When Did 616 Hulk Start Killing?

[CaptainStacy]

I was reading the Illuminati special the other day, and got to the part where the SHIELD director tells Iron Man that the Hulk's latest rampage cost the lives of 26 people (and a dog)...

Shortly before that, in the prelude to Planet Hulk, it looked like he crushed the skull of a would-be rapist...

So...how long has this been going on?

The prime of my Hulk collecting was back in the seventies and eighties, under such writers as Len Wein and Bill Mantlo, and i'm pretty sure the Hulk had NEVER killed up to that point. I seem to remember an issue where someone comments on how surprised they are that the Hulk's rampages have never resulted in any fatalities... i read PAD's run sporadically, but STILL can't recall any instances with the Hulk actually killing anyone.

So is this a relatively new thing, or what?

[DBM]

So is this a relatively new thing, or what?

It must be. Because like you I can remember many times when it was stated that the Hulk had never caused anyone to die. In fact wasn't that a major story point just a few years ago? They were hunting down the Hulk because they thought he had finally killed someone, but it turned out he hadn't?

[Themanofbat]

I think Brian Azzarello's "Banner" mini-series that came out about 5 or 6 years ago was one of the first times I've ever heard about the Hulk killing.

They act like it's been happening all along these days.... maybe the Comic Code prohibited them from mentioning that the "hero" of a book killed people, thus why we ol'timers who've been reading the Hulk since Christ was on a cross are wondering that very question.

:confused:

[Purple Man]

Here's how I see it.

The Hulk is a uncontrollable monster, and it would make very little to no sense that he's never killed a person in a fit of rage. This was never mentioned/shown in any of the older Hulk comics because Marvel always tried to sell him as a super hero. I think in truth he has killed many people, but I could be wrong, it all depends on what the decree of the writers are.

I always thought the Hulk in the Ultimates was how the Hulk was supposed to be, not having his own book Millar was allowed to have the Hulk act how he really would without trying to make him look like a hero.

Hulk is a monster with a deep down sensitive side, that side would keep him from killing some innocent people, but when in a full blown rage, I think he could destroy a large city without even thinking.

[Themanofbat]

I still remember the Hulk ripping Tigra in half (grabbed her ankles & ripped her apart) in the Last Avengers' story by Peter David.

It was awesome... :cool:

:)

[euroq]

I'm pretty sure Hulk intentionally killed someone during PAD's run, I think it was during his time with the Pantheon.

But yeah, I don't think any of his rampages have lead to casualties.

[bkhedr]

I still remember the Hulk ripping Tigra in half (grabbed her ankles & ripped her apart) in the Last Avengers' story by Peter David.

It was awesome... :cool:

:)

Awesome

you wouldnt happen to have a scan or issue number would you?

[gildea]

Bruce jones' run was based around the hulk finally accidently killing someone (but not really it turned out) so it's def. a new thing.

Not really complaining as it does make logical sense i suppose.

[Harlekin]

I'm pretty sure Hulk intentionally killed someone during PAD's run, I think it was during his time with the Pantheon.

But yeah, I don't think any of his rampages have lead to casualties.
Until the recent FF arc where he apparently killed a few people during his rampage in Las Vegas. It was just a convenient plot device to do the whole Planet Hulk thing.

[Mr. Green]

http://superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225708
I tell why it is lame that they say he kills people here.

[euroq]

Until the recent FF arc where he apparently killed a few people during his rampage in Las Vegas.

*shrug* There was no mention of casualties in that FF arc, I guess they were mentioned in another title.

[Mr. Green]

Until the recent FF arc where he apparently killed a few people during his rampage in Las Vegas. It was just a convenient plot device to do the whole Planet Hulk thing.
I can give them the Las Vegas thing. Hulk was not in his right mind as he was attacking Thing and Torch he was imagining certain events in his life. Rick Jones being saved turning him into Hulk, Jarella dying, that Jim guy dying, Betty being put into a catatonic state... Even then though, it would be purly accidental and do to falling buildings and stuff. Of course, if you read the issues, it is unlikely that 26 people and a dog were killed during these events.

What REALLY gets me though, is how they act like every damn week Hulk kills another bunch of innocents. Woops. Sorry about that folks. For some reason the Hulk has to kill people all the time now. He's still a hero though, he just kills more people than he saves is all...

I loved the issue. All EXCEPT that part of it. :mad:

[Genesis 1.0]

Seems to me they're turning him into Ult. Hulk, this is his schtick.

[Mr. Green]

I still remember the Hulk ripping Tigra in half (grabbed her ankles & ripped her apart) in the Last Avengers' story by Peter David.

It was awesome... :cool:

:)
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! PLEASE tell me what issue that is in so I can buy it this week!

[The Question]

Well, if you think about it, The Hulk never having caused the deaths of anyone doesn't make any sense. I mean, I know The Hulk is usually rather innocent, but with all the rampages he's had, it doesn't make any sense that no one died during any of them. If a huge green monster is knocking over buildings, someone's going to get dead.

[The Question]

I can give them the Las Vegas thing. Hulk was not in his right mind as he was attacking Thing and Torch he was imagining certain events in his life. Rick Jones being saved turning him into Hulk, Jarella dying, that Jim guy dying, Betty being put into a catatonic state... Even then though, it would be purly accidental and do to falling buildings and stuff. Of course, if you read the issues, it is unlikely that 26 people and a dog were killed during these events.

What REALLY gets me though, is how they act like every damn week Hulk kills another bunch of innocents. Woops. Sorry about that folks. For some reason the Hulk has to kill people all the time now. He's still a hero though, he just kills more people than he saves is all...

I loved the issue. All EXCEPT that part of it. :mad:


Well, when he goes on a rampage through a city, it makes perfect sense that he'd kill some people by accident. However, he shouldn't be murdering people intentionally. Remember, Banner has many personalities. Some are more benevolant (like the Savage Hulk and Joe Fixit, even though he's a douchebag), and others are going to leave a heafty body count in their wake (like the Devil Hulk and the Mindless Hulk).

[Marcdachamp]

Well, to be honest, they never say he KILLED the 26 people and a dog. It's implied, but one could also interpret that they were injured.

[PWN3R]

Bendis prolly got confused with Ultimate Hulk. :o

[euroq]

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! PLEASE tell me what issue that is in so I can buy it this week!

Themanofbat already said it, "The Last Avengers Story".

[Themanofbat]

"The Last Avengers' Story" was a 2 part deluxe format mini that came out around 1995. It's a futuristic tale where Ultron-59 kills the modern day Avengers and forces his creator, Henry Pym, to round up the old school Avengers or he'll kill them one by one.

It was an awesome tale at the time.

You can either dig up the 2 issues, or buy it via TPB (which may or may not be out of print... (I think it is :( ))

http://members.fortunecity.com/jshayer/covers/avg_last1.jpg

http://members.fortunecity.com/jshayer/covers/avg_last2.jpg

:)

[Themanofbat]

There's a great read on it here....

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/earthlastavengers.htm

:)

[Dread]

In a way, I see the "Hulk killing" thing as a sort of retcon to inject post-modern "realism" into his many rampages of yesteryear. Back when the Comics Code still mattered for something, you couldn't have the Hulk actually kill people during his rampages, even though it would have been very likely even unintentionally (if you collapse a building with people inside it often enough, someone is going to croak). Of course, the Hulk is also a sometimes hero so they had to keep his rampages "light" to make him relatable. But those times are gone. Now we are in age where if you choose to write a story where a female character is brutalized and/or raped, fans see it was a "strong character growth" moment. Fellow anti-heroes like Wolverine and Punisher (and Ghost Rider) have long body counts since the 90's. So I was not surprised when Bendis suddenly asserted that Hulk killed people in his rampages. It was a break from tradition, but that tradition always was a little implausable.

Of course, if Hulk had killed 26 people when he'd NEVER KILLED ANY BEFORE, that could justify the Illuminati's decision that the time was right to exile him off the Earth (even if it was reckless; surely Reed should have known better that the odds of SOMETHING happening to change Hulk's course to an unplanned planet were likely, given his own track record of flying into space). And it provided fodder for Namor's constant rebellion from the non-alliance.

[Lackey]

Bendis prolly got confused with Ultimate Hulk. :o


just like he gets Spider-Man confused with Ultimate Spider-Man :o

[Not Jake]

and how he gets everyone confused with jewish linguists:(

[The Question]

In a way, I see the "Hulk killing" thing as a sort of retcon to inject post-modern "realism" into his many rampages of yesteryear. Back when the Comics Code still mattered for something, you couldn't have the Hulk actually kill people during his rampages, even though it would have been very likely even unintentionally (if you collapse a building with people inside it often enough, someone is going to croak). Of course, the Hulk is also a sometimes hero so they had to keep his rampages "light" to make him relatable. But those times are gone. Now we are in age where if you choose to write a story where a female character is brutalized and/or raped, fans see it was a "strong character growth" moment. Fellow anti-heroes like Wolverine and Punisher (and Ghost Rider) have long body counts since the 90's. So I was not surprised when Bendis suddenly asserted that Hulk killed people in his rampages. It was a break from tradition, but that tradition always was a little implausable.

Of course, if Hulk had killed 26 people when he'd NEVER KILLED ANY BEFORE, that could justify the Illuminati's decision that the time was right to exile him off the Earth (even if it was reckless; surely Reed should have known better that the odds of SOMETHING happening to change Hulk's course to an unplanned planet were likely, given his own track record of flying into space). And it provided fodder for Namor's constant rebellion from the non-alliance.


Good points all around. Like I said, I'm not too suprised by The Hulk having any kind of body count, because he's got more than a few personalities, and not all of them are very nice. The Savage Hulk might vent his anger in the desert so he won't hurt anyone, but the mindless Hulk would tear through a populated area, killing hundreds of people, and not give a crap.

[Kurosawa]

That Last Avengers Story was an alternate Earth. Thank God.

Like every other character nowadays, Hulk has to kill to be "kewl" with the bloodthirsty kiddies.

[The Question]

I don't think that's it. I think it's just for the sense of logic. I mean, has The Hulk ever seemed like someone who would have some major moral code? Not to me. Hell, during the Infinity Gauntlet, Adam Warlock asked Wolverine and The Hulk to kill Thanos the first chance they had, and they both agreed, so it's hardly unprecidented. I think it really depends which personality you're talking about:



Bruce: Probably wouldn't kill anybody unless he was put into a situation where he had no choice.

Savage Hulk: If he was in a fight or having one of his temper tantrums, he'd probably kill some people by accident. But he wouldn't set out to and he'd feel really bad about it if they were innocents.

Joe Fixit: He'd kill a man in a fair fight. Or if he thought he was going to start a fair fight. Or if he bothered him. Or if there was a woman involved. Or if he was getting paid. Mostly when he's getting paid. Joe's a jackass without much in terms of moral fiber. Hell, he worked for the mob for a while.

Mindless Hulk: This one's the one I'd expect to have the highest body count. He's the nastyest personality that's ever gotten out. He's basically nothing but basic animal instinct and anger. If he's pissed off or feels threatened, he'll lash out at anything that moves. This is the personality you're usually dealing with when The Hulk's on a major rampage.

Devil Hulk: He's never gotten out before, but if he ever does, the body count would be huge. He'd kill and rape and canabalize people just for the hell of it.

[IronSpidy]

I find it very odd that Hulk has started killing innocent. I dont think its a very good move at all...

[CAPT. MARVEL]

Seems to me they're turning him into Ult. Hulk, this is his schtick.
true

This really bothers me though. The whole point of the Ultimate U is for a new take on things and it seems lately like a bunch of the writers are trying to take both incarnations of a character into the same direction. Ult. Scarlet Witch doesn't need to start wearing the same costume as 616. 616 Hulk doesn't need to start killing people like Ult. Hulk. Leave 616 Cap as a liberal peak-human and Ult Cap as a super-human conservative. The differences are what makes it interesting!!

[The Question]

I find it very odd that Hulk has started killing innocent. I dont think its a very good move at all...



Well, It's probably not the first time in continuity. There has been more than one occasion where he's completely lost it and went rampaging through a populated area. Statistically, some people would have died there.

[IronSpidy]

True, but that was some time ago.

[Cyclops]

I remember "Professor Hulk" attacking several foes quite fatally. He literally beat a Loki-wannabe to death in the painted graphic novel "Tales to Astonish" back in the mid-1990s, and I remember him impaling some cyborg guy with his own spear even earlier than that.

Let's not forget that Hulk's been steadily growing in size over the years, starting at slightly shorter than Yao Ming and now tops 12 feet tall with ease, so it would stand to reason that he's much stronger now than ever before...

But I think the real issue is that.. well, isn't Daniel Way writing the Hulk now? And since when has Daniel Way ever given a crap about the history of a character?

Edit: Oh... Bendis. Serves me right for trying to have input on current comics when I've been unable to get any for three months... :(

[Mr. Green]

Alright, here is the timeline.

Pre-PAD Hulk has killed a total of 0 innocents.

During PAD's run all the way from 1987 to the end of the 90s, Hulk has
killed a total of 0 innocents.

From the end of PAD's run, there were a few writers until Paul Jenkins took over (one of which was Joe Casey). During that time Hulk has killed 0 innocents.

During Paul Jenkins' run Hulk killed 0 innocents.

During Bruce Jones' run, which I think rocked, the public backlashes against Hulk because there is video footage of Hulk killing a child in one of his rampages. Turns out he was just framed. When Doc Samson was asked about what he believed he said, "When was the last time you saw the Hulk kill anybody, let alone a kid?" (vol. 2, #36) Again 0 innocents killed in Jones' run.

After that, PAD took over again for a short time and the Hulk killed 0 innocents during this run.

Daniel Way took over during the Planet Hulk prelude (which sucked), and still, 0 innocents were killed.

In the Fantastic Four issues (#'s 533 - 535) Hulk goes out of his mind after he is exposed to a gamma bomb blast. I could see where they could get away with saying that he killed innocents here (and they DID say that in NA: Illuminati) but in the issues nothing is shown that would lead me to believe that innocents were killed during his rampage anyway.

