characters that I could actually recognize, as far as characterization goes...

[Tana Nile]

Yeah, I have to say I thought Sue was well done. I also liked how she put a shield around the Anti forces after Goliath was killed and basically shut down the fight by herself. It's about time she got some respect, she's been a superhero longer than almost anyone.

I also think the Thing was portrayed accurately. Ben is sort of a nexus for the superhuman community, what with his many team ups and his poker games. He has always had a strong sense of justice, and he is someone other heroes look up to and respect. He didn't like the law, but it was the law, and that alone made him conflicted. But even worse, he had to see all his friends at war with each other. This was just too much for him. His decision to remove himself made sense. When he did return, in Civil War 7, his actions -trying to protect people - were pitch perfect. In fact, that was (for me) the best thing about that issue!

[Doctor Doom]

Even though you all hate me for it- Captain America. Spidey would be second.

[thew40]

docdoom said:

Even though you all hate me for it- Captain America. Spidey would be second.

I'm close. Spider-Man first, then Captain America.

~W~

[balok]

I'd have to agree with Susan Richards. Spider-Man comes a close second; one could see the tensions between his desire to help Tony, and its probable origins in his need for a father figure, and his desire to keep his identity a secret. Because Spider-Man kind of fell into the background toward the end, he lost out to Susan, whose characterization I felt most matched her history. Cap, Iron Man, and Reed were all but unrecognizable to me.

[silvermoth]

Speedball would get my vote. He went to groan worthy over the top kid to an interesting and dark character with great ease in a storyline which really made sense for him to do so

[redstatecap]

The Punisher, without doubt. He was perhaps the only participant in Civil War who was 100% in-character. He behaved almost precisely as he should have based on his history. Give credit where credit is due, I say. So good job, Millar. You managed to get one character out of dozens right.

RSC

[Doctor Doom]

I really must question that, RSC. I mean, if we're expanding the field to dozens- are you saying he wrote Ultra Girl out of character?

I also want to give points for the portrayal of Hank Pym, except in New Avengers #21. As The W said in his thread- we're FINALLY seeing Hank moved back towards competence and redemption again, not a mention of Jan-slapping!

[redstatecap]

Sure, "dozens" is reasonable.
Tony, Cap, and at the very least every hero that got a speaking part on the pro-reg side, as they were willing to go along with a fascistic program out of the blue. That has to be a few dozen at least.

[Doctor Doom]

Except for the minor "It's not a fascistic program and just because they disagree with you it doesn't mean they're wrong" detail. For example, is Bantam out of character for going pro-reg? I doubt he had any idea about the Thunderbolts, or 42, or any of that- yet according to you he was out of character just for supporting the law!

[balok]

Fascism is generally a corporate controlled state as was found in Nazi Germany. By mandating government awareness of and control over superhuman resources, the SHRA is more correctly characterized as a move towards totalitarianism.

Some of the superhumans who joined the Initiative may not be out of character. Like Doom, they may be willing to accept government control of superhumans, and even themselves, as necessary for some greater good.

[Doctor Doom]

The definition of Facism demands that there be one person at the top. That is most definitely not the case in the pro-reg side as Iron Man has been overruled a number of times.

Ergo I can happily state that it is not opinion but fact that the pro-reg side were not fascist during CW. Fascist-like is a totally different thing. (Though IMO they weren#t that either.)

[spiderwasp]

AH, yet another simple topic sidetracked because of a disagreement of someone's use of a single word that someone else didn't like.
Back to the topic-I agree that Sue was probably the best character in the series. I also thought that Ben's attempt to stay nuetral but not being able to in the end was good.
Oddly enough, I think quite a few characters were handled okay. It made sense that Ms. Marvel would be pro-reg due to her military background. Also, Wonderman enjoys being known so much that it would seem wrong for him to side with the people who wanted to protect their identities. I thought many of the characters who sided with Cap made the choices that made sense for them as well. However, there were several that I don't think were handled so well, especially Tony and Reed.

There has been some support here for Spider-man being handled well, but I only think he was handled well toward the end. I'm not saying that just because I was ant-reg but because he started off not seeming like Spidey at all. He started off doing whatever Ironman told him without question- that's out of character. He revealed his identity after years and years of keeping it protected. He's always known that he would be endangering MJ and May if he did. Why did he suddenly not know this now? When he finally woke up, he seemed more like his old self. The characters we know the best are the ones who should have been the easiest to predict when a question such as registration popped up. I can't think of anyone who should have more logically been a rebel, based on history.

[Nutcase65]

I would put Thing as my second choice. Ben Grimm has always had more heart than just about any other comic book character out there. He won't fight his country ,even when they're freezing his assets, and he wont fight his friends, even when they're upsetting his routine. So he takes a vacation.

Then when he is needed, he's there. He's still not fighting anyone, he's staying true to his calling. He protects the people.
So I think they really stayed true to his character as well.

[The Night Phantom]

docdoom said:

The definition of Facism demands that there be one person at the top. That is most definitely not the case in the pro-reg side as Iron Man has been overruled a number of times.

By whom—the sole person at the top of the Executive Branch?

