|
Post by overlord on Mar 11, 2007 20:47:32 GMT -5
Do you hope the Initiative suceeds or fails?
Personally I hope it fails. I think Stark has too much power at the moment and this power has allowed himself to become arrogant/ This may make him sloppy in the long run. Frankly I think he needs a lesson in humility to be a good superhero again.
I would love to see a super villain completely destory Tony's 100 idea plan, forcing tony to realize the error of his ways. Frankly Tony's need for organization and control can be weakness as well as strength. A villain with good computer skills put a real dent in Tony's armour, so to speak. Said villain could overide the anno controls enslaving the T-bolt villains and have a an army of villains ready to strike at heroes or said villain could his his skills to hack into the SHIELD database and get secret IDs of every registered hero. There many ways for Tony's little empire to crash and burn.
But any way which option do you pick?
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Mar 11, 2007 21:16:28 GMT -5
Frankly I think he needs a lesson in humility to be a good superhero again. Perhaps. Or perhaps putting him in charge of all the super-heroes and SHIELD is the best place for him to redeem himself. He did manage to get all of the anti-reg forces amnesty. Also, he's trying to find Luke Cage's team of Avengers before "they" (who are the people corrupting SHIELD [which he's trying to clean up], Hydra, and the Hand) do. This happened during "Civil War." Tony's the kinda guy that once something like that happens, he makes sure he doesn't happen again. SHIELD nor Tony are in charge of the Thunderbolts. They're supervised by the Commission of Superhuman Affairs. And they're not actually enslaved as they are kept in line. All of the villians that were involved in "Civil War" that aren't in the "Thunderbolts" titles are locked up in 42. I'd be up for a story about that. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by overlord on Mar 11, 2007 21:54:51 GMT -5
Perhaps. Or perhaps putting him in charge of all the super-heroes and SHIELD is the best place for him to redeem himself. He did manage to get all of the anti-reg forces amnesty. He is still arrogant jerk though. Look at his recent actions, he had his company build a new helicarrier to match hios colour scheme. First of all isn't there a conflict of interest for Stark as director of SHIELD to award his own company this kind of contract? Second idoesn't the fact that this new helicarrier matches his colour scheme prove that the man has ego issues? Plus look at his other actions, he referred Cap merely as "Rogers" which shows a lot disrespect towards cap (made worse by the fact Cap is dead now. Also look at the way he was undermining Ms. Marvel's authority as field leader is MA 1. He is a mirco managing control freak, I'm surprised anyone can stand tyo work with him. All this power hasn't "redeemed" Tony, its made him worse. Also, he's trying to find Luke Cage's team of Avengers before "they" (who are the people corrupting SHIELD [which he's trying to clean up], Hydra, and the Hand) do. Considering he failed to prevent Cap's death (he seemed more interested in hunting down Spider-Man than he did the Red Skull in CW) why should any hero believe he can or will protect them? This happened during "Civil War." Tony's the kinda guy that once something like that happens, he makes sure he doesn't happen again. When did that happen it seemed to me that besides he red Skull most of the villains did jack in CW. Besides you do realize I was making a jest right? I was using the tem amour in a figurative sense, not a literal one. I was using the term to refer to system Tony and the government made, not Tony's armour. The fact is Tony's little empire has weaknesses that can be exploited. SHIELD nor Tony are in charge of the Thunderbolts. They're supervised by the Commission of Superhuman Affairs. And they're not actually enslaved as they are kept in line. Do you really think a psychopath like Bullseye would ever be hero if the government wasn't using nano probes control him? Why is not slavery? Frankly its insanely dangerous to allow these guys to be running around, nano probes or not. This is the kinda thing that's gonna blow up in the government's face in the long run. All of the villians that were involved in "Civil War" that aren't in the "Thunderbolts" titles are locked up in 42. So what, are we never going to see those super villains again? I doubt it. [quote author=thew40 board=initiative thread=1173664052 post=1173665788 . . . or said villain could his his skills to hack into the SHIELD database and get secret IDs of every registered hero. I'd be up for a story about that. ~W~[/quote] At least we agree on something.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 11, 2007 21:54:52 GMT -5
Actually, IM's armor has been taken over a number of times, even after he's taken certain measures to avoid this; never quite in the same way, but...