Even if did show innocents killed, Iron Man said "How many this time?" Like it happens every week or something.

It is crap to say that Hulk has killed innocent people in the past when he hasn't. Accident or no, it hasn't. It is just completley against continuity and it hurts Hulk's character making him more like his Ultimate counterpart.

Hulk DOESN'T kill innocents, even accidently. What some writer wrote in that "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth" in reference to Spidey? You'd be like, "What the hell? Where did that come from?" That's what I'm feeling right now, and just because it would make sense doesn't mean it happened.

I love Planet Hulk and I thought NA: Illuminati was an awesome read (except for an obvious part), but they could have done this to where it fit with continuity. What the hell are editors DOING these days?

[THANOSRULES]

yeah well Writers today seem to want to introduce more "realism" into comics...toning down cheese (costumes , hero rhetoric)..it makes sense when hulk fights somebody and buildings fall down and such, that somebody could have been killed..

Many old hulk battles, where people didnt died, certainly had the mechanism for deaths.

True of most heros, even truer for HULK...

I mean how many people has captain america killed??

Are we to beleive he went through WWII simply a' sockin the the lights out of pesky nazis'?

Sure these are'nt innocents and such, but its sort of "retconning" out the mixed comic book idealism and romantic feel of super hero battles.

Blame Ultimates, Blame JMS, Blame Bendis..whatever and who knows.

If Hulk were in our world he should have killed many, many people by now...if just indirectly.

I dont know if I like it, or what...but I do know planet Hulk absolutely ROMPS and has got me hooked on the hulk like I have never been...

[Marcdachamp]

Even if did show innocents killed, Iron Man said "How many this time?" Like it happens every week or something.

It is crap to say that Hulk has killed innocent people in the past when he hasn't. Accident or no, it hasn't. It is just completley against continuity and it hurts Hulk's character making him more like his Ultimate counterpart.

Hulk DOESN'T kill innocents, even accidently. What some writer wrote in that "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth" in reference to Spidey? You'd be like, "What the hell? Where did that come from?" That's what I'm feeling right now, and just because it would make sense doesn't mean it happened.

I love Planet Hulk and I thought NA: Illuminati was an awesome read (except for an obvious part), but they could have done this to where it fit with continuity. What the hell are editors DOING these days?
I'll repeat this because it seems everyone ignored me the first time: Neither Iron Man, nor director Hill say that Hulk killed anyone. It could be easily assumed that they were referring to those injured, seriously or otherwise. Obviously people have been hurt in his rampages. Therefore, no problem.

[Roughneck]

It's funny cause I also read the Illuminati book with Hulk killing 26 people and a dog, but just before that I read an Issue of She-Hulk where she stated that if Bruce ever killed someone he would take his own life, then back in the Illuminati it was revelaed that he wants to kill himself but cannot.

Either way I find it hard to believe that he never killed anyone, it's just a silly thought that he hasn't killed anyone in his rampages.

[BrianWilly]

I think there's a difference between intentionally murdering someone and someone getting killed in midst of one of your mindless, uncontrollable rages.

No one said that the Hulk actually went and murdered 26 people in cold blood. But 26 people getting killed because of the Hulk is so obvious in retrospect that it actually surprises me that Marvel's apparently had such a strict policy against it. Or so I hear, of course; I don't actually read any Hulk.

It's definitely still a bit of a retconish way of setting up Planet Hulk, but I think this sort of retcon was within the realms of reason.

[Themanofbat]

Alright, here is the timeline.

Pre-PAD Hulk has killed a total of 0 innocents.

During PAD's run all the way from 1987 to the end of the 90s, Hulk has
killed a total of 0 innocents.

From the end of PAD's run, there were a few writers until Paul Jenkins took over (one of which was Joe Casey). During that time Hulk has killed 0 innocents.

During Paul Jenkins' run Hulk killed 0 innocents.

During Bruce Jones' run, which I think rocked, the public backlashes against Hulk because there is video footage of Hulk killing a child in one of his rampages. Turns out he was just framed. When Doc Samson was asked about what he believed he said, "When was the last time you saw the Hulk kill anybody, let alone a kid?" (vol. 2, #36) Again 0 innocents killed in Jones' run.

After that, PAD took over again for a short time and the Hulk killed 0 innocents during this run.

Daniel Way took over during the Planet Hulk prelude (which sucked), and still, 0 innocents were killed.

In the Fantastic Four issues (#'s 533 - 535) Hulk goes out of his mind after he is exposed to a gamma bomb blast. I could see where they could get away with saying that he killed innocents here (and they DID say that in NA: Illuminati) but in the issues nothing is shown that would lead me to believe that innocents were killed during his rampage anyway.

Even if did show innocents killed, Iron Man said "How many this time?" Like it happens every week or something.

It is crap to say that Hulk has killed innocent people in the past when he hasn't. Accident or no, it hasn't. It is just completley against continuity and it hurts Hulk's character making him more like his Ultimate counterpart.

Hulk DOESN'T kill innocents, even accidently. What some writer wrote in that "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth" in reference to Spidey? You'd be like, "What the hell? Where did that come from?" That's what I'm feeling right now, and just because it would make sense doesn't mean it happened.

I love Planet Hulk and I thought NA: Illuminati was an awesome read (except for an obvious part), but they could have done this to where it fit with continuity. What the hell are editors DOING these days?

Nice post. :up:

But seriously, didn't he kill people in that "Banner" mini-series a few years ago?
Or am I simply hallucinating???

:confused: :confused: :confused:

:(

[euroq]

Isn't that mini out of continuity? :confused:

I never bought it but I remember reading it, I guess it was a dotcomic at Marvel's website. :confused:

[ShadowBoxing]

He was killing people in 298

[The Question]

Alright, here is the timeline.

Pre-PAD Hulk has killed a total of 0 innocents.

During PAD's run all the way from 1987 to the end of the 90s, Hulk has
killed a total of 0 innocents.

From the end of PAD's run, there were a few writers until Paul Jenkins took over (one of which was Joe Casey). During that time Hulk has killed 0 innocents.

During Paul Jenkins' run Hulk killed 0 innocents.

During Bruce Jones' run, which I think rocked, the public backlashes against Hulk because there is video footage of Hulk killing a child in one of his rampages. Turns out he was just framed. When Doc Samson was asked about what he believed he said, "When was the last time you saw the Hulk kill anybody, let alone a kid?" (vol. 2, #36) Again 0 innocents killed in Jones' run.

After that, PAD took over again for a short time and the Hulk killed 0 innocents during this run.

Daniel Way took over during the Planet Hulk prelude (which sucked), and still, 0 innocents were killed.

In the Fantastic Four issues (#'s 533 - 535) Hulk goes out of his mind after he is exposed to a gamma bomb blast. I could see where they could get away with saying that he killed innocents here (and they DID say that in NA: Illuminati) but in the issues nothing is shown that would lead me to believe that innocents were killed during his rampage anyway.

Even if did show innocents killed, Iron Man said "How many this time?" Like it happens every week or something.

It is crap to say that Hulk has killed innocent people in the past when he hasn't. Accident or no, it hasn't. It is just completley against continuity and it hurts Hulk's character making him more like his Ultimate counterpart.

Hulk DOESN'T kill innocents, even accidently. What some writer wrote in that "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth" in reference to Spidey? You'd be like, "What the hell? Where did that come from?" That's what I'm feeling right now, and just because it would make sense doesn't mean it happened.

I love Planet Hulk and I thought NA: Illuminati was an awesome read (except for an obvious part), but they could have done this to where it fit with continuity. What the hell are editors DOING these days?


The thing is, no one having ever died in his rampages makes absolutely no sense. He's demolished entire sections of cities before. You're telling be everyone walked away with minor cuts and bruises? When the Hulk goes into full mindless rapage mode, when he's running on basic animal instinct and lashing out at everything, it makes no sense that he'd never kill anybody. Way I see it, people have died during his major rampages. It's just never been mentioned until now.


I mean how many people has captain america killed??

More than a few. The ones shown on panel are when he cut off Baron Blood's head, when he killed that terrorist in the arc where Jon Cassidy did the art, and when he knocked a few terrorists off of a moving train in Brubaker's run. He was also shown killing lots of people in his origional stories in the 40s.

[roach]

How many people did Namor kill in his attack on New York????
How many people did Stark kill from his weapons???

this really shouldnt be the bunch to throw stones

[The Question]

How many people did Namor kill in his attack on New York????

Well, from what I understand, most of the city was evacuated when he flooded it in the 40s.

How many people did Stark kill from his weapons???

One time he accidentally killed a diplomat with his suit.

[Mara Jane]

Does the Illuminati issue (sorry, haven't read it) say there were 26 deaths or 26 casualties? Casualties does not equal deaths; they can simply be injuries.

[gildea]

I'll repeat this because it seems everyone ignored me the first time: Neither Iron Man, nor director Hill say that Hulk killed anyone. It could be easily assumed that they were referring to those injured, seriously or otherwise. Obviously people have been hurt in his rampages. Therefore, no problem.




Thats a good point.

The story NEVER actually says the hulk killed anyone.

At all.

Going back it seems like it was heavily set up to imply this to justify the exile but so it could be argued later that he hasn't ACTUALLY killed anyone.

nice catch sir :)

[TheSumOfGod]

I think Brian Azzarello's "Banner" mini-series that came out about 5 or 6 years ago was one of the first times I've ever heard about the Hulk killing.

They act like it's been happening all along these days...

Precisely. They essentially said: "What? When the Hulk rampaged through cities and small towns and villages and destroyed entire buildings for all those years, did you actually think that no one ever got hurt? When you destroy a building, even by accident, there are usually people in it that die."

[gildea]

banner was out of continuity was it not? didn't he kill himself at the end of it?

[The Question]

It was implied that he hulked out at the last minute and survived.

[Roughneck]

Well Stark kills inadvertantly. And Namor doesn't give a hoot. Namor was actually against it.

Banner is Out of Continuity

And Ultimate hulk Eats people.

[wobbly]

Thing to remember about the Hulk's many past rampages is they have usually come with time for people to get the hell outta the way and for other heroes or the military to move in (with them usually being the one's provoking the rampage in the first place). And yes, if he levelled a building with people in it there would be deaths but only the mindless Hulk (I think only seen twice?) would deliberately smash something without being aware of any innocents (or potential innocents) nearby. Even the gray Hulk, which is the nastiest of the 3 personalities he has possessed ('Devil' Hulk has remained in Bruce's head so far) still has enough morality inside him to avoid crossing that line.
So for me the Hulk should not be portrayed/ret-conned as having killed innocents in the past, even if they make it clear it's indirectly, and there's enough wriggle room in continuity to cover how such deaths could have been avoided.
In the end, for all the trouble he can bring the Hulk has been for the most part a very moral character, hell, the point of some stories in the past was to show that the childish persona is far more moral than those who would try to destroy him.

Also, ditto on the 'casualties' part. Though deaths was my first implication on reading that injuries also fits that term, so maybe we are jumping the gun a little.

[Mr. Green]

I'll repeat this because it seems everyone ignored me the first time: Neither Iron Man, nor director Hill say that Hulk killed anyone. It could be easily assumed that they were referring to those injured, seriously or otherwise. Obviously people have been hurt in his rampages. Therefore, no problem.
Actually... Iron Man (in NA: Illuminati): "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth."

And that pretty much sums it up. Does it make sense? Sure. Does it agree with the issues of the past 40+ years? No.

More importantly... Do Hulk fans want their favorite hero turned into somebody who accidently kill innocents everytime he gets pissed? And by the way, it is VERY rare for Hulk to just get mad and smash buildings.

When does Banner turn into Hulk? When there is an ENEMY to smash. Usually he doesn't smash buildings just because he wants to lash out.

[Mr. Green]

Thing to remember about the Hulk's many past rampages is they have usually come with time for people to get the hell outta the way and for other heroes or the military to move in (with them usually being the one's provoking the rampage in the first place). And yes, if he levelled a building with people in it there would be deaths but only the mindless Hulk (I think only seen twice?) would deliberately smash something without being aware of any innocents (or potential innocents) nearby. Even the gray Hulk, which is the nastiest of the 3 personalities he has possessed ('Devil' Hulk has remained in Bruce's head so far) still has enough morality inside him to avoid crossing that line.
So for me the Hulk should not be portrayed/ret-conned as having killed innocents in the past, even if they make it clear it's indirectly, and there's enough wriggle room in continuity to cover how such deaths could have been avoided.
In the end, for all the trouble he can bring the Hulk has been for the most part a very moral character, hell, the point of some stories in the past was to show that the childish persona is far more moral than those who would try to destroy him.
You hit the nail right on the head.

And for the record, I don't blame Bendis. I blame the editor, Tom Brevoort, and his assistant editors, Molly Lazer and Aubrey Sitterson for missing the obvious mistakes that any Hulk fan could see as rediculous.

[TheSumOfGod]

Actually... Iron Man (in NA: Illuminati): "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth."

And that pretty much sums it up. Does it make sense? Sure. Does it agree with the issues of the past 40+ years? No.

More importantly... Do Hulk fans want their favorite hero turned into somebody who accidently kill innocents everytime he gets pissed? And by the way, it is VERY rare for Hulk to just get mad and smash buildings.

When does Banner turn into Hulk? When there is an ENEMY to smash. Usually he doesn't smash buildings just because he wants to lash out.

Hulk is essentially the Marvel Universe's version of King Kong. Betty is Ann Darrow, and Kong steps on people from time to time. It's realistic.

[TheSumOfGod]

^Hey! 9,000! :D

[wobbly]

Hulk is essentially the Marvel Universe's version of King Kong. Betty is Ann Darrow, and Kong steps on people from time to time. It's realistic.

I dont really agree with the Kong analogy: Kong is an animal and as such doesn't have any morality to be judged by. Yes we can sympaphise with the big ape but at the end of the day theres no 'right or wrong' decision making going on in his brain, he reacts to his animal instincts.