[Doctor Bong]

spiderwasp said:

AH, yet another simple topic sidetracked because of a disagreement of someone's use of a single word that someone else didn't like.
Back to the topic-I agree that Sue was probably the best character in the series. I also thought that Ben's attempt to stay nuetral but not being able to in the end was good.
Oddly enough, I think quite a few characters were handled okay. It made sense that Ms. Marvel would be pro-reg due to her military background. Also, Wonderman enjoys being known so much that it would seem wrong for him to side with the people who wanted to protect their identities. I thought many of the characters who sided with Cap made the choices that made sense for them as well. However, there were several that I don't think were handled so well, especially Tony and Reed.

There has been some support here for Spider-man being handled well, but I only think he was handled well toward the end. I'm not saying that just because I was ant-reg but because he started off not seeming like Spidey at all. He started off doing whatever Ironman told him without question- that's out of character. He revealed his identity after years and years of keeping it protected. He's always known that he would be endangering MJ and May if he did. Why did he suddenly not know this now? When he finally woke up, he seemed more like his old self. The characters we know the best are the ones who should have been the easiest to predict when a question such as registration popped up. I can't think of anyone who should have more logically been a rebel, based on history.

Nicely summmarized, spiderwasp! In a nutshell, that's precisely why Spider-Man was widely mischaracterized during this event, at least at the beginning...

[Doctor Doom]

AH, yet another simple topic sidetracked because of a disagreement of someone's use of a single word that someone else didn't like.

It's a VERY strong word that shpuldn't be tossed around lightly. Not as bad as "Nazi" I grant you.

There has been some support here for Spider-man being handled well, but I only think he was handled well toward the end. I'm not saying that just because I was ant-reg but because he started off not seeming like Spidey at all. He started off doing whatever Ironman told him without question- that's out of character.

That's not true though, Tana. FIrstly, it wasn't out of the blue- they've been building up his friendship with Tony since over a year ago in Amazing Spider-Man. And it's certainly the case that, as Cap puts it, Peter needs a father figure desperately and Tony was ideally placed to take that role. I actually thought that was a clever idea. But he didn't just do whatever Tony told him at the start of the war, not at all. I'll get to the unmasking in a moment but besides that, he fought at Geffen-Meyers independently, and it was only the death of Goliath which gave him serious doubts. Then he fought at Yancy Street but was again wracked by doubt, unsurw what way to go.

He revealed his identity after years and years of keeping it protected. He's always known that he would be endangering MJ and May if he did. Why did he suddenly not know this now?

He's in Stark Tower, surrounded by the Avengers- soon to become the "best team of Avengers" Tony Stark can handpick. He has SHIELD protection. These are all huge differences between now and before. But another one- one that also demonstrates he didn't just do whatever Tony told him- he only unmasked after Aunt May convinced him to. AND Mary-Jane agreed.

When he finally woke up, he seemed more like his old self. The characters we know the best are the ones who should have been the easiest to predict when a question such as registration popped up. I can't think of anyone who should have more logically been a rebel, based on history.

Luke Cage?
Falcon?
Daredevil?

I think they're all much more likely. But you'rte ignoring all the developments in his friensship with Tony for over a year.

By whom?the sole person at the top of the Executive Branch?

By Maria Hill, by the President, I'm betting at least a few times by Reed and Hank though I can't demonstrate that. And are you calling the US fascistic now?

[Tana Nile]

docdoom said:

That's not true though, Tana.

I know you disagree with me frequently but I think you meant Spiderwasp here ole chap.

[Doctor Doom]

Oh good lord! I am most mortified for my mistake, tana! I do apologize most profusely for this profound lack of basic reading on my part!

[Tana Nile]

docdoom said:

Oh good lord! I am most mortified for my mistake, tana! I do apologize most profusely for this profound lack of basic reading on my part!

No problem Doomsie! Just wanted to make sure we know who's who here!

[The Night Phantom]

nightphantom said:

docdoom said:

The definition of Facism demands that there be one person at the top. That is most definitely not the case in the pro-reg side as Iron Man has been overruled a number of times.

By whom—the sole person at the top of the Executive Branch?

docdoom said:

By Maria Hill, by the President, I'm betting at least a few times by Reed and Hank though I can't demonstrate that. And are you calling the US fascistic now?

I think that if you carefully apply your counting skills to my post quoted in full above, you’ll find the number of times I called the US fascistic is zero.

But since I was trying to make a point in an oblique manner, I suppose I should not chide you too much for misidentifying it. So, I’ll be plain. The point is this: regardless of whether the Marvel Universe’s US is fascistic or not, the argument that you advanced against that proposition holds no water. There is one person at the top of the US government (which led the pro-registration side of the conflict), and that is the President (who heads the Executive Branch). Iron Man is not the President. Therefore, the fact that Iron Man has gotten overruled by the person who is the President and/or by other people answering directly or indirectly to the President is a nonsensical way of disproving the charge of fascistic tendencies.

[Doctor Doom]

nightphantom said:

[
I think that if you carefully apply your counting skills to my post quoted in full above, you?ll find the number of times I called the US fascistic is zero.

I felt it was heavily implied. It seems I misread the situation.