|
|
|
Post by overlord on Mar 11, 2007 22:00:51 GMT -5
Actually, IM's armor has been taken over a number of times, even after he's taken certain measures to avoid this; never quite in the same way, but... I was using the tem amour in a figurative sense, not a literal one. I was using the term to refer to system Tony and the government made, not Tony's armour. The fact is Tony's little empire has weaknesses that can be exploited.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 11, 2007 22:01:18 GMT -5
It does seem that the aftermath of Civil War offers a number of storytelling opportunities, as various forces seek to exploit the weaknesses (perceived and real) in this system. I don't think it can last, because at some point it will be impossible for villains to succeed believably (i.e. if Mr. Evil attacks the Pennsylvania team, and overwhelms them, and they just bring in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and whoever else they need to stomp him into the ground). If writers choose to ignore the connectivity that the Initiative permits, then what's the point of having it? The whole idea is to make sure supercrime gets dealt with faster and more efficiently. If someone attacks a military base, you know the army would bring in soldiers from as many bases as needed to contain and eliminate that threat.
I think that might mean that they'll have to either resort to ubervillians, or else they'll have to break the Initiative somehow and return to disorganized crime fighting.
thew40 - I think they are pretty much mind controlled. Remember that Norman could not say what he had done because Tony's nanomachines prevented it. Granted, those were specially programmed for that role, but you know the CSA will have its people working on recreating that, even if the machines Tony provided them can't do it now. Tony isn't the only genius in the Marvel universe - there's probably a dozen guys that could do it. For example, you find the Mad Thinker, shoot him up, and then threaten him with death if he doesn't crack the machine's code and show you how to reprogram the machines. The CSA is going to want its own people just in case Tony and SHIELD get out of control, after all.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 11, 2007 23:13:19 GMT -5
The kid in me would love to see tons of superhero teams, with the ability to put the spotlight on a lot of lesser known characters and develop them. However, the whole premise of the current Marvel Universe is fairly abhorrent to me, so I doubt I can pick up this book and enjoy it.
There was a lot of talk about Stark on this board. What I would hope we might see through this book and others is some sort of fall and rise for him. He needs to be held accountable for all of his mis-use of power (outlined in Frontline 11 among other places), and general hubris. I can only hope that somehow all of this will be exposed to the public -at the very least, his fellow heroes - and he will have to find a way to redeem himself.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Mar 11, 2007 23:24:38 GMT -5
He is still arrogant jerk though. Look at his recent actions, he had his company build a new helicarrier to match hios colour scheme. First of all isn't there a conflict of interest for Stark as director of SHIELD to award his own company this kind of contract? Second idoesn't the fact that this new helicarrier matches his colour scheme prove that the man has ego issues? I'll grant you the color scheme issue. But it's been said that he's now had to step down from Stark Enterpirses since he's head of SHIELD. A lot of upper management-types, company presidents, and whatnot are like that. And even Carol seemed put-off by his referring to Cap as "Rogers," but I think there's more to seen about that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't/isn't there reason to believe that Red Skull was dead? Plus, there were all those cops and agents there. I doubt Iron Man expected what happened to happen. And he wasn't even there, so it's not like he could have done anything. "New Avengers" # 24. Bullseye isn't a hero. None of the Thunderbolts. He's only involved so he can have chance to do violent acts. I never said we wouldn't, I'm just saying that's where they are. Don't take what I'm saying the wrong way. I feel like Tony needs to redeem himself -- more for his actions in "Frontline" # 11 than anything else. But for having an ego? No. And I really like the Intiative. I think it's a great idea and I can't wait to see it develop. But don't worry . . . 98% of the board will probably agree with you. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 12, 2007 11:39:17 GMT -5
Well clearly a bad sense of fashion is reason enough to want a giant program to protect America to fail miserably. If it was no bids then possibly. He's leader of the world's most powerful secuirty agency, he's allowed ego issues People grieve in different ways. For all you know, he can't bear to say Steve's name. I don't think we can use one offhand line as a judge. "Undermining" her? He PICKED her. He added one name to the roster and it annoyed her sure, but he is still head of SHIELD which bakcs the Avengers so I'd say he has the final word according to the chain of command. So now it's Tony's fault!? "God d**n, I should have predicted the Red Skull would have a sniper at the courthouse!" This was WAY beyond Tony- we saw no SHIELD forces there, it was US wardens bribed by the Skull. How the Hell could Tony have done ANYTHING? It's willing. That right there runs directly against slavery. Because the old method worked MUCH better.