On the more realistic front, maybe so, but if we are to apply this to the Hulk shouldn't it go with all the others too?
What I mean here is how realistic is it for say Spider-man to continually jump out of the way of a hail of bullets with no-one behind him ever being killed? Or when any big battle happens in a populated area, say with the FF, Avengers or X-Men, shouldn't the death toll, something the heroes can be held indirectly responsible for as realisticly there's no way someone like the Thing could know punching a baddie into a building isnt gonna kill someone, measure in the hundreds, if not thousands?

[TheSumOfGod]

I dont really agree with the Kong analogy: Kong is an animal and as such doesn't have any morality to be judged by. Yes we can sympaphise with the big ape but at the end of the day theres no 'right or wrong' decision making going on in his brain, he reacts to his animal instincts.

On the more realistic front, maybe so, but if we are to apply this to the Hulk shouldn't it go with all the others too?
What I mean here is how realistic is it for say Spider-man to continually jump out of the way of a hail of bullets with no-one behind him ever being killed? Or when any big battle happens in a populated area, say with the FF, Avengers or X-Men, shouldn't the death toll, something the heroes can be held indirectly responsible for as realisticly there's no way someone like the Thing could know punching a baddie into a building isnt gonna kill someone, measure in the hundreds, if not thousands?

Little known fact: Every time a bullet bounces off of Superman's chest, it hits a little old lady. It's true. ;) :D

[CaptainStacy]

Alright, here is the timeline.

Pre-PAD Hulk has killed a total of 0 innocents.

During PAD's run all the way from 1987 to the end of the 90s, Hulk has
killed a total of 0 innocents.

From the end of PAD's run, there were a few writers until Paul Jenkins took over (one of which was Joe Casey). During that time Hulk has killed 0 innocents.

During Paul Jenkins' run Hulk killed 0 innocents.

During Bruce Jones' run, which I think rocked, the public backlashes against Hulk because there is video footage of Hulk killing a child in one of his rampages. Turns out he was just framed. When Doc Samson was asked about what he believed he said, "When was the last time you saw the Hulk kill anybody, let alone a kid?" (vol. 2, #36) Again 0 innocents killed in Jones' run.

After that, PAD took over again for a short time and the Hulk killed 0 innocents during this run.

Daniel Way took over during the Planet Hulk prelude (which sucked), and still, 0 innocents were killed.

In the Fantastic Four issues (#'s 533 - 535) Hulk goes out of his mind after he is exposed to a gamma bomb blast. I could see where they could get away with saying that he killed innocents here (and they DID say that in NA: Illuminati) but in the issues nothing is shown that would lead me to believe that innocents were killed during his rampage anyway.

Even if did show innocents killed, Iron Man said "How many this time?" Like it happens every week or something.

It is crap to say that Hulk has killed innocent people in the past when he hasn't. Accident or no, it hasn't. It is just completley against continuity and it hurts Hulk's character making him more like his Ultimate counterpart.

Hulk DOESN'T kill innocents, even accidently. What some writer wrote in that "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth" in reference to Spidey? You'd be like, "What the hell? Where did that come from?" That's what I'm feeling right now, and just because it would make sense doesn't mean it happened.

I love Planet Hulk and I thought NA: Illuminati was an awesome read (except for an obvious part), but they could have done this to where it fit with continuity. What the hell are editors DOING these days?

Very true!

It's funny, because any time change is instilled upon Spider-Man's status quo, the Spidey comics forum explodes with outrage, like a pack of feces hurling babboons, screaming about how much Marvel sucks, and this and that.

So....where's the support for The Hulk? Forty years of continuity just erased by Bendis' pen, and everyone's cool with that?

[The Question]

Thing to remember about the Hulk's many past rampages is they have usually come with time for people to get the hell outta the way and for other heroes or the military to move in (with them usually being the one's provoking the rampage in the first place). And yes, if he levelled a building with people in it there would be deaths but only the mindless Hulk (I think only seen twice?) would deliberately smash something without being aware of any innocents (or potential innocents) nearby. Even the gray Hulk, which is the nastiest of the 3 personalities he has possessed ('Devil' Hulk has remained in Bruce's head so far) still has enough morality inside him to avoid crossing that line.
So for me the Hulk should not be portrayed/ret-conned as having killed innocents in the past, even if they make it clear it's indirectly, and there's enough wriggle room in continuity to cover how such deaths could have been avoided.
In the end, for all the trouble he can bring the Hulk has been for the most part a very moral character, hell, the point of some stories in the past was to show that the childish persona is far more moral than those who would try to destroy him.

Also, ditto on the 'casualties' part. Though deaths was my first implication on reading that injuries also fits that term, so maybe we are jumping the gun a little.



Well, I think the Mindless Hulk's come out more often than twice. When he goes into a full on rage, the mindless starts to take over a bit. And really, this is not the first mention of The Hulk killing people or indangering innocent lives. In the issue of The Hulk where the Thunderbolts first apeared, he destroyed a local dam to create a distraction, allowing him to escape. He endangered the lives of thousands of people, and I'm sure at least a few died. And really, while the Savage Hulk has been shown to be a pretty nice guy, when he goes on a full blown rampage, he gets into a fight or flight mode. Do you honestly think none of the soldier's who went after him died fighting him?

[wobbly]

Well, I think the Mindless Hulk's come out more often than twice. When he goes into a full on rage, the mindless starts to take over a bit. And really, this is not the first mention of The Hulk killing people or indangering innocent lives. In the issue of The Hulk where the Thunderbolts first apeared, he destroyed a local dam to create a distraction, allowing him to escape. He endangered the lives of thousands of people, and I'm sure at least a few died. And really, while the Savage Hulk has been shown to be a pretty nice guy, when he goes on a full blown rampage, he gets into a fight or flight mode. Do you honestly think none of the soldier's who went after him died fighting him?

By mindless I mean when there's been no personality driving him. Afaik this has happened twice, the first when Banner's mind shut-down after being tormented by Nightmare (and Doc Strange exiled him to the 'crossroads') and the second when Banner was physically seperated from the Hulk. On both occasions he was indeed a creature of mindless rage quite capable of killing anything without a thought one way or another.

As for what I think on soldiers being killed whilst fighting him, like I said above, if we are gonna apply that kind of scrutiny to the Hulk, then do likewise across the board, you soon find many other heroes should also be accountable for a huge number of innocent deaths in their pasts.

[gildea]

What I mean here is how realistic is it for say Spider-man to continually jump out of the way of a hail of bullets with no-one behind him ever being killed?

has happened actually in the death of jean dewolfe.

[The Question]

By mindless I mean when there's been no personality driving him. Afaik this has happened twice, the first when Banner's mind shut-down after being tormented by Nightmare (and Doc Strange exiled him to the 'crossroads') and the second when Banner was physically seperated from the Hulk. On both occasions he was indeed a creature of mindless rage quite capable of killing anything without a thought one way or another.

I'm fairly certain there have been other occasions where he's completely lost it and reverted to a very animalistic mindset.

As for what I think on soldiers being killed whilst fighting him, like I said above, if we are gonna apply that kind of scrutiny to the Hulk, then do likewise across the board, you soon find many other heroes should also be accountable for a huge number of innocent deaths in their pasts.

Except, that's not the same thing. The Hulk has been atacked by the military on several occasions, and has fought back on many of those occasions. Throwing around tanks, tearing apart fighter jets, plowing through large numbers of soldiers, throwing around very large and heavy rocks in the direction of the atacking soldiers, and stuff like that. Some of them were bound to have gotten dead. Not quite the same as Spider-Man fighting the Rhino in Time's Square.

[gildea]

.
So....where's the support for The Hulk? Forty years of continuity just erased by Bendis' pen, and everyone's cool with that?

As pointed out though bendis was verrryyy careful to actually not to say the hulk had killed anyone.

[Not Jake]

It's funny, because any time change is instilled upon Spider-Man's status quo, the Spidey comics forum explodes with outrage, like a pack of feces hurling babboons, screaming about how much Marvel sucks, and this and that.

So....where's the support for The Hulk? Forty years of continuity just erased by Bendis' pen, and everyone's cool with that?
You realize that what you are calling for in support of Hulk is the exact reason why people here hate the Spidey comics forum:o

[CaptainStacy]

As pointed out though bendis was verrryyy careful to actually not to say the hulk had killed anyone.

"innocent people are dying because he walks the earth..."

'nuff said?

[The Question]

Bendis hasn't erased 40 years of continuity. There has only really been one occasion that said no one has ever died when The Hulk went on a major rampage or fought the government, and even then it was only one character's opinion, not a statement of fact.

[CaptainStacy]

You realize that what you are calling for in support of Hulk is the exact reason why people here hate the Spidey comics forum:o

Not trying to rabble rouse, just making an observation out loud.

One thing i've noticed about the Marvel forum is that when something happens that causes fans here to complain, they also, for the most part, are fair in handing out praise where and when it is due, as opposed to other forums here at the hype who seem to be in constant "HATE" mode.

So im pretty comfortable in posing that question here, as im sure we'll get a fair dialogue going.

[Not Jake]

Well another thing to consider is that there are far more Spidey fans than Hulk fans, so there are fewer people who could possibly be offended


plus, the general conception is that the Hulk is a destructive monster, and even if it isn't true, most people believe the hulk has killed, at least accidentally. Even comics fans

Sooooo there are just fewer people who are not only Hulk fans but are "in the know" sufficently enough to raise hell

[wobbly]

I'm fairly certain there have been other occasions where he's completely lost it and reverted to a very animalistic mindset.

Except, that's not the same thing. The Hulk has been atacked by the military on several occasions, and has fought back on many of those occasions. Throwing around tanks, tearing apart fighter jets, plowing through large numbers of soldiers, throwing around very large and heavy rocks in the direction of the atacking soldiers, and stuff like that. Some of them were bound to have gotten dead. Not quite the same as Spider-Man fighting the Rhino in Time's Square.

If you are using realism as a justification for marvel ret-conning the Hulk into a killer then it is, for if that kind of realism is applied to all then pretty much any major battle between super-powered beings in a public place is gonna kill a lot of people.

[The Question]

It's not really retconning, since they've never said anything about it one way or the other very often in the past. Anyway, of course lots of people are going to be injured in major super fights, and some are going to be killed. However, most super battles aren't that major (compared to The Hulk), or don't last long enough to cause any major damage. However, if it's a super fight involving The Hulk and the Abomination, and it's in a populated area, I'd assume some people in the imediate area would get killed.

[gildea]

"innocent people are dying because he walks the earth..."

'nuff said?


Yeah I noticed that too however it seemed easily dismissable without a specific example, which wasn't concretely provided.

Its could easily be explained as something said in an argument (because even without a body count it's tough to argue he isn't a threat to innocent life).

I think that his been very carefully written to make us consider hulk a killer without actually making him into a killer (heck hulk used to threaten to kill people fairly regularly without actually doing it which really shouldn't be a problem for him).

[Mr. Green]

If you are using realism as a justification for marvel ret-conning the Hulk into a killer then it is, for if that kind of realism is applied to all then pretty much any major battle between super-powered beings in a public place is gonna kill a lot of people.
Exactly! And that kind of realism belongs in the Ultimate universe. What Hulk reader is going to complain about a lack of realism when the character himself is completely unrealism in his powers, origin, and feats?

Read the past year or so's Hulk comics. All of PAD's most recent stuff. There isn't A SINGLE SITUATION where Hulk had done ANYTHING to put INNOCENT lives in danger. (This is significant because Stark speaks with Director Hill as if he has killed innocents all the time, when in actuality, he never does. Even in the FF issues, you can't see any moment imparticular where Hulk was doing something that would endanger innocent lives.)

Couple more things:

When Hulk fought Thunderbolts for the first time, no Innocents died. Hulk didn't hurt any innocents and V said something like, "We just want to protect innocent lives." So Hulk simply gave them something to protect them from.

As far as them not saying not saying Hulk's never killed innocents in the past enough... A writers ENTIRE run was started by Hulk FINALLY messing up and burying a kid under a building. That was the FIRST time, and Bruce was a wanted man. It actually turned out that he was framed, giving him a clean record once more. That's all the evidence I need.

[The Overlord]

I don't think that's it. I think it's just for the sense of logic. I mean, has The Hulk ever seemed like someone who would have some major moral code? Not to me. Hell, during the Infinity Gauntlet, Adam Warlock asked Wolverine and The Hulk to kill Thanos the first chance they had, and they both agreed, so it's hardly unprecidented. I think it really depends which personality you're talking about:



Bruce: Probably wouldn't kill anybody unless he was put into a situation where he had no choice.

Savage Hulk: If he was in a fight or having one of his temper tantrums, he'd probably kill some people by accident. But he wouldn't set out to and he'd feel really bad about it if they were innocents.

Joe Fixit: He'd kill a man in a fair fight. Or if he thought he was going to start a fair fight. Or if he bothered him. Or if there was a woman involved. Or if he was getting paid. Mostly when he's getting paid. Joe's a jackass without much in terms of moral fiber. Hell, he worked for the mob for a while.

Mindless Hulk: This one's the one I'd expect to have the highest body count. He's the nastyest personality that's ever gotten out. He's basically nothing but basic animal instinct and anger. If he's pissed off or feels threatened, he'll lash out at anything that moves. This is the personality you're usually dealing with when The Hulk's on a major rampage.

Devil Hulk: He's never gotten out before, but if he ever does, the body count would be huge. He'd kill and rape and canabalize people just for the hell of it.

Maestro likely has the devil Hulk personality and he has killed more people than any other Hulk.

[Marcdachamp]

Actually... Iron Man (in NA: Illuminati): "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth."

And that pretty much sums it up. Does it make sense? Sure. Does it agree with the issues of the past 40+ years? No.

More importantly... Do Hulk fans want their favorite hero turned into somebody who accidently kill innocents everytime he gets pissed? And by the way, it is VERY rare for Hulk to just get mad and smash buildings.

When does Banner turn into Hulk? When there is an ENEMY to smash. Usually he doesn't smash buildings just because he wants to lash out.
They could be dying due to wounds inflicted. Or Iron Man is assuming. Either way, it seems Bendis was vague enough that it could be read either way.