But since I was trying to make a point in an oblique manner, I suppose I should not chide you too much for misidentifying it. So, I?ll be plain. The point is this: regardless of whether the Marvel Universe?s US is fascistic or not, the argument that you advanced against that proposition holds no water. There is one person at the top of the US government (which led the pro-registration side of the conflict), and that is the President (who heads the Executive Branch). Iron Man is not the President. Therefore, the fact that Iron Man has gotten overruled by the person who is the President and/or by other people answering directly or indirectly to the President is a nonsensical way of disproving the charge of fascistic tendencies.

The President does not control the Initative. Maria Hill is not answering to the President and she was overrided Iron Man. It cannot be called fascistic because there is no one poerson, even the President, who can just make a decision and have "their will be done." Now we have Secretary Gyrich to throw into the loop as well.

[Doctor Bong]

The state doesn't require to have a face to be a fascist state, Doom; only a cult-type dictatorship does... like the Phantom says, your building your argument on fallacies & verbal footwork..
The way the old Soviet Union was constructed, with its Politburo, you may well say there wasn't ONE person in particular who was in power, it was a bunch of men, a party which held the reigns of power, but the Soviet Union was a fascit nation, albeit one with anticapitalistic leanings; in George Orwell's novel "1984" it's never clear whether Big Brother's an actual human being or, more likely, if he's just a construct, a Boogeyman, a sort of sinister Wizard of Oz behind whose curtain the people in power could hide without ever having to show their faces... that state, however, was the culmination of the fascist dream...

[Doctor Doom]

I think many history afficiendos, myself included would seriously question labelling a communsit country as a fascist state. The two are polar opposites. I'm not trying to justify it but the far end of the left wing spectrum is just as bad as the far end of the right wing spectrum.

Fascism is misapplied when used about the Initative. That's basic fact.

[Doctor Bong]

Okay, Doom, I looked up the definition of 'fascim" on the dictionary & you are most definitely right...!!! It defines it as "power under A dictator"... & so my election of words WAS faulty... Touche...! The word I should have used instead is "totalitarianism"... However, once we substitute "fascim" for "totalitarianism", the gist of my post remains intact: I see no advantage for the United States (wheter it be our, "real" US or an imaginary one...) on being under the yoke of totalitarianism instead of fascism... To me, both states of affairs are equally odious... If anything, a case COULD be made that totalitarianism may be even worse, as it doesn't require one particular person to keep it going, and may very well survive, prosper & thrive long after its 1st main impulsor is dead & gone...

[The Night Phantom]

docdoom said:

The President does not control the Initative. Maria Hill is not answering to the President and she was overrided Iron Man. It cannot be called fascistic because there is no one poerson, even the President, who can just make a decision and have "their will be done." Now we have Secretary Gyrich to throw into the loop as well.

By the “their will be done” standard, fascism is essentially an absurd concept; even in the Marvel Universe, supposedly omnipotent beings like Eternity evidently have some limits to their power.

Let’s instead consider fascism in terms of normal political power. As you have already established, the Initiative operates under the US federal government. It’s reasonable to assume it is under the Executive Branch, rather than the Legislative or Judicial. The head of the Executive Branch is the President. The fact that one or more layers of authority, such as Secretary Gyrich, may exist between the Initiative and the President is not an indication of non-fascism, for even a fascist leader can delegate (Mussolini didn’t make the trains run on time by running each one personally, did he?—actually, it seems he didn’t make them run on time at all—even though he really was a fascist—but I hope the fanciful illustration is helpful nonetheless). Myself, I would characterize Hill’s professional relationship with the President as bordering on the anilingual, but we can leave that assessment aside. I don’t know what you mean by “she was overrided Iron Man”—partly because that string of words is ungrammatical to the point of unintelligibility (active or passive voice?) and partly because I don’t know what event or events you have in mind. But that’s not even relevant. Although SHIELD is a multinational organization not entirely under direct American control, as custodian of the US’s Initiative program Stark and Hill’s organization is operating the Initiative under US auspices—temporarily, with the plan of moving it directly into US federal control; with all roads leading to the President as head, the emerging power structure vis-à-vis the Initiative is therefore not inconsistent with a move toward fascism or, as Balok said, a move toward totalitarianism.

docdoom said:

Fascism is misapplied when used about the Initative. That's basic fact.

Like 2+2=4? No, sorry, now you’re begging the question; it’s not a “basic fact” but a hypothesis subject to the burden of proof.

To be clear: I am not stating that the Initiative is fascist or moving into fascism; rather, I’m reacting to the problems of your argument. Frankly, I don’t know why you didn’t ask for justification of RSC’s proposition that the Initiative is fascistic instead of trying to prove a negative and sinking into a typically unconvincing argumentum verbosium.

[Nutcase65]

nightphantom said:

[justification of RSC’s proposition that the Initiative is fascistic instead of trying to prove a negative and sinking into a typically unconvincing argumentum verbosium.

Ouch,.... my head hurts

[Nutcase65]

is all that just a fancy way of saying "your mama" ?

[The Night Phantom]

nutcase65 said:

is all that just a fancy way of saying "your mama" ?

I should hope not.