|
|
|
Post by overlord on Mar 12, 2007 11:56:53 GMT -5
He is still arrogant jerk though. Look at his recent actions, he had his company build a new helicarrier to match hios colour scheme. First of all isn't there a conflict of interest for Stark as director of SHIELD to award his own company this kind of contract? Second idoesn't the fact that this new helicarrier matches his colour scheme prove that the man has ego issues? I'll grant you the color scheme issue. But it's been said that he's now had to step down from Stark Enterpirses since he's head of SHIELD. Wanna bet Stark still has a lot of stock in that company. It still comes off as a conflict of interest at the end of the day. A lot of upper management-types, company presidents, and whatnot are like that. And even Carol seemed put-off by his referring to Cap as "Rogers," but I think there's more to seen about that. Stark has shown Cap more respect than that in the past. This kind of petty behaviour shows Stark to be a unlikable jerk. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't/isn't there reason to believe that Red Skull was dead? Plus, there were all those cops and agents there. I doubt Iron Man expected what happened to happen. And he wasn't even there, so it's not like he could have done anything. Alll that police and Crossbones was able to set up a sniper position across the street. Good job guys. Stark was the head of SHIELD when he he died, he could have done things to protect Cap, like having him secretly transfered from him his prison to the court and back, instead of doing it in a public manner. Also its not the Skull has never died and come back before? No that has never happened. Since CW stark and cronies have put far more effort into fighting the anti reg side then fighting super villains. Why didn't any of the pro reg heroes spend time hunting Nitro, the person who is responsible for this mess in the first place? Considering Ultron just took over stark's armour in MA 1, it didn't work. Besides you are ignoring my main point, I was using the term armour, in a figurtive manner, not a literal one Every heard of the phrase "find a cink in someone's armour" it doesn't refer to actual armour. I was making a comparsion, that Tony's new empire has a bunch of weaknesses that could be taken advntage of. Bullseye isn't a hero. None of the Thunderbolts. He's only involved so he can have chance to do violent acts. Do you really think Bullseye would be a government lackey if he had in any say in it? Ditto for the Green Goblin? Of course not, they are government slaves, forced to do the government bidding against their will. That's slavery. The government is more or less using press tactics at this point. Looking at Bullseye at the begining of the new arc, Bulls dosen't look at all that happy about his stituation. Frankly this whole new T-bolts plan is immoral and illogical on so many levels. Half the team are dangerous psychopaths, if they were to get off their leash they could cause a lot of trouble. This is the kind of thing that will blow up the government's face. I never said we wouldn't, I'm just saying that's where they are. Don't take what I'm saying the wrong way. I feel like Tony needs to redeem himself -- more for his actions in "Frontline" # 11 than anything else. But for having an ego? No. And I really like the Intiative. I think it's a great idea and I can't wait to see it develop. But don't worry . . . 98% of the board will probably agree with you. ~W~ This is another thing I don't like about this status quo, the heroes have all the advantages. How are villains supposed to pose a threat if the government has na amry of organized heroes at its command and send the villains they captured to a prison in the Negative zone. Is Marvel trying to make its villains irrelevant?
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Mar 12, 2007 13:43:48 GMT -5
Stark has shown Cap more respect than that in the past. This kind of petty behaviour shows Stark to be a unlikable jerk. Doctor Doom covered this point. Perhaps "Rogers" is the only way Stark can deal with the loss of Cap. Like I said, there's probably more to this. Probably because (A) they didn't count on anyone shooting Cap; and (B) because they probably figured both Cap's armor and powers would protect him. Soooo any super-villians that have died need to be looked out for anyways? Well, it's good thing the Marvel Universe has an army of super-heroes to keep an out! Wolverine and Namor took care of this. I didn't ignore it. I understood what you meant. But then you asked me what issue and so I answered you. "New Avengers" # 24. All of them have their own reasons for being a part of the team. If I recall, they volunteered for the job. I think you're confusing the point. The Marvel characters are trying to make villians irrelevant. Why? Because they're bad guys. They don't want them running around. Hence the army of super-heroes and the Negative Zone prison. To deal with the super-villians. Is Marvel Entertainment trying to make villians irrelevant? Probably not since these are super-hero books and heroes need villians. But most of the villians in 42 are B-listers anyways. Will we see new villians? Sure. Will we see old villians bust out? Sure. Will the Marvel heroes do their best to contain the situation and stop another disaster like Stamford from happening? Yes, hence the 42 prison and the Initative. You know, most of the Intiative consists of characters that have already been out there. The only real difference is that they're all active heroes and all working together with new characters. Besides that, how does it really change things? ~W~
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 12, 2007 14:32:59 GMT -5
The real question with T-Bolts is: did these guys get a chance to say "no" when asked to be on the team? I don't recall a scene where they were asked but someone else might. If they didn't get that chance, they're effectively slaves.