[BrianWilly]

Exactly! And that kind of realism belongs in the Ultimate universe. What Hulk reader is going to complain about a lack of realism when the character himself is completely unrealism in his powers, origin, and feats?I don't think tackling the possibility of someone dying when the Hulk inadvertantly knocks over a building should for whatever reason be reserved for the Ultimate universe, I think that those sorts of questions are perfectly valid and in-place in the 616 universe. The Ultimate universe isn't some "sophisticated," "mature" version of the regular universe; it's just another point of view. There's no reason why the 616 universe has to be dumbed down for people who don't like asking difficult questions.

The fictional world of comics takes a lot of liberties with scientific facts and laws of the universe, but the physics and matters of the real world still come into play, especially when you bring matters of morality into the mix. People still might die and will die. At what point does "taking liberties with reality" become flat-out "not real at all"? The truth of the matter is that when you knock over a whole building, someone is going to die. Period. Especially if buildings keep getting knocked over, over and over and over again by the same guy.

I can maybe believe someone like Juggernaut having never caused any deaths in his career since he is 100% in control of his own actions, but the Hulk isn't. He's called mindless for a reason. Even experienced superheroes like Spider-Man and Captain America have to intentionally go out of their way and make an effort to keep ordinary citizens safe in midst of one of their scuffles; it's hard work, and sometimes they even fail at it. The Hulk might have that mentality some of the time, but definitely not all of the time.

I'm just as ready to rag on Bendis for his various many sins as the next guy, but I can't fault him for this specific choice of words. I mean, he's looking at something logically and reasonably and...that's a bad thing now? I wouldn't want to read comics where everything is painted in a false light just so we can keep some innocent, naive image of the Hulk.

[Ahura Mazda]

I just don't agree this whole argument of collateral damage as per what has been said eloquently above, any battle with super beings in poulated area would have caused deaths of innocents or is it you take the Hulk to be so much more powerful than others like Thor who was incidentally a member of the Avenger who did at times fight in poulated areas.

And excuse me but this is not reality and nothing in it could be even seen as remotely real. This is a fantasy world so I personally can see how the Hulk who originally had the mind of a child, not a monster, could have not killed people.

Plus as Mr. Green said most of Jones runmade it clear that Hulk had never killed.

[Shadowknight]

Not really relevant to "collateral killing", but the Hulk has killed people in the past under PAD, always deliberately.

1. Future Imperfect: killed a bunch of soldiers in the first few pages of the book. Deliberately murdered the Maestro (didn't have any other option really, but still...). Killed one soldier by accident, the one fused to the flying thing. Deliberately killed several soldiers by throwing a piece of metal at one flying thingy, setting it up to destroy several in one shot. Killed a Dog of War. If you count the Maestro as the Hulk, even though he's an alternate reality version, he killed at least his Minister and Pifiz on page. *ETA: The Smart Hulk knocked the Maestro into an apartment building, we saw one person die on panel. His last words were for the Hulk to kill the Maestro (who then snapped the Hulk's neck while he was distracted).
2. Grey Hulk: He never worked for the Mafia, just a casino who was actually threatened by the Maggia. Deliberately killed a dog in a cock-fight type arena. Attempted to murder Crusher Creel (Absorbing Man), not knowing he could reform himself from little pieces.
3. Intelligent Hulk (not counting #1 above) - while psychotic at the time, deliberately killed the Leader

So She-Hulks claim that Bruce would kill himself if he took anyone's life is wrong. In all of the cases above, the Hulk deliberately killed people, not by accident but by choice. In all cases, he didn't show any remorse after the fact, and was in full control of his mental facilities whether he was Grey or Banner was running the show.

Doesn't really have anything to do with collateral killing, with what this thread is about, just wanted to mention the Hulk's killed people. On the other hand, I don't buy the retcon of killing people on rampages; it's comics, he's never killed anyone on rampages, no matter how "realistic" it would be. That would be "realistic", but also depressing, something I prefer to avoid in straight up superhero comics. If I wanted nasty killing, I'd just pull out my copy of Miracleman #15, one of the most violent issues of all time (Screw Supreme Power, THIS is a nasty fight scene/book, featuring deliberate and collateral killing.

[UK_Stu]

I'm not a massive Hulk fan, so bear with me.

I never realised that Hulk had never killed any innocents before, and I'm suprised to hear that considering the amount of damage he causes in his battles and his ramages. So to hear of casualties because of the Hulk seemed reasonable to me. BUT if he hasn't killed innocents in the past (though that seems far fetched) it really affects the whole ethos of the character if Marvel now claim he has done a lot of this in the past.

[Fantasyartist]

It's possible that the Hulk may have killed people (such as his pursuer Glenn Talbot in #Hulk 260) or at least seriously injured them (as he did to the then Crimson Dynamo, Dmitri Bukharin in #Hulk 258) so badly as to require emergency surgery),but we should make a distinction between killing in a fit of anger or in the heat of battle and killing in cold blood. Remember, other heroes such as Captain America have been known to kill in cases of extreme need when conventional means are unavailable or impractical(ie. beheading the Nazi vampire Baron Blood-technically this wasn't murder as the good Baron was no longer alive- just as an episode of THOR in which the Thunder God, stating that his oath never to take human life was invalid as Dracula was "dead" prepared to kill him.
Killing in the heat of battle or in anger maybe, but I can't think of ol'Greenskin as a cold blooded killer!

[UK_Stu]

Killing in the heat of battle or in anger maybe, but I can't think of ol'Greenskin as a cold blooded killer!

I think this is what separates 616 HUlk and Ultimate Hulk

[The Question]

I don't think tackling the possibility of someone dying when the Hulk inadvertantly knocks over a building should for whatever reason be reserved for the Ultimate universe, I think that those sorts of questions are perfectly valid and in-place in the 616 universe. The Ultimate universe isn't some "sophisticated," "mature" version of the regular universe; it's just another point of view. There's no reason why the 616 universe has to be dumbed down for people who don't like asking difficult questions.

The fictional world of comics takes a lot of liberties with scientific facts and laws of the universe, but the physics and matters of the real world still come into play, especially when you bring matters of morality into the mix. People still might die and will die. At what point does "taking liberties with reality" become flat-out "not real at all"? The truth of the matter is that when you knock over a whole building, someone is going to die. Period. Especially if buildings keep getting knocked over, over and over and over again by the same guy.

I can maybe believe someone like Juggernaut having never caused any deaths in his career since he is 100% in control of his own actions, but the Hulk isn't. He's called mindless for a reason. Even experienced superheroes like Spider-Man and Captain America have to intentionally go out of their way and make an effort to keep ordinary citizens safe in midst of one of their scuffles; it's hard work, and sometimes they even fail at it. The Hulk might have that mentality some of the time, but definitely not all of the time.

I'm just as ready to rag on Bendis for his various many sins as the next guy, but I can't fault him for this specific choice of words. I mean, he's looking at something logically and reasonably and...that's a bad thing now? I wouldn't want to read comics where everything is painted in a false light just so we can keep some innocent, naive image of the Hulk.


Very true. The Savage Hulk may be rather innocent and child like, but the military has atacked him on several occasions, causing the child to throw a temper tantrum in their direction. I wouldn't be suprised if he has killed several soldiers. And when he completely looses it and starts rampaging through a city, it would only make sense that some people would die.

[KAD]

Here's how I see it.

The Hulk is a uncontrollable monster, and it would make very little to no sense that he's never killed a person in a fit of rage. This was never mentioned/shown in any of the older Hulk comics because Marvel always tried to sell him as a super hero. I think in truth he has killed many people, but I could be wrong, it all depends on what the decree of the writers are.

I always thought the Hulk in the Ultimates was how the Hulk was supposed to be, not having his own book Millar was allowed to have the Hulk act how he really would without trying to make him look like a hero.

Hulk is a monster with a deep down sensitive side, that side would keep him from killing some innocent people, but when in a full blown rage, I think he could destroy a large city without even thinking.


OMFG!!! Some with common sense.

And they like comics, I gotta call Ripley's

[Mr. Green]

I can maybe believe someone like Juggernaut having never caused any deaths in his career since he is 100% in control of his own actions, but the Hulk isn't. He's called mindless for a reason. Even experienced superheroes like Spider-Man and Captain America have to intentionally go out of their way and make an effort to keep ordinary citizens safe in midst of one of their scuffles; it's hard work, and sometimes they even fail at it. The Hulk might have that mentality some of the time, but definitely not all of the time.
Here is where you are wrong. Hulk is NOT mindless. Not at all. As somebody stated before there were two ocassions when he was mindless (like when Banner was seperated from Hulk). The rest of the time he isn't mindless and he has more control than you are probably aware of.

Savage Hulk is what you are thinking of. He's dumb and childlike, but he doesn't just smash things for no reason. He has to be provoked by someone or something, and when he isn't he is quite benevolent.

Anyway, the Hulk hasn't been Savage Hulk for a while. PAD made him more like a cross between the Savage and Gray Hulk. The powers of Savage but he isn't dumb. He isn't quite as sinister as the Gray Hulk either.

So he IS in complete control, and has been for a while. This is important because that is further proof that Hulk doesn't constantly do things to claim innocent life.

[Mr. Green]

To everybody: PLEASE SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE IN AN ISSUE THAT IS IN CONTINUITY WHERE HULK SMASHES A BUILDING THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE.

[rjb182]

Y'know what this reminds me of? Those old 80's adventure shows like "The A-Team" or the "Dukes of Hazzard" where the heroes would be spraying bullets all around or causing cars to overturn, and the shot would always linger for a second to show the villains climbing out of their car, so nobody was "really" hurt...

So on the one hand we have the casual or non-Hulk fans who are saying "Of COURSE the Hulk would have killed people! It's only realistic!"

And on the other you have the Hulk supporters who are saying "Who says we want that? We were just minding our own business, watching 'The Dukes of Hazzard,' and out of nowhere they got all realistic on us!"

I admit I'm closer to the first camp, 'cause I'm more interested in what works for the overall Marvel U. than in the Hulk as a character. But I think both sides have a point...

[roach]

I think I am in both camps. While it is believeable that Hulk would have killed people in his rampages I think it is unbelieveable the way the Marvel Universe has reated to it. Think about it.... the Hulk kills one boy and the Government goes after him like he's The A-Team. If he had killed before the Hulk busters would be hot on his trail.

[Mr. Green]

I think I am in both camps. While it is believeable that Hulk would have killed people in his rampages I think it is unbelieveable the way the Marvel Universe has reated to it. Think about it.... the Hulk kills one boy and the Government goes after him like he's The A-Team. If he had killed before the Hulk busters would be hot on his trail.
EXACTLY! :) :up:

[Arkady Rossovich]

I was reading the Illuminati special the other day, and got to the part where the SHIELD director tells Iron Man that the Hulk's latest rampage cost the lives of 26 people (and a dog)...

Shortly before that, in the prelude to Planet Hulk, it looked like he crushed the skull of a would-be rapist...

So...how long has this been going on?

The prime of my Hulk collecting was back in the seventies and eighties, under such writers as Len Wein and Bill Mantlo, and i'm pretty sure the Hulk had NEVER killed up to that point.

So is this a relatively new thing, or what?

Well,i can imagine your mind is fresh full of comics from back in the day.I never thought that the Hulk was a killer,just a brute with a small brain.That`s how it started,but i liked how it was portrayed with Hulk,Banner and his anger.

It gave the whole thing depth,which i thought was a good thing.The savage Hulk was just a figure of the times,now this?I dont really like how the Hulk is being portrayed today.Im suprised an old timer like you would actually accept Planet Hulk or Illuminati,im not.:thing:

[Genesis 1.0]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis 1.0
Seems to me they're turning him into Ult. Hulk, this is his schtick.


true

This really bothers me though. The whole point of the Ultimate U is for a new take on things and it seems lately like a bunch of the writers are trying to take both incarnations of a character into the same direction. Ult. Scarlet Witch doesn't need to start wearing the same costume as 616. 616 Hulk doesn't need to start killing people like Ult. Hulk. Leave 616 Cap as a liberal peak-human and Ult Cap as a super-human conservative. The differences are what makes it interesting!!

Heh, exactly why I mentioned it, alot of characters are now showing 'side effects' of their counterparts and this whole Hulk deal is just another example of what I'm talking about. Seems that if one writer sees a point in a Hulk version killing innocents then the other could as well, I suppose it's impossible to open these new Avenues in the Ultimate Universe and then expect other writers not to take a few of them. Heh, the comic world isn't exactly known for ingenuity, I doubt this is the last time we'll see this in 616.

[KAD]

To everybody: PLEASE SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE IN AN ISSUE THAT IS IN CONTINUITY WHERE HULK SMASHES A BUILDING THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE.

There are several.

One in particular comes to mind.

In the Byrne run the Hulk fights Namor, WonderMan, IronMan and Hercules and lays waste to an entire section of new Mexico city

[Mr. Green]

That was the mindless Hulk, and I wouldn't complain if he did that because he was seperated from Banner. I was really asking for something including the Savage Hulk since everyone keeps talking about how he's ALWAYS smashing buildings.

By the way, the town was abandonned and when there was a house full of people who didn't want to leave Hulk smashed it. Everyone ran away first though, and went unharmed. :) :up:

[gildea]

To everybody: PLEASE SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE IN AN ISSUE THAT IS IN CONTINUITY WHERE HULK SMASHES A BUILDING THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE.


Future imperfect.

In the first fight with the maestro hulk punches the maestro into a building which promptly collapses. One person dies. As hulk is mourning over the body the maestro sneaks up and breaks his neck.


The edition i have has an afterward from peter david explaining future imperfect IS in continuity as a possible path.

[Grim Goblin]

There are several.

One in particular comes to mind.

In the Byrne run the Hulk fights Namor, WonderMan, IronMan and Hercules and lays waste to an entire section of new Mexico city

Yep, that was in Incredible Hulk #316.

That book featured the mindless Hulk (without Banner), and a tv reporter named Dianne Bellamy states on page 3 that the number of deaths caused by the Hulk's rampage might reach the hundreds. Wonderman also confirm that there were deaths caused by the Hulk when Samson tells all 4 avengers to back off.

He may have been mindless but that was still Hulk who killed thos people.