The case was made in Frontline #11 that Norman Osborn acted against his will - he couldn't explain his actions. Since we don't know exactly what Tony told him about the modifications to the nanomachines, it's hard to be sure whether he knew ahead of time that this could happen or not. But it's either slavery or on the cusp.
I found T-Bolts #111 to be a repulsive and thoroughly unlikeable book; it started my mass Marvel exodus. The sense of glee Bullseye displayed at crippling a man... who wants to read that in someone supposedly acting on behalf of the public good? If they permit Bullseye to remain on the team after what he did to Jack Flag, then the CSA can only be counted a morally bankrupt organization.
As far as Cap being shot - the whole point of security is to anticipate and neutralize threats before they materialize. I can assure you that if you switch in "The President of the United States" for Cap, and "the Secret Service" for the marshals, the very least that would happen to all those involved is a career dead-end. That is, they'd never advance in their job and never be trusted with significant responsibility again. Those directly responsible (for example, the guy responsible for the building from which Bulleye fired the shot) would be fired and possibly lose their pensions. And if there was the slightest indication that money changed hands, criminal charges would follow. Protective details are about protection; it is no defense at all to say "we didn't expect an attack to come from..." because that's their job - to expect any kind of attack. And a sniper's is a rather commonplace assassination technique - it's not like a villain killed Cap using some weird power.
If the object of a protective detail is injured or killed, the detail is either incompetent or suborned.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 12, 2007 14:56:56 GMT -5
Then read again. They did get the chance, in Thunderbolts #110 and #111 we see Bullseye get the offer, Songbird get the offer and Moonstone get the offer. (Even though Moonstone gets no nanochips and we don't know if Songbird does) We also know that Penance and Radioactive Man are there of their own choices. Venom got the offer in "Choosing Sides". That leaves the Swordsman, who was already a Thunderbolt and chose to stay on. So basically... no, they're not slaves.
Funny, i found it to be the funnest marvel book in quite some tme though McDuffie's FF is now replacing it.
Well CLEARLY Marvel intended that the reader share it. :rolleyes:
Thunderbolts is a comic about psychopaths being psychopaths. It's very fun, and many people agree- the reader hates the characters but in a good way. (Moonstone for example is currently my least favourite and favourite marvel female character all at once) It's a brilliant paradox Ellis has created. What you don't do is say "Hmm, I'll take this 100% seriously." Because honestly, if you do that then I can officially say over half of all avengers classic issues are complete crap. But they're not. Because you don't take them 100% seriously and say "Oh My God! Notice how Thor accidently destroys that car on page 20 of Avengers #353! What a MONSTER!? There were PEOPLE in that!? Thor is now a villain and I shall boycott his book!"
This was the fault of whoever the Red Skull bribed to get Crossbones in this building. The system does not allow for things like this. There was a problem but those guys did the best they could.
It's "Crossbones", not Bullseye, and is there a point to this?