[The Question]

Here is where you are wrong. Hulk is NOT mindless. Not at all. As somebody stated before there were two ocassions when he was mindless (like when Banner was seperated from Hulk). The rest of the time he isn't mindless and he has more control than you are probably aware of.

He's been mindless more than twice. Whenever he goes completely nuts, goes on a major rampage and the like, he's probably in mindless mode.

Savage Hulk is what you are thinking of. He's dumb and childlike, but he doesn't just smash things for no reason. He has to be provoked by someone or something, and when he isn't he is quite benevolent.

Very true. But when he is provoked, that's what we're talking about here. Are you telling me that in the many times he's fought the military, not a one of them has been killed by having a tank thrown at them?

Anyway, the Hulk hasn't been Savage Hulk for a while. PAD made him more like a cross between the Savage and Gray Hulk. The powers of Savage but he isn't dumb. He isn't quite as sinister as the Gray Hulk either.

So he IS in complete control, and has been for a while. This is important because that is further proof that Hulk doesn't constantly do things to claim innocent life.

He isn't always, though. He has lost it from time to time in recent years.

[BrianWilly]

Whenever someone brings up the "It's just a comic book, it's not real, it's fantasy!" argument in order to justify wildly unrealistic aspects of a comic book, it always reminds me of what Joel Schumacher reportedly said to everyone over and over again on the set of Batman and Robin: "Remember guys, it's a cartoon!! SMILE!"

Being a comic book gives you liberty to tell fictional stories with the requisite theatrical drama and fantastical science, but that's not nearly the same thing as saying that you can just forget about the tangible facets of the real world and just tell silly-ass silver age tomfoolery up and down the street. The Hulk is a fantasy book, but "fantasy" doesn't mean "dumbed down."

[Mr. Green]

He's been mindless more than twice. Whenever he goes completely nuts, goes on a major rampage and the like, he's probably in mindless mode.
No he hasn't. The mindless Hulk is completely different than Banner. Hulk won't attack certain people/things. Take away Banner and he has no reasoning. He just smashes anything and everything. That statement just shows that you know little about the character.

And you know what? I'm fine with mindless Hulk doing things that would kill people. Why? Because Banner has nothing to do with it. It's like if Iron Man's suit came to life and started shooting everything. Would you blame Stark if it wasn't his fault? Nope. And you wouldn't blame Banner either. But Hulk is as much Banner as Banner is the Hulk, and neither would just smash apart a town or city for no reason.

[Mr. Green]

Being a comic book gives you liberty to tell fictional stories with the requisite theatrical drama and fantastical science, but that's not nearly the same thing as saying that you can just forget about the tangible facets of the real world and just tell silly-ass silver age tomfoolery up and down the street. The Hulk is a fantasy book, but "fantasy" doesn't mean "dumbed down."
Yeah, and it isn't dumbed down. Saying Hulk has done something that would be impossible in the last few years according to the actual Hulk series is dumb.

You know what WOULD be dumbed down also? If the Hulk writers had Bruce Banner turn into Hulk and smash buildings just because he was mad. Thank God that no writer has done that. :) :up:

[BrianWilly]

Yeah, and it isn't dumbed down. Saying Hulk has done something that would be impossible in the last few years according to the actual Hulk series is dumb.Why is it impossible?

People die in the midst of ordinary superhero conflicts all the time. And the Hulk is no ordinary superhero. The circumstances for casualties in his line of fire is much, much higher than other superheroes due to his very nature. Are you going to tell us that the actual number of casualties is actually lower than that of other superheroes?

Banner might not be mindless Hulk, but he is responsible for him. If Iron Man's suit goes crazy and kills people, Tony has the obligation to shut it down and make sure it would never happen again. When mindless Hulk goes crazy and kills people, Banner has the obligation to shut him down and make sure it never happens again.

Obviously, he hasn't done that. The Hulk still exists, through no particular fault of anyone's, and at any given transformation there is the possibility of him going mindless. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. Not just that it might happen, it will happen. If Banner isn't going to make sure the problem goes away, then someone has to do it for him.

[Ahura Mazda]

Why is it impossible?

People die in the midst of ordinary superhero conflicts all the time. And the Hulk is no ordinary superhero. The circumstances for casualties in his line of fire is much, much higher than other superheroes due to his very nature. Are you going to tell us that the actual number of casualties is actually lower than that of other superheroes?

Banner might not be mindless Hulk, but he is responsible for him. If Iron Man's suit goes crazy and kills people, Tony has the obligation to shut it down and make sure it would never happen again. When mindless Hulk goes crazy and kills people, Banner has the obligation to shut him down and make sure it never happens again.

Obviously, he hasn't done that. The Hulk still exists, through no particular fault of anyone's, and at any given transformation there is the possibility of him going mindless. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. Not just that it might happen, it will happen. If Banner isn't going to make sure the problem goes away, then someone has to do it for him.


Ok I will admit the possible is above as long as the superhero community then admits that having all of them walk the earth be a danger to innocents. if this argument is valid for Hulk, it is valid for all super powerred beings given that Hulk would never intentionally hurt an innocent relative to his psyche.

[The Question]

No he hasn't. The mindless Hulk is completely different than Banner. Hulk won't attack certain people/things. Take away Banner and he has no reasoning. He just smashes anything and everything. That statement just shows that you know little about the character.

No, it doesn't. And yes, he has. He's gone mindless more that twice. He's just rampaged through cities for the hell of it more than twice.

And you know what? I'm fine with mindless Hulk doing things that would kill people. Why? Because Banner has nothing to do with it. It's like if Iron Man's suit came to life and started shooting everything. Would you blame Stark if it wasn't his fault? Nope. And you wouldn't blame Banner either. But Hulk is as much Banner as Banner is the Hulk, and neither would just smash apart a town or city for no reason.

The Mindlkess Hulk is not anything like if Tony's suit just randomly started killing people. The Mindless Hulk is another one of Bruce's personalities. It's just as much a part of him as Joe Fixit or the Savage Hulk.

[Ahura Mazda]

The Mindlkess Hulk is not anything like if Tony's suit just randomly started killing people. The Mindless Hulk is another one of Bruce's personalities. It's just as much a part of him as Joe Fixit or the Savage Hulk.


The mindless Hulk is not supposed to be a Banner persona as this is the Hulk without........a mind or in other words the Banner persona.

[The Question]

It's still one of Banner's personalities. It's still a part of him.

[Ahura Mazda]

It's still one of Banner's personalities. It's still a part of him.


How can it be a part of him when it was once when banner's mind was sent to a seperate universe and the second time he was a seperate being?

[wobbly]

They stated at the time Banner was physically seperated that the mindless Hulk was a 'blank slate', with nothing of Banners persona/s in there at all, and when exiled to the crossroads banners mind & influence was so deeply submerged this was effectively the same condition. Bottom line, the mindless Hulk is a condition that can be forced on him only by removing Banners mind (and all his various persona's) from the equation.

I think the confusion here is defining those moments when he has been majorly p#ssed off as also being mindless. That isn't the case though as in those moments he can be calmed down*, whereas in a truely mindless state he can't.

*The only instance I know of (there could be more, I just dont know of em') where this wasn't possible was when an attempt to cure him by fitting a pace-maker to his heart failed (instead of keeping his heart beat slow it was slowly affected by the gamma radiation and sped it up keeping him constantly angry) and Iron-Man had to knock him out to stop him.

[Shadowknight]

re: Hulk being a mindless monster without Banner. While somewhat amoral, he retained a normal intellect after being separated from Banner during the Heroes Reborn fiascoe. Didn't go on a rampage, though he did conquer an island for a bit.

[gildea]

come on though thats nothing i conquered 2 islands last week alone.

[Mr. Green]

No, it doesn't. And yes, he has. He's gone mindless more that twice. He's just rampaged through cities for the hell of it more than twice.
Okay, how about you read the actual story with mindless Hulk in it so you can grasp the idea that there is a difference between Savage Hulk and MINDLESS Hulk. It would help if you knew what you were talking about before you became so adamant about things. You do not know what mindless Hulk is, and I was simply trying to explain it.
Why is it impossible?
Because he hasn't rampaged through any towns in the Bruce Jones' run or PAD's most recent run. It would be IMPOSSIBLE. 100% NOT POSSIBLE. :) :up:

Notice how the people who argue against the Hulk the most don't know anything about the character. :(

[Grim Goblin]

No offense green but I already made my point in my previous post so either you missed it or you didn't want to comment.

[BrianWilly]

Your reasoning for the fact that Hulk hasn't killed anyone is because...no one has shown him killing anyone?

The very point that everyone has been making is that it isn't reasonable to portray him in that sort of light. It's completely inaccurate to the reality of the character. It takes the lethal ramifications of the Hulk and dumbs it down so that we can have some PG-rated, idealistic, and -- most significantly -- unrealistic rendition of a character.

All those tanks thrown, and not one soldier dead?

All those buildings smashed, and not one civilian casualty?

That's just simply not possible in a world where one small mistake -- just one -- is going to send Gwen Stacy's neck a-snappin'. I'm not talking about not plausible as in "A normal guy can't absorb gamma rays and become a green giant!", I'm talking about it not being plausible in the context of the Marvel universe.

Maybe if we were in the Tiny Toons universe, or the Power Rangers universe, where no one ever gets seriously hurt and everything always ends up okay...but we're not.

[wobbly]

Can anyone who is adamant it is unrealistic for the Hulk to have never killed post examples that have appeared in the books of him doing something in his usual state (not mindless or influenced) that should have killed someone (either a soldier or a civillian)?

My reason for asking is that I haven't read all things hulk so it may well have happened but to the best of my recollection I cant remember any occasion where I saw him do something and thought it was really absurd that no-one died as a result.

My memory of the character is that his rampages, especially those in populated areas, were isolated incidents rather than regular occurences, usually brought on by some villain or the military themselves provoking him, and even then more often than not he wasn't a careless smasher of anything in sight (not when he isnt mindless): he would often fight with a natural cunning that could surprise the hell out of his opponents. For me I took it as a given that when he started smashing his opponents about he (like most other heroes) took into account his surroundings and wouldn't put an innocent at risk just to beat his enemies. Bottom line: he always had a base morality, even in his gray persona, that would keep him from harming innocents.

I dunno though, maybe I've never got the character at all, but if that is the case then neither has Stan Lee...

[The Question]

When he's fighting the military, I highly doubt he's concerned about being a clean and virtuous person. He's tossed around tanks, plowed through groups of soldiers, thrown men around like ragdolls, and had missiles explode on his chest in close proximity to the soldiers. And not a one of them has died? Also, Joe Fixit may not kill average people on the street, but I highly doubt he'd have a problem with killing soliders if they're firing at him.

[Shadowknight]

The Grey Hulk fought the military in the issue after the Green Hulk personality re-emerged. He didn't kill anyone by accident or on purpose. He threw a tank at Doc Samson, but only because he knew he would catch it, then took advantage of that to sucker punch Samson. He stomped on the ground to knock the soldiers off their feet instead of trying to kill them, and even commented that he'd have to take out the soldiers so they'd wouldn't kill themselves by accident.

[euroq]

Bendis comments on this:

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66106

Q: In She-Hulk #4 just 2 months ago, it was revealed that the Hulk has NEVER killed a civilian. So why are Tony Stark and S.H.I.E.L.D. saying that the Hulk has killed and continues to kill civilians? I don't get it. Is the Hulk a murderer or not?

BB: Remember in the Hulk movie when the Hulk threw a tank with a guy inside it across the desert and it crashes and the guy gets out of the tank unscathed? Didn’t that seem like complete and utter ________ to you? It did to me. I’m not saying the Hulk is a squeezing a guy’s head until his eyeballs pop out murderer but when Hulk smashes ____ gets ____ed up and people get hurt. You can’t knock down a building and everyone inside brushes off and goes to lunch. It's ridiculous.

:rolleyes:

[wobbly]

Bendis comments on this:

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66106



:rolleyes:

So Bendis throws established continuity out of the window because he doesn't agree with it? Talk about arrogant...

And he really ought to avoid talking about 'ridiculous' things in comics. His own track record aint exactly spotless regarding remarkably stupid ideas making their way into his books.

[The Question]

But really, the remark in She Hulk came from a relative of Bruce's who always tries to see him in a better light than he actually is. I mean, if you think about it, Jen sugar coats things when talking about Bruce alot.

[deathshead2]

So Bendis throws established continuity out of the window because he doesn't agree with it? Talk about arrogant...

And he really ought to avoid talking about 'ridiculous' things in comics. His own track record aint exactly spotless regarding remarkably stupid ideas making their way into his books.You got to remember Bendis doesn't listin to other people he doesn't care about what they say. Heck on his own message board he bans people for saying bad things about his work. Hopefully a few years after bendis leaves someone will write off everything he and Joe Q have done to marvel.

[deathshead2]

But really, the remark in She Hulk came from a relative of Bruce's who always tries to see him in a better light than he actually is. I mean, if you think about it, Jen sugar coats things when talking about Bruce alot.Well people never have seen him kill unless its someone who is super evil or something.RIGHT?

[The Question]

As someone said earlyer, he killed several soldiers when he traveled to the future and fought himself. But yeah, mostly he's stuck to offing the major baddies.

[Grim Goblin]

As I said before, check Incredible Hulk #316.

On page 3, a tv reporter named Dianne Bellamy states that the number of deaths caused by the Hulk's rampage might reach the hundreds. Wonderman also confirm that there were deaths caused by the Hulk when Samson tells all 4 avengers to **** off!!!.

Yeah, he was mindless but the name of this thread is "When Did 616 Hulk Start Killing?" not "When did 616 Bruce Banner start killing?" so I think the point is valid.

[BrianWilly]

I'm going to agree 100% with Bendis on this. And I hate Bendis, so make of that what you will. When something is BS, it is just BS and nothing's going to change that.

[Mr. Green]

Yep, that was in Incredible Hulk #316.

That book featured the mindless Hulk (without Banner), and a tv reporter named Dianne Bellamy states on page 3 that the number of deaths caused by the Hulk's rampage might reach the hundreds. Wonderman also confirm that there were deaths caused by the Hulk when Samson tells all 4 avengers to back off.