This is the sheer giant hypocrisy of your position Balok. If it's an OLD comic it's unimpeachable. If it's an OLD comic, it's flaws are immediately forgiven. However, this entire issue is absolutely ruined because the government didn't anticipate a sniper? It's hypocrisy, it's nitpicking, and it's literally you trying to claw every excuse you can to insult Marvel.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 12, 2007 15:52:16 GMT -5
can we at least agree that comparing old marvel to new marvel is fairly pointless? there was nothing like the current standard of realism being imposed on the storylines. to compare them by that standard is like comparing Perry Mason to Law and Order. People expect different details and different storytelling now. joe Q himself would admit it. the stories aren't all ages now; they're heavily skewed towards the older reader. as such to indict old marvel because they often ran the gamut from impossible to absurd is hardly fair. back then, that's what they were supposed to do. as for the initiative, given what I know of it, I hope it does eventually fall out of favor. the concept of the bulk of marvel's heroes being akin to a paramilitary organization takes much of the heroism out of the stories for me. had there been one small cadre, with several personalities I think that would've been interesting (and that may be the way the story unfolds which would be untrue to the concept in its entirety), however a giant organized linkup of hundreds of heroes just sounds like overkill. real police and combat procedure is to overwhelm the enemy with significant force, so having twenty heroes surround trapster is somewhat anticlimatic to say the least. and anything less really sort of doesn't follow the point of organizing all these heroes... now if the story unfolds that the initiative is eventually undone (hopefully by some civil war expose) leaving only a core of several distinct personalities, then yes I could see wanting to give that idea a chance. a procedural approach to heroics could be interesting provided a small cadre to explore and a good mix of personalities.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 12, 2007 16:38:37 GMT -5
Then read again. They did get the chance, in Thunderbolts #110 and #111 we see Bullseye get the offer, Songbird get the offer and Moonstone get the offer. (Even though Moonstone gets no nanochips and we don't know if Songbird does) We also know that Penance and Radioactive Man are there of their own choices. Venom got the offer in "Choosing Sides". That leaves the Swordsman, who was already a Thunderbolt and chose to stay on. So basically... no, they're not slaves. Okay, I'll take your word for it. That's why I added that I didn't recall that scene, but someone else might. I was so repelled by what followed that I must have blocked the early part of the issue from my memory. As a freedom loving individual, I object in principle to the use of nanomachines in this way. That's an opinion, and you might hold a different opinion. Funny, i found it to be the funnest marvel book in quite some tme though McDuffie's FF is now replacing it. Of course you did. Thunderbolts is a comic about psychopaths being psychopaths. It's very fun, and many people agree- the reader hates the characters but in a good way. (Moonstone for example is currently my least favourite and favourite marvel female character all at once) It's a brilliant paradox Ellis has created. I'm sure many people do agree. I could be the only person in the world who finds it repulsive, and that would remain my opinion. And frankly, if you want to go by popularity - most of the people on this board disagree with you, and yet that does not prevent you from holding contrary opinions. And more power to you. What you don't do is say "Hmm, I'll take this 100% seriously." Because honestly, if you do that then I can officially say over half of all avengers classic issues are complete crap. But they're not. Because you don't take them 100% seriously and say "Oh My God! Notice how Thor accidently destroys that car on page 20 of Avengers #353! What a MONSTER!? There were PEOPLE in that!? Thor is now a villain and I shall boycott his book!" Two things: I have never found psychopaths all that amusing. You may hold a different opinion. And, there is a difference between something someone does on purpose (Bullseye) and something that happens by accident (Thor, in your comment). This was the fault of whoever the Red Skull bribed to get Crossbones in this building. The system does not allow for things like this. There was a problem but those guys did the best they could. I believe I said "incompetent or suborned." It's "Crossbones", not Bullseye, and is there a point to this? Geez. It's a mistake, okay. Crossbones, then. The point is that a protective detail doesn't get to say "oops" when they lose their package. There are consequences. And really, that was a reply to "thew40" so why are you even involved in the conversation? This is the sheer giant hypocrisy of your position Balok. If it's an OLD comic it's unimpeachable. If it's an OLD comic, it's flaws are immediately forgiven. However, this entire issue is absolutely ruined because the government didn't anticipate a sniper? It's hypocrisy, it's nitpicking, and it's literally you trying to claw every excuse you can to insult Marvel. Lovely. I have a board stalker. You have extrapolated from comments I made about a specific situation (comments not even directed at you) and suggested an entire point of view for me. You're tedious, Doc.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 12, 2007 16:41:56 GMT -5
I think it's fair enough to say there's a "New Marvel" and an "Old Marvel" at this stage, but I don't think that's necessarily the negative thing many of you consider it. Allow me to elaborate:
You are asll, I assume, familiar to some vague degree with Crisis on Infinite Earths. There is 100% undoubtedly a DC Universe pre-Crisis and a DC Universe after Crisis. It changed everything all at once. I think Marvel has been undergoing one of it's own in the last few years, and civil war is the big bang, the climax, the high point. I mean, let's think for a moment here- what is the difference between the followign now and 5 years ago? And I mean ignoring meaningless resurrection stuff. (Though some resurrections, like Bucky are obviously exceptions)
X-Men: There are now less than 1% of the number of mutants there were then. Many villains are now X-Men. Magneto has lost his war and knows it and is no longer the Big Bad. Mostly trivial stuff, I admit.