He may have been mindless but that was still Hulk who killed thos people.
Well, if you really want a response just read the countless posts by myself and others explaining why Mindless Hulk is nothing like Hulk.

Mindless Hulk isn't Banner (and Banner is Hulk) just like the Iron Man suit is not Tony Stark.

[Mr. Green]

All those buildings smashed, and not one civilian casualty?
Oh really? I'm sure you have an example out of the comics where Hulk smashes a building full of civillians and nobody gets hurt, right? I mean, unless you don't even read the Hulk of course. Unless you know absolutley nothing about the character.

If you agree with Bendis on this one, you agree with ignoring continuity.

Notice how gives an example from the Hulk MOVIE to support his point. I guess if he's doing that he can go ahead and change Hulk's origin too. :mad:

God, I used to support Bendis... NOW I HATE HIM. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[wobbly]

I think Bendis's comments show that he, like some here, have made the same mistake as many characters have been shown to do in the comic books themselves: they misunderstand the Hulk. They have a picture of him as this marauding merciless ravager of cities and that just isn't the case. That was one thing the writers (of the book itself and not some 'event' tie-in) would usually keep consistent. Basically, instead of attacking the guy on this false assumption they should just leave him the hell alone, as left to his own devices he wouldn't harm anyone (well, not anyone who didn't ask for it!!).

Re: Mindless Hulk maybe having killed in #316: As stated that was a Hulk completely free of any of Banner/Hulks influence and he was only in that condition due to Doc Samson's interference in the first place. Also, I haven't got the issue anymore myself but as best I can recall they never showed him do anything that would/should have killed any innocents? (the reporter was speculating and Wonder-Man was assuming?)

[gildea]

as said in future imperfect hulk smashes a building and kills someone.

[Genesis 1.0]

I'm going to agree 100% with Bendis on this. And I hate Bendis, so make of that what you will. When something is BS, it is just BS and nothing's going to change that.

Yeah, the general Bendis hate around here seems to make them extremely biased because what Bendis just said makes PERFECT sense. I agree 100% but then again you can never make everyone happy, if he'd said something on the complete opposite of the spectrum there would still be a contingent to be upset. Just take it with a grain of salt.:o

[rjb182]

For the purpose of this argument, does it even MATTER whether it's the mindless Hulk that has killed people or not? That means something if you're trying to decide whether Bruce Banner is a hero... *not* when you're trying to decide, as the Illuminati apparently did, whether or not the Hulk's presence on Earth is a threat.

The public at large doesn't really know when the Hulk is "mindless"-- they just know he's a big, green guy who occasionally goes berserk and gets *really* dangerous.

Even if he only ever became mindless Hulk twice-- the third time it happens might destroy a city. They still might have decided to send him into space, no matter whose "fault" it was.

[ShadowBoxing]

So Bendis throws established continuity out of the window because he doesn't agree with it? Talk about arrogant...

And he really ought to avoid talking about 'ridiculous' things in comics. His own track record aint exactly spotless regarding remarkably stupid ideas making their way into his books.But he is right...even back in the 60s Hulk would destroy whole towns and villages....In Hulk 300 he rampages across the countryside destroying everything in his way....no way When Hulk takes out a whole building, town or military base does no one die or get hurt.

[BrianWilly]

For the purpose of this argument, does it even MATTER whether it's the mindless Hulk that has killed people or not? That means something if you're trying to decide whether Bruce Banner is a hero... *not* when you're trying to decide, as the Illuminati apparently did, whether or not the Hulk's presence on Earth is a threat.

The public at large doesn't really know when the Hulk is "mindless"-- they just know he's a big, green guy who occasionally goes berserk and gets *really* dangerous.

Even if he only ever became mindless Hulk twice-- the third time it happens might destroy a city. They still might have decided to send him into space, no matter whose "fault" it was.Exactly! Do you think that the victims of a mindless Hulk care which Hulk it was that destroyed their homes?

Should it matter? The question remains, has Bruce Banner done enough to take responsibility for the mindless Hulk? Has it come to the point where someone else has to take responsibility for the mindless Hulk? It was Bendis' job to convince us that it has, and I don't think he's so very off the mark.

The very premise, the very conception of the Hulk is and always has been that he's a constant danger to those around him because when he Hulks out, he's uncontrollable. Yet here y'all are telling me that he isn't a constant danger to those around him. That he is controllable when he Hulks out. It's makes no sense; you can't have it both ways.

[The Question]

Exactly. And even when The Hulk is all sweet an innocent, he's still a danger. He's one of the strongest non mystical/cosmic beings in the MU. And most of the time, he has the mentality of a child. A perfect example of this is in "Hulk: Grey". The Hulk was in the desert, when a jack rabbit hopped up beside him. He picked it up, and started petting it. But because he was so strong, he crushed it to death. Give the most innocent person on the planet The Hulk's powers, and they're bound to kill some people by accident.

[Grim Goblin]

I'll go with the previous posts starting with rjb182.

Sorry Green, but mindless Hulk is still the Hulk. Hell, he's even more Hulk without Banner since he doesn't have Banner's mind influencing him. Yeah I know that Hulk is just an mpd of Banner but since the gamma bomb, it took on a life of it's own (check all the times Hulk wants nothing to do with Banner).

And like rjb 182 said, the point is not wether or not Banner is too noble or heroic to kill, it's wether or not Hulk has killed before. He did, period. He was in a mindless state but he did.

And wobbly, the reporter wasn't speculating, The hulk had been on a rampage for over a week. obviously by that time they're would be have been an official check up on servivors to find out exactly how many people died in there.

[Mr. Green]

....no way When Hulk takes out a whole building, town or military base does no one die or get hurt.
Give me an example FROM THE COMICS where Hulk topples a building that would be full of people and nobody got hurt. Wait... YOU CAN'T. YOU WON'T.

Everyone keeps mentioning him knocking over buildings full of people when it's never happened.

Bruce has mpd and Hulk is one of those personalities. (I know some of you know this) So without Banner there is no Hulk. Therefore it was just the Hulk's body. That's an important point because it shows this: Using the mindless Hulk as an example of how Savage Hulk is an uncontrolable killer is a fallacy. It DOESN'T prove your point. Quit using it to do so.

[Mr. Green]

Even if he only ever became mindless Hulk twice-- the third time it happens might destroy a city. They still might have decided to send him into space, no matter whose "fault" it was.
EXACTLY! PERFECT POINT! I promise you I'm not being sarcastic at ALL.

Do you know why I am agreeing? Because Bendis could have said THIS instead, and he didn't. The mindless Hulk incident (Where Banner was seperated from Hulk's body) happened over 20 years ago. Bendis made it seem like he kills people frequently. I have already made the point that it was impossible for that to even happen in the last five years of comicbooks. Prove me wrong.

To BrianWilly: Does it bother that you are arguing about a character that you obviously know nothing about? Does it bother you that your biggest argument (Hulk knocking over buildings and destroying cities) hasn't even happened?

Prove me wrong.

[TheCorpulent1]

Wasn't there an issue a long time ago where the Hulk accidentally killed a deer and he went all childlike and emo over it? People probably wouldn't matter as much to him as the deer, but I still don't think he's killed very many people. I guess there was a shift at some point where the idea of the Hulk's not leaving casualties in his wake went from being a point of fact to a ludicrous assumption.

[Mr. Green]

Wasn't there an issue a long time ago where the Hulk accidentally killed a deer and he went all childlike and emo over it? People probably wouldn't matter as much to him as the deer, but I still don't think he's killed very many people. I guess there was a shift at some point where the idea of the Hulk's not leaving casualties in his wake went from being a point of fact to a ludicrous assumption.
That's the thing that bothers me though. There WASN'T a turning point because all the Hulk fans would hate that, and any writer who understands the Hulk wouldn't do that anyway. Bendis just DECIDED one day, "Hey. I think Hulk is a killer because I didn't like the movie."

His editors need to be slapped for letting that happen.

Oh yeah, and the Future Imperfect thing is irrelevant because neither Iron Man or SHIELD would know about that.

[gildea]

Oh yeah, and the Future Imperfect thing is irrelevant because neither Iron Man or SHIELD would know about that.



Uh no it's not we're talking about what iron man or shield know but only IF hulk has killed people when destroying buildings. WHICH HE HAS.

The debate wasn't what shield knows about hulk but if he had destroyed a building in the past and killed people. that's all.

Your line of argument hasn't been "shield doesn't know" but "hulk doesn't do this" so don't try and fudge the issue when a counter example which you claim should exist does.

So are you now saying hulk DOES kill by accident but shield simply doesn't know about it and THATS the flaw in the story?

[wobbly]

Afaik, in Future Imperfect they never stated or showed that anyone had died in the building that fell. Will have to dig it out and re-read it to be sure but if that is the case saying he killed in that scene is assumption rather than fact.

[gildea]

Afaik, in Future Imperfect they never stated or showed that anyone had died in the building that fell. Will have to dig it out and re-read it to be sure but if that is the case saying he killed in that scene is assumption rather than fact.


the bit i'm referring to is just before the maestro snaps hulks neck and the person is lying in the rubble, bloodied and says "maes...tro...kill..." the hulk then exclaims "oh hell".

It could be said that it doesn't say the character dies in black and white but i don't think we're that unsophisticated as readers. We'd also then need to make the assumption that hulk knew the people would survive.

Whether the person died (and i thinks its obvious they did) i was responding to this post by mr green anway :

To everybody: PLEASE SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE IN AN ISSUE THAT IS IN CONTINUITY WHERE HULK SMASHES A BUILDING THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE.

At the end of the day the death is immaterial as there is no way hulk can hit someone like the maestro into an occupied building, destroying it in the process but working on the assumption that people wouldn't die.

[The Question]

Give me an example FROM THE COMICS where Hulk topples a building that would be full of people and nobody got hurt. Wait... YOU CAN'T. YOU WON'T.

Everyone keeps mentioning him knocking over buildings full of people when it's never happened.

Bruce has mpd and Hulk is one of those personalities. (I know some of you know this) So without Banner there is no Hulk. Therefore it was just the Hulk's body. That's an important point because it shows this: Using the mindless Hulk as an example of how Savage Hulk is an uncontrolable killer is a fallacy. It DOESN'T prove your point. Quit using it to do so.



The thing is, it can be argued that Banner is one of The Hulk's personalities. Mindless Hulk is another one of his personalities, just like Savage, Devil, and Joe Fixit.

[wobbly]

the bit i'm referring to is just before the maestro snaps hulks neck and the person is lying in the rubble, bloodied and says "maes...tro...kill..." the hulk then exclaims "oh hell".

It could be said that it doesn't say the character dies in black and white but i don't think we're that unsophisticated as readers. We'd also then need to make the assumption that hulk knew the people would survive.
He didn't. He realised as soon as the building started falling that people were in danger and leapt in to try and save them, disregarding the threat the Maestro still posed. And if PAD had really wanted people to believe Hulk had killed in that scene he could have just had the Hulk lift the debris and exclaim 'oh hell' over a mangled corpse, but he didnt, he showed the guy was still alive.

At the end of the day the death is immaterial as there is no way hulk can hit someone like the maestro into an occupied building, destroying it in the process but working on the assumption that people wouldn't die.

Well...the collapsing building fell on people, rather than it being occupied but going with this thought...if it's ok to allow such an assumption on the Hulk bringing down that building convict him then can we also assume the Avengers, Fantastic Four, X-Men etc, are also as guilty? All have been involved in pitch battles in the heart of New York at one time or another (probably fought in cities more often than the Hulk when you think about it), with no shortage of property damage incurred and civillians put at risk along the way. If we assume the Hulk must have killed someone in his past, surely they all must have too?

[gildea]

He didn't. He realised as soon as the building started falling that people were in danger and leapt in to try and save them, disregarding the threat the Maestro still posed. And if PAD had really wanted people to believe Hulk had killed in that scene he could have just had the Hulk lift the debris and exclaim 'oh hell' over a mangled corpse, but he didnt, he showed the guy was still alive.

I see it as he showed the guy dying. Given the way the person's voice trailed off. Also the hulk would be unlikely to exclaim "oh hell" if the person was going to live, more likely something along the lines of "thank god you'll live" or something.
The scene IMO is very much set up for hulk to be distracted by the death given the way it's written (they'd have need to informed us the guy had survived otherwise). It's a very common way of doing deaths in comics, movies and tv people more often than discovering the corpes find the dying body and it utters its last few weak words.

HAVING SAID THAT i don't think if the character dies is relevant to the discussion at hand as i was answering a specific question posed by mr green which wasn't about causing deaths per se. But even if the character did survive can you honestly say the hulk knew he would (which is the real issue i think)?



Well...the collapsing building fell on people, rather than it being occupied


No, they were in the building. The vey page before it has one of them state "Quick, lets get out of h.." and above their heads perez has drawn in the blinds of the window they're looking out of.


but going with this thought...if it's ok to allow such an assumption on the Hulk bringing down that building convict him then can we also assume the Avengers, Fantastic Four, X-Men etc, are also as guilty? All have been involved in pitch battles in the heart of New York at one time or another (probably fought in cities more often than the Hulk when you think about it), with no shortage of property damage incurred and civillians put at risk along the way. If we assume the Hulk must have killed someone in his past, surely they all must have too?

The difference being that they have (in general) far more intelligence than the hulk and much more control. The hulk in the MU is viewed as much as a force of nature as anything else. IF the avengers do kill people by accident they can be held accountable far more readily than the hulk.
There is a significanct difference in someone like a hulk and the thing, people refer to the hulk as child like which is a good comparison, you wouldn't give a child a hand gun would you? It's too powerful for someone of that intelligence to be trusted to operate.

But i'm not making that assumption, though i am saying i believe it has happened because of future imperfect.




I should also add I DON'T want 616 hulk to be a killer in the accidental sense because he *needs* to be the hero. I just don't think it's logical to claim that he doesn't cause deaths by accident HOWEVER I am MORE than willing to accept this leap in logic because having a superhero book where the hero routinely causes innocent deaths by accident simply WOULDN'T work. It can happen once or twice (happened to spidey dodging gun fire in another peter david work, death of jean de wolfe) for plot reasons (as i believe it did in future imperfect) or character development (which was bruce jones initial idea). But as a long term concept i think it is UNSUPPORTABLE for a super hero comic book of the hulk's stature and fame.

Even though I really think the line of argument saying its logical for hulk to not kill by accident is wrong my simple answer to that is SO WHAT? The hulk has survived for many many years being written to avoid it and in general doesn't need to have that added to his backstory.

(of course despite bendis's comments i believe he was very careful to actually not have the hulk kill and it can be easily fixed by writers in the future).

[wobbly]

I see it as he showed the guy dying. Given the way the person's voice trailed off. Also the hulk would be unlikely to exclaim "oh hell" if the person was going to live, more likely something along the lines of "thank god you'll live" or something.
The scene IMO is very much set up for hulk to be distracted by the death given the way it's written (they'd have need to informed us the guy had survived otherwise). It's a very common way of doing deaths in comics, movies and tv people more often than discovering the corpes find the dying body and it utters its last few weak words.
I disagree. I read the Hulk's "Oh Hell" as a reaction to the guy saying "Maestro kill", like it suddenly reminded him the Maestro was still there.

No, they were in the building. The vey page before it has one of them state "Quick, lets get out of h.." and above their heads perez has drawn in the blinds of the window they're looking out of.

The difference being that they have (in general) far more intelligence than the hulk and much more control. The hulk in the MU is viewed as much as a force of nature as anything else. IF the avengers do kill people by accident they can be held accountable far more readily than the hulk.
There is a significanct difference in someone like a hulk and the thing, people refer to the hulk as child like which is a good comparison, you wouldn't give a child a hand gun would you? It's too powerful for someone of that intelligence to be trusted to operate.
Well, I have never had a problem accepting the Hulk had never killed, no more so than accepting the aforementioned heroes hadn't either, and when you see realism arguments put forward to justify this change that doesnt really fly for me when you consider there's no way Thor or the Thing could realisticly avoid civillian casualties when they cut loose on an opponent in a populated area.
But the gun point is a good one, however, for me there's a huge difference between potraying the Hulk as a potential threat to civillian lives, which he has always been, there's no doubt about that, and having him realise that potential by actually having killed (and killed often by the looks of it). Making him a killer, especially a careless indirect one (at least someone like Wolverine or the Punisher are usually justified when they kill), fundamentally damages the character (ie, the Illumaniti are definitely right to send this monster away and he really shouldn't ever return). Basically, he goes from being a misunderstood monster to being a genuine one.

But I'm not making that assumption, though i am saying i believe it has happened because of future imperfect.

I should also add I DON'T want 616 hulk to be a killer in the accidental sense because he *needs* to be the hero. I just don't think it's logical to claim that he doesn't cause deaths by accident HOWEVER I am MORE than willing to accept this leap in logic because having a superhero book where the hero routinely causes innocent deaths by accident simply WOULDN'T work. It can happen once or twice (happened to spidey dodging gun fire in another peter david work, death of jean de wolfe) for plot reasons (as i believe it did in future imperfect) or character development (which was bruce jones initial idea). But as a long term concept i think it is UNSUPPORTABLE for a super hero comic book of the hulk's stature and fame.
Even though I really think the line of argument saying its logical for hulk to not kill by accident is wrong my simple answer to that is SO WHAT? The hulk has survived for many many years being written to avoid it and in general doesn't need to have that added to his backstory.

(of course despite bendis's comments i believe he was very careful to actually not have the hulk kill and it can be easily fixed by writers in the future).
I would agree with that, but unfortunately the way Bendis presented it and with his comments (and that he seems to be able to do whatever the hell he likes at Marvel) it does look like they have decided to ret-con the Hulk into having killed, and killed a lot (hence Tony's "how many this time?"). It remains to be seen how they will follow this through but if that is the intention I find it distasteful to say the least.

[ShadowBoxing]

Give me an example FROM THE COMICS where Hulk topples a building that would be full of people and nobody got hurt. Wait... YOU CAN'T. YOU WON'T.

Everyone keeps mentioning him knocking over buildings full of people when it's never happened.

Bruce has mpd and Hulk is one of those personalities. (I know some of you know this) So without Banner there is no Hulk. Therefore it was just the Hulk's body. That's an important point because it shows this: Using the mindless Hulk as an example of how Savage Hulk is an uncontrolable killer is a fallacy. It DOESN'T prove your point. Quit using it to do so.
http://img19.exs.cx/img19/6295/shockwave15ag.jpg
http://img19.exs.cx/img19/250/shockwave7uw.jpg
read that one
http://img133.exs.cx/img133/8140/tidalwaves8ze.jpg
http://img78.exs.cx/img78/958/denmarkquake1mm.jpg
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/4719/skyscraper4zl.jpg (http://imageshack.us/?x=my6&myref=http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f51/t354306.html)
http://img44.echo.cx/img44/8761/avengersih300f8ui.jpg

[Ahura Mazda]

Damn I cannot argue with the scans above I guess the Hulk probably did cause some collatarel damage. However, I would just like to say if the Hulk did so did others....

[Mr. Green]

Okay, I will give you those. Hulk has smashed a couple buildings during fights, and that is undisputable evidence. :up:

However, my point was still that Hulk doesn't get mad and smash a city unless provoked. He can also control himself. It is VERY rare that he goes into a blind rage, or worse becomes mindless.

Why I am REALLY mad is because Bendis' writing made it seem like Hulk is a walking Holocaust, when in fact, he hasn't even been the "Savage" Hulk for quite some time. That means that he can fully control himself. It is impossible for Hulk to have done anything fatal to innnocents in the last five years. (I limit it to five years because only collected in the mid 90s and again with Bruce Jones' run.)

That was simply OUT OF CONTINUITY and Bendis doesn't know ANYTHING about the Hulk anyway. He used an example from the damn MOVIE! I think those editors need to be fired tommorow.

EDIT: I believe it was in Thor: BloodOath where after Thor was in a fight with the absorbing man and the city was ravaged with tons of injuries. No deaths were mentioned and the scene looked worse than anything in the above pictures.

So is it realistic for Hulk to kill but nobody else? Hmm...

[Mr. Green]

The debate wasn't what shield knows about hulk but if he had destroyed a building in the past and killed people. that's all.
Read above to see my argument and why I'm pissed.

Didn't get the chance to read Future Imperfect, but from what Wobbly says it sounds like you are just posting whatever suits your argument. You make it sound like Hulk did something to blatantly put lives in danger.

It is FACT that Proffesor Hulk (Banner Hulk) would always put saving innocent lives as first priority.

[Grim Goblin]

Well Proffesor Hulk was Banner's full mind controling the Hulk's body (not really, but it was another personality that appeared to to be Banner in control).

I give you the point that the Hulk would never go on any kind of rampage unless provoked but it doesn't change the fact that once provoked past a point he wouldn't hesitate to smash puny humans. maybe not squash them by hand one at a time but still...

I'm not going to argue in defense of Bendis 'cause that would be a real waste of time. He screwed up, period.

And I wasn't trying to say that mindless Hulk is the same thing as savage Hulk but there are similarities. Mindless Hulk could have just continued to fight the avengers in #316 but once they started fighting Samson, he just left. So I agree that the Hulk isn't a bloodthirsty creature. But I'm sticking to my point that mindless Hulk killed a lot of people and that it still counts.

[TheCorpulent1]

EDIT: I believe it was in Thor: BloodOath where after Thor was in a fight with the absorbing man and the city was ravaged with tons of injuries. No deaths were mentioned and the scene looked worse than anything in the above pictures.

So is it realistic for Hulk to kill but nobody else? Hmm...
Thor's careful not to cause any casualties. The tide of a few of his battles has turned, in fact, because he was concerned for the safety of others while his opponent wasn't. Tarene, while trying to be a hero on Earth in Thor's absence during the King Thor saga, endangered civilian lives and got scolded by Jake Olson (who was just a part of Thor splintered off at the time; the real Olson was long dead and presumably in Heaven, if the imagery of the annual his spirit left in is any indication) for it. That's why most of Thor's fights with the Juggernaut end in his teleporting Jugs away, too: 1) he knows he can't beat the Juggernaut one-on-one and 2) he knows if he tries to beat the Juggernaut, he can't guarantee bystanders won't be killed in the process. He's also tried to lure the Hulk out of populated areas in most of their fights.

[The Question]

Okay, I will give you those. Hulk has smashed a couple buildings during fights, and that is undisputable evidence. :up:

However, my point was still that Hulk doesn't get mad and smash a city unless provoked. He can also control himself. It is VERY rare that he goes into a blind rage, or worse becomes mindless.

So? Who was talking about that? Provoked, mindless, or otherwise, it still makes no sense that no one would have died during The Hulk's rampages.

Why I am REALLY mad is because Bendis' writing made it seem like Hulk is a walking Holocaust, when in fact, he hasn't even been the "Savage" Hulk for quite some time. That means that he can fully control himself. It is impossible for Hulk to have done anything fatal to innnocents in the last five years. (I limit it to five years because only collected in the mid 90s and again with Bruce Jones' run.)

Five years in the real world. In the comics, it's more like a year. Maybe less. And really, people have died because The Hulk exists. This is a fact. Did the Illuminati exagerate it? Maybe.

That was simply OUT OF CONTINUITY and Bendis doesn't know ANYTHING about the Hulk anyway. He used an example from the damn MOVIE! I think those editors need to be fired tommorow.

How is it out of continuty? And really, using the example from the movie wasn't out of context. It would be ridiculous for The Hulk to throw a tank that far and have the soldiers be fine.

EDIT: I believe it was in Thor: BloodOath where after Thor was in a fight with the absorbing man and the city was ravaged with tons of injuries. No deaths were mentioned and the scene looked worse than anything in the above pictures.

So is it realistic for Hulk to kill but nobody else? Hmm...


It didn't say no one died either. I'd assume that people would have died there.

[Mr. Green]

So? Who was talking about that? Provoked, mindless, or otherwise, it still makes no sense that no one would have died during The Hulk's rampages.
Okay then. Will you then agree that it makes no sense that the Avengers have ended innocent lives during their epic battles?
How is it out of continuty? And really, using the example from the movie wasn't out of context. It would be ridiculous for The Hulk to throw a tank that far and have the soldiers be fine.
I made a timeline showing how it would be impossible for Hulk to have killed any innocents.
It didn't say no one died either. I'd assume that people would have died there.
Okay, well Thor would be responsible of killing too. And so would 95% of the A-list superheroes in Marvel. I can see how it can be done to get some great storytelling going, but in the Illuminati it is done just as a simple way out.

Bottom line, I don't like the idea of them making my favorite hero a cause of innocent death. I don't think Thor fans would like it if someone said "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth." I don't think ANYBODY would like it if that happened with their favorite hero, and that's why ANY writer should be allowed to just be like, "hey, whatever, this guy rampages through the city everyother issue for no reason. All he DOES is kill innocents."

[The Question]

Okay then. Will you then agree that it makes no sense that the Avengers have ended innocent lives during their epic battles?

Of course. Just saying, The Avengers would probably try and save innocents. I doubt The Hulk would care enough to do so.

I made a timeline showing how it would be impossible for Hulk to have killed any innocents.

No, you didn't. Since several people here have shown that it is VERY possible.

Okay, well Thor would be responsible of killing too. And so would 95% of the A-list superheroes in Marvel. I can see how it can be done to get some great storytelling going, but in the Illuminati it is done just as a simple way out.

Except, I'd probably lay the blame on Absorbing Man. He was doing most of the smashing. Difference between Hulk and Thor is that when The Hulk's in a fight, he doesn't care enough to make sure nothing around him gets smashed.

Bottom line, I don't like the idea of them making my favorite hero a cause of innocent death. I don't think Thor fans would like it if someone said "Innocent people are dying because he walks the Earth." I don't think ANYBODY would like it if that happened with their favorite hero, and that's why ANY writer should be allowed to just be like, "hey, whatever, this guy rampages through the city everyother issue for no reason. All he DOES is kill innocents."

The things is, The Hulk isn't a hero. Never has been. He doesn't live by some moral code or fight the good fight. He simply tries to survive. Sometimes, that gets people hurt. He's not a villain either, mind you. He's one huge, walking, smashing grey area.

[Mr. Green]

The things is, The Hulk isn't a hero. Never has been. He doesn't live by some moral code or fight the good fight. He simply tries to survive. Sometimes, that gets people hurt. He's not a villain either, mind you. He's one huge, walking, smashing grey area.
Good post, and good point. :up:

Keep in mind that the majority of the time in the last 20 years, Hulk has either been Banner Hulk or Gray Hulk, both of which have control over their actions as to avoid unnecessary smashing. And the current incarnation of the Hulk is one of my favorites, because it gives Hulk intelligence while keeping the power of the regular Savage Hulk.

I think if you read Planet Hulk (It's only two issues in, catching up would be easy) because everyone who does loves it, and then you would be like, "Man! This character is way cooler than anyone else in the world! I finally understand the character!"

[gildea]

Read above to see my argument and why I'm pissed.

Didn't get the chance to read Future Imperfect, but from what Wobbly says it sounds like you are just posting whatever suits your argument. You make it sound like Hulk did something to blatantly put lives in danger.

It is FACT that Proffesor Hulk (Banner Hulk) would always put saving innocent lives as first priority.

Heh
he did put lives in danger, the only disagreement wobbly and i have is if the person survived. You might want to read the posts before posting in such a condescending manner (and blatantly ignorant manner).

For your edification you said show me a time when he smashes a building with people in it so i did thats all. I didn't say anything about his motivations (when he realises what happens he digs out the people).

and you really want to read future imperfect also it's arguably the best story about your favourite character.

[Grim Goblin]

well I'm bailing out of this debate since Mr Green is clearly not interested in hearing any opinions different than his own. I don't mind a healthy debate where each party throw around facts to prove their point, but his condescending attitude and total disregard of things that don't support his point of view clearly show me this is a waste of my time.