Iron Man: Now Extremis-enhanced and Director of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Captain America: Now dead. Oh, and before that he realised just how out of touch with America was and fell to a new low.
Thor: Has died and is returning pretty different.
Thunderbolts: Now a COMPLETELY revamped team, motive etc.
Spider-Man: Now Unmasked, with new powers and a tweaked origin.
Avengers: Disassembled twice. Now two Avengers teams at war with one another, very different line-ups and relations.
Fantastic Four: Pushed to their lowest point ever, temporarily broken up and then reassembled but with widening cracks and a new temporary FF.
In the end, the FF and the X-Men have remained the most stationary. (Since the FF will be back together again ere long.) But the entire Avengers franchise, as well as the Spider-Man franchise, have been RADICALLY overhauled. Now you may think this is bad- I think it's opening up limitless new possibilities. And not's even BEGINNING to discuss the new marvel world as a whole- the Fifty States Initiative, the role of SHIELD, the tension between heroes, the Illuminati and whatnot. (I also think you simply cannot alter the FF too much in the long term. Short term yes, long term it doesn't work.) I think it's fair to say it's a very different place.
Where our views differ though, is that not only do Ilike it, I think it's a LOGICAL PROGRESSION from the old marvel and it's PROGRESS. It's moving on, and many and most older readers will hopefully be willing to move on with it.
...So basically, rant over- I agree it's almost a new marvel, but I think that's a good thing. And I think it's like CoIE- there's a pre-civil war and a post-civil war but I would never narrow my view by saying "Old= bad" and "New=good" or "ALL new Marvel is dark and evil". The latter I see a lot but I can name many fun, light hearted books- starting with Fantastic Four, She-Hulk, and even Mighty Avengers. I can also name many dark, from Captain America to New Avengers to Thunderbolts. And I can name many in between which fluctate- like Amazing Spider-Man or Iron Man. There's something for everyone!
Okay, NOW rant over!
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 13, 2007 2:54:16 GMT -5
Well the old marvel and new marvel thing only works if you like the new direction. Of course there are some lighthearted books and there are some well written books and there are some grim gritty books that work as well. and death and rebirth and sales gimmicks are all part of the mix as well and have been for decades. I don't think that's the issue. Marvel has to my eye, anyway abandoned the classic superhero for the most part. of course they were too good and too noble and the villains too evil. that was the fun of it. now Tony Stark and magneto could compare notes; they are just too alike--both are doing whatever it takes to keep their special populace alive. I have kept wanting to put an excerpt from the preface of Alan Moore's first collected Swamp Thing here and I guess this is as good a place as any.
The continuity-expert's nightmare of a thousand different superpowered characters co-existing in the same continuum can, with the application of a sympathetic eye, become a rich and fertile mythic background with fascinating archetypal characters hanging around, waiting to be picked like grapes on a vine. Yes, of course, the whole idea is utterly inane, but to let its predictable inanities blind you to its truly fabulous and breathtaking aspects is to do both oneself and the genre a disservice... ...imagine a place where people were terribly good or terribly bad, with little room for the mediocre in between. No it certainly wouldn't look very much like the world we live in, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be as glorious, touching, sad or scary.
I took this passage to heart because I think Moore gets it. This is a special artform with special rules and when you say "this is what would happen in the real world", you take away part of what makes it special. And I think that's a common thread that's killing much of the enjoyment for me. They're making it a bit more mundane to me. And likely someone will hasten to add that Moore probably did what he says not to do in Watchmen (and V for Vendetta which is not a superhero book, so let's just establish that before we get into it...). I would say "read it again because it's a lot more deep and rich than just having some realistic themes." The book is wholly surreal, disturbing, but hopeful; morbidly and laugh out loud funny in places. He uses a few real world elements as a launch pad for an amazingly odd and in the end very redemptive story for several characters (which doesn't happen for many marvel characters these days). And even if you don't agree, it was still self contained and didn't affect the DC universe as a whole and was not indicative of the bulk of his work. Look at the run of Swamp Thing and his work on Supreme and you'll see a genuine love for superheroes. His issues of Superman are joyful and love every aspect of the man of steel. This is not to say he doesn't tackle some heavy themes. Moore definitely does, but he manages to do it and still keep that sense of wonder about superheroes. I don't think a lot of other talents do that these days. That's why the old marvel/new marvel thing doesn't work for me, because even if everything was still status quo I wouldn't be buying a lot of these books. It's just missing that joy.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 13, 2007 10:52:08 GMT -5
I'd agree that there's an old Marvel and a new Marvel, and that Civil War represents a sea change. Where we seem to disagree is that I don't think the new Marvel is worth reading, and that irritates you for some reason I can't fathom, Doctor Doom. I have cited specific objections with which you do not agree, so let's just leave it at this: you like what Marvel's doing, and I don't.
But I must add this: even you admitted, after reading Frontline #11, that Cap didn't end the fight because he felt out of touch with America. He ended it because of the collateral damage, and he may have planned to continue the fight in court.
If you're lucky, more people will like the new Marvel and you'll get to read about psychopaths and sundry other stories as please you. Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 13, 2007 13:12:10 GMT -5
Way to twist my words, Balok. Cap ended the fight because he was doing the WRONG THING in violently opposing the SHRA. That's the bitter truth.And Balok, it doesn't irritate me that you don't like the new marvel, I feel bad for you that you're missing out on so much. If it was up to me, everyone would read at least a few comics because I am 100% certain there are marvel comics left you would love which you will never read due to your self imposed banishment.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 13, 2007 13:24:34 GMT -5
Way to twist my words, Balok. Cap ended the fight because he was doing the WRONG THING in violently opposing the SHRA. That's what I said. If it's also what you meant, then I misinterpreted your statement. It seemed, from the words there, that you meant Cap abandoned the fight because he realized his opinion was wrong. I don't think that's true, and I think interviews with Quesada and Brevoort, as well as Frontline #11, bear that view out. And Balok, it doesn't irritate me that you don't like the new marvel, I feel bad for you that you're missing out on so much. If it was up to me, everyone would read at least a few comics because I am 100% certain there are marvel comics left you would love which you will never read due to your self imposed banishment. Quesada and Bendis won't last forever. I should be able to return when they're gone...
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 13, 2007 16:43:41 GMT -5
You're onto something, imperiusrex... Personally, I felt Supreme was a haunting work, which I remember vividly even today... IMO, he managed with it the rare achievement of creating a homage which was MORE memorable, interesting & meaningful than the original it mirrored...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 14, 2007 23:30:14 GMT -5
I like the thought about redemption of Tony Stark. I hope it works out. Even more I hope it produces a more complete end to the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 23, 2007 22:26:51 GMT -5
Well I looked at the six page preview and if the story unfolds in this format, I really really won't want to buy this book. I'm sure some people will like the paramilitary aspect, and its heroism in our fighting troops is more than justified but to me it's just not super-heroic. Heroes don't gang up on villains, they don't come in overwhelming waves of force, Yellowjacket isn't R. Lee Ermey (for those who don't know, see following link...) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Lee_ErmeyMy only hope is that there will be forces trying to tear apart the Initiative and destroy Tony Stark, Reed and Hank's plan. Hopefully there will be villains and infiltrators and this whole thing will come crashing down, leaving a smaller, wiser core of heroes who are registered and trained, but otherwise leave the rest of the MU with some spontaneity. Because, realistically, if this works out, the MU will be an incredibly boring place. Every minor league villain will be registered, tagged and followed, every hero will be compensated and trained, so there won't much weirdness happening. All that will happen will be the big threats, Loki, mephisto, Hydra, the Skull, Doom, Galactus, et al. Spider Man alone facing Doc Ock and Scorpion is a tough battle. Spider Man facing Doc Ock and Scorpion when War Machine, Young Vision, Justice, Firestar and field leader Yellowjacket show up create a perimeter, alert local authorities, and contain the situation until a SHIELD battle van shows up for transport or hostage negotiations, might be interesting the first time, but is going to get boring very fast, unless someone pulls something amazing out their butt, storywise. But there's a reason comics don't do procedurals like TV and books; overall they're not that visually compelling. Movies don't do many either, because there's just not enough bang to it. Anyway the concept just seems pretty dang weak to me. Hope Slott does something amazing with the rest of the issue...
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 24, 2007 2:40:00 GMT -5
It's hard not to get excited about a book with tons of superheroes in it, especailly (for me) when some of them are B and C listers who haven't gotten much attention over the years.
However, that being said, I agree with Rex: I really dislike the militarization of superheroes. The thought of armies of superheroes under the control of our government - or any government - just completely rubs me the wrong way.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 24, 2007 5:35:42 GMT -5
Whereas, to no-one's surprise, I'm the oppposite- I love the militarisation of super heroes. I think it makes obvious sense after Civil War. While it would get VERY tiresome if it was in every book, it seems to just be in this one, which is absolutely fine by me.
The sheer number of B and C listers, the re-appearance of some old favourites (Stingray! War Machine! Justice! Yellowjacket!), the tone which I love and the very strong connection to the whole FSI idea which I also love, make this my number one book to watch!
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 24, 2007 13:51:18 GMT -5
But can it be in just one book? the fifty state initiative will have to crossover and overlap and the militarization of the super hero forces has already become a significant theme in Mighty Avengers and Iron Man. I can't imagine it'll stop there. Plus if you've read the preview, did that sound like Yellowjacket at all? To me, he sounded like a drill sargeant and if that's what it takes to have him around, is that really what we want? Personally I prefer the too smart, socially awkward Hank Pym to the tough grunt I'm seeing and can't imagine in a book with this theme he'll show his other side. I dunno, I'm starting to think Cap was the lucky one... Like I said, a smaller scale version of this book would likely work. However a cast of hundreds and the stated mission seems like overkill. Marvel kind of got it with Decimation, that when you have those sorts of numbers it just becomes impossible to do anything with all those characters. We'll see how this unfolds...
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 24, 2007 14:33:04 GMT -5
It should be something more like 4 Avengers teams; I would propose them to be based in NYC, LA, Miami & Seattle...
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 24, 2007 17:04:12 GMT -5
The thought of armies of superheroes under the control of our government - or any government - just completely rubs me the wrong way. Exactly. Any "normal" citizen of the Marvel Universe should have difficulty sleeping at night, knowing what the government can now bring to bear against anyone who dares oppose it. Governments are a necessary evil, and they do their job best when they're minimally strong: as strong as necessary to coordinate defense against invaders and no stronger than that. That is their chief responsibility. Or should be. Who would dare speak out against a government that could make a phone call and have Bullseye visit them in the night?
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 24, 2007 17:22:50 GMT -5
Balok, the real life government can make a phone call and have far worse things than Bullseye come down upon you in the middle of the night, but we all speak out every time they say something we don't like. We vote in the people we feel are least likely to do that very thing.
And it's interesting to meat someone who is conservative to the degree you are, Balok. I mean real conservative, not the Bush-lovers who pass themselves off as conservative whole voting to give the government ever more power. Personally I think the government should intervene a lot more- if I had my way, for example, the Federal Government would ban the Death Penalty. I know you're opposed to said penalty, but I assume given your views on government you don't think the Federal government should ban it?
|
|
|
Post by overlord on Mar 24, 2007 21:28:41 GMT -5
Whereas, to no-one's surprise, I'm the oppposite- I love the militarisation of super heroes. I think it makes obvious sense after Civil War. While it would get VERY tiresome if it was in every book, it seems to just be in this one, which is absolutely fine by me. The sheer number of B and C listers, the re-appearance of some old favourites (Stingray! War Machine! Justice! Yellowjacket!), the tone which I love and the very strong connection to the whole FSI idea which I also love, make this my number one book to watch! How are super villains supposed to pose a threat if the heroes are organized into a giant government backed army? Personally I still hope super villains force the Initiative to crash and burn and Stark has to go the anti reg side and beg for help. Stark needs a lesson a humility and the villains of MU need to be threatening again. When was the last time super villians had major role in a Marvel crossover?
|
|