I've been down this road before with Jplaya 2023 and although it was fun owning his clueless ass, I just have better things to do these days.

[The Question]

Good post, and good point. :up:

Keep in mind that the majority of the time in the last 20 years, Hulk has either been Banner Hulk or Gray Hulk, both of which have control over their actions as to avoid unnecessary smashing. And the current incarnation of the Hulk is one of my favorites, because it gives Hulk intelligence while keeping the power of the regular Savage Hulk.

You're right, Savage Hulk has not been seen for a while. But Joe Fixit is very far from what I'd call a hero, and has some traits I would consider somewhat vilinous at times.

I think if you read Planet Hulk (It's only two issues in, catching up would be easy) because everyone who does loves it, and then you would be like, "Man! This character is way cooler than anyone else in the world! I finally understand the character!"

Oh, I get the character. And, I get that the character is alot more complex that "hero" or "villain". He's done some very good things and some very bad things before.

[Mr. Green]

Heh
he did put lives in danger, the only disagreement wobbly and i have is if the person survived.
Okay... You're right. Banner Hulk doesn't care about innocent lives and he blatantly disregarded them. He knew that there was someone in the building that he smashed. He DOESN'T put innocent lives ahead of everything else.

When some writer is allowed to make YOUR favorite writer look like a careless dick who kills countless innocents in every other issue, we'll see how you react. And screw continuity too. That doesn't matter in the face of realism, because that's all that matters in a superhero book. REALISM. :rolleyes:

[TheSumOfGod]

I wonder what Hulk will do when he returns from Planet Hulk... tie Mister Fantastic into a knot, perhaps?

[rjb182]

When some writer is allowed to make YOUR favorite writer look like a careless dick who kills countless innocents in every other issue, we'll see how you react.

Fortunately, my favorite is Wolverine. That would be 100-percent in-character! :up: :D

I jest. Somewhat...

[Genesis 1.0]

I think if you read Planet Hulk (It's only two issues in, catching up would be easy) because everyone who does loves it, and then you would be like, "Man! This character is way cooler than anyone else in the world! I finally understand the character!"

..............

Don't you think that's more than a bit subjective? Jaded? It's stuff like this thrown into an otherwise decent argument that result in the type of response you've gained in this thread.

[gildea]

Okay... You're right. Banner Hulk doesn't care about innocent lives and he blatantly disregarded them. He knew that there was someone in the building that he smashed. He DOESN'T put innocent lives ahead of everything else.

When some writer is allowed to make YOUR favorite writer look like a careless dick who kills countless innocents in every other issue, we'll see how you react. And screw continuity too. That doesn't matter in the face of realism, because that's all that matters in a superhero book. REALISM. :rolleyes:

Dear me.

If you'd read my posts in my discussion with wobbly you would have seen i disagree with the concept of making the hulk a regular accidental killer.

And i don't recall saying professor hulk was trying to actually hurt innocents either.

So is all you have to offer me ignorance of what i have said or making up stuff that i've said?

[ShadowBoxing]

I think if you read Planet Hulk (It's only two issues in, catching up would be easy) because everyone who does loves it, and then you would be like, "Man! This character is way cooler than anyone else in the world! I finally understand the character!"Naw...he is kind of a jerk now. They don't even write the whole fear Banner has of becoming the Hulk. Now that was the Hulk. The Hulk that made Banner run into unihabited areas to keep his anger at bay and keep the Hulk away from people. However Banner cannot control Hulk and thats the thing. Don Blake could control Thor. Hulk is Banner anger embodied, not his smarts, not his ethics, not his morals, not even his common sense. Its his anger. He is not a hero, he is an antihero, but only because Banner puts himself in situations where the Hulk could be used for good. However the rest of the world will never see that. Hulk has come up against Thor, the Fantastic Four, The X-Men, Colossus, Sasquatch, Man Thing, Quasar, Black Bolt, Iron Man, Namor, Dr Strange, Alpha Flight, the Avengers, scads of Alternate dimension creatures, Xemnu, SHIELD and the US army and totalled them all. Thats why they sent him into space. Not because Banner tries to control Hulk, but because there is no assurance he can. And if he goes "all rage again" or Dark or mindless or super empowered or sinister Grey again there are not going to be a whole lot of people who can stop him.

[wobbly]

Naw...he is kind of a jerk now. They don't even write the whole fear Banner has of becoming the Hulk. Now that was the Hulk. The Hulk that made Banner run into unihabited areas to keep his anger at bay and keep the Hulk away from people. However Banner cannot control Hulk and thats the thing. Don Blake could control Thor. Hulk is Banner anger embodied, not his smarts, not his ethics, not his morals, not even his common sense. Its his anger. He is not a hero, he is an antihero, but only because Banner puts himself in situations where the Hulk could be used for good. However the rest of the world will never see that. Hulk has come up against Thor, the Fantastic Four, The X-Men, Colossus, Sasquatch, Man Thing, Quasar, Black Bolt, Iron Man, Namor, Dr Strange, Alpha Flight, the Avengers, scads of Alternate dimension creatures, Xemnu, SHIELD and the US army and totalled them all. Thats why they sent him into space. Not because Banner tries to control Hulk, but because there is no assurance he can. And if he goes "all rage again" or Dark or mindless or super empowered or sinister Grey again there are not going to be a whole lot of people who can stop him.

I wouldn't have a problem with the idea of his being sent away because of fear of his potential threat, but in making that threat very real (and in the past tense too) and as such making the action fully justified I do think Bendis has dropped the ball. Should also be noted they had to contrive a reason for the rampage that precipitated this exile, ie; Hulk hasn't rampaged through a city for ages so they came up with this bomb exploding in his face out of the blue in FF that made him go ape and prompt the Illuminati having just cause to make such a decision.

Lastly, though I agree with you in that the savage Hulk will always be my 'real' version of the Hulk too, I disagree that he has no moral values; just because he never sets out to be a hero doesn't mean he doesnt know or respect the difference in good & evil, and when push comes to shove he has usually chose to side with the good.

[Mr. Green]

Naw...he is kind of a jerk now. They don't even write the whole fear Banner has of becoming the Hulk. Now that was the Hulk. The Hulk that made Banner run into unihabited areas to keep his anger at bay and keep the Hulk away from people. However Banner cannot control Hulk and thats the thing. Don Blake could control Thor. Hulk is Banner anger embodied, not his smarts, not his ethics, not his morals, not even his common sense. Its his anger. He is not a hero, he is an antihero, but only because Banner puts himself in situations where the Hulk could be used for good. However the rest of the world will never see that. Hulk has come up against Thor, the Fantastic Four, The X-Men, Colossus, Sasquatch, Man Thing, Quasar, Black Bolt, Iron Man, Namor, Dr Strange, Alpha Flight, the Avengers, scads of Alternate dimension creatures, Xemnu, SHIELD and the US army and totalled them all. Thats why they sent him into space. Not because Banner tries to control Hulk, but because there is no assurance he can. And if he goes "all rage again" or Dark or mindless or super empowered or sinister Grey again there are not going to be a whole lot of people who can stop him.
That is a good post. :) :up:

I have to agree with Wobbly though, because Bendis could have followed EXACTLY the logic that you used. Hulk IS a huge risk as you stated. You gave perfect examples that Bendis could have used himself. Instead he figured he needed to be the guy who made Hulk a killer.

Planet Hulk IS pretty badass though, and I think a lot of people who never even read the Hulk like it a lot. As for Hulk being a jerk, Hulk #82 is a one-shot written by PAD with the current Hulk incarnation. It is a great story and it shows that Hulk isn't just an ass.

[TheCorpulent1]

I wouldn't have a problem with the idea of his being sent away because of fear of his potential threat, but in making that threat very real (and in the past tense too) and as such making the action fully justified I do think Bendis has dropped the ball. Should also be noted they had to contrive a reason for the rampage that precipitated this exile, ie; Hulk hasn't rampaged through a city for ages so they came up with this bomb exploding in his face out of the blue in FF that made him go ape and prompt the Illuminati having just cause to make such a decision.

Lastly, though I agree with you in that the savage Hulk will always be my 'real' version of the Hulk too, I disagree that he has no moral values; just because he never sets out to be a hero doesn't mean he doesnt know or respect the difference in good & evil, and when push comes to shove he has usually chose to side with the good.
I was confused at Reed's participation in shooting the Hulk off into space. Namor I can easily see--he's got loads of first-hand experience with how destructive and uncontrollable the Hulk can be thanks to their time on the Defenders, plus he's just that kind of guy. Iron Man I could see as well, since his characterization lately has slipped back to the manipulative, morally ambiguous douchebag he used to be around the West Coast Avengers/Armor Wars era. Black Bolt I'm not sure, since I don't know much about his personality, but my guess is that if it doesn't directly affect Attilan, he wouldn't have a problem with it; he locked his own brother up for pretty much the rest of time based on the damage he could do in Attilan, after all. Professor X has had a similar streak to Iron Man lately, becoming more and more of a morally ambiguous leader participating in subtle, clandestine machinations that the X-Men never knew about--Deadly Genesis, Mystique's last series, and the craptastic "Danger" arc from AXM are proof enough of that.

But Reed? When has Reed ever really shown the kind of moral arrogance to jettison one of his close friends and scientific colleagues off into space for damage he may or may not have caused or will cause? There was the recent "Authoritative Action" stuff in Latveria, but that was a pretty unique case in that Dr. Doom had just possessed his infant daughter and sent his adolescent son to Hell. That's bound to twist a man's sense of right and wrong. He got over it with the help of his family in the FF and returned more or less to his normal, unassuming self afterwards, though. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something since I haven't been reading FF lately, but the fact that Reed not only participated, but in fact came up with the idea to send the Hulk into space, seemed like a departure from his usual characterization. I guess he might've been cowed into submission by the other Illuminati members' agreement, though.

[The Question]

If you read the current FF series, you'll see that Reed feels EXTREMELY guilty about alot of the things the Illuminati's been doing, including jetisoning Banner into space and supporting the registration act. They never actually say it, but you see him thinking about what the group has done and sulking alot.

[TheCorpulent1]

Ok, well props to JMS for that, even if he is making Peter Iron Man's butt-monkey over in ASM. ;)

[Mr. Green]

Namor is my second favorite character now because of that issue. He was the only one to see that it was messed up for them to betray the Hulkster! He put the hurt on that bastard Stark, too. :) :up:

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, it was nice to see Namor kick some ass for once.

[BrianWilly]

And yet, some people have mentioned that that was out-of-character for Namor, that it was weird for him to care at all about the fate of the Hulk and how cruel it was considering his own checkered past, much less push for the Hulk's freedom when Namor himself has seen firsthand the type of danger he is and would be pragmatic, as the King of Atlantis, about what to do with that kind of danger.

If anything, I second the notion that Reed Richards giving up on trying to cure Banner is just very questionable. He's Reed f'ing Richards; "impossible" isn't even a word in his dictionary. And now he's giving up on a scientific pursuit because, in his own words, it would be a lot of work to go through with it?

Okay...

[TheCorpulent1]

Not to mention the possible other applications that a cure for Banner could lend itself to. The Hulk stems mostly from Banner's MPD, after all; the radiation was just a catalyst that had the outlandish result of giving his other personas physical form. Cure Bruce Banner of becoming the Hulk entirely and you've probably got a cure for MPD wrapped up in it somewhere. Millions of lives could be bettered with that.

[roach]

And yet, some people have mentioned that that was out-of-character for Namor, that it was weird for him to care at all about the fate of the Hulk and how cruel it was considering his own checkered past, much less push for the Hulk's freedom when Namor himself has seen firsthand the type of danger he is and would be pragmatic, as the King of Atlantis, about what to do with that kind of danger.

If anything, I second the notion that Reed Richards giving up on trying to cure Banner is just very questionable. He's Reed f'ing Richards; "impossible" isn't even a word in his dictionary. And now he's giving up on a scientific pursuit because, in his own words, it would be a lot of work to go through with it?

Okay...

Actually I believe Namor's characterization in correct. I see him thinking that if this is how they deal with Hulk how soon will it be until they do it to him.

[BrianWilly]

I actually really like how Namor was written in this issue; to see a bunch of stuffy old guys prattling on about stuffy stuff and then suddenly have this butthead with pointy ears go "You know, you're all so very very stupid" was just great.

I can totally see how the prospect of being betrayed by these people alarms Namor, but on the other hand would he really care so much? After all, he's the one that's always looking for an excuse to get into a fight. And like he says, if they ever did anything to him it would be war against Atlantis.

It was just a bit weird looking at all these people who would normally look for other ways to solve a problem all of a sudden going for the easiest way out, and then Namor the guy who usually has a very direct, very violent way of doing things all of sudden questioning their decision. It's a minor nitpick, though, and to be honest it's more about the other characters' choices being awkward than it is about Namor.

[roach]

I was confused at Reed's participation in shooting the Hulk off into space. Namor I can easily see--he's got loads of first-hand experience with how destructive and uncontrollable the Hulk can be thanks to their time on the Defenders, plus he's just that kind of guy. Iron Man I could see as well, since his characterization lately has slipped back to the manipulative, morally ambiguous douchebag he used to be around the West Coast Avengers/Armor Wars era. Black Bolt I'm not sure, since I don't know much about his personality, but my guess is that if it doesn't directly affect Attilan, he wouldn't have a problem with it; he locked his own brother up for pretty much the rest of time based on the damage he could do in Attilan, after all. Professor X has had a similar streak to Iron Man lately, becoming more and more of a morally ambiguous leader participating in subtle, clandestine machinations that the X-Men never knew about--Deadly Genesis, Mystique's last series, and the craptastic "Danger" arc from AXM are proof enough of that.

But Reed? When has Reed ever really shown the kind of moral arrogance to jettison one of his close friends and scientific colleagues off into space for damage he may or may not have caused or will cause? There was the recent "Authoritative Action" stuff in Latveria, but that was a pretty unique case in that Dr. Doom had just possessed his infant daughter and sent his adolescent son to Hell. That's bound to twist a man's sense of right and wrong. He got over it with the help of his family in the FF and returned more or less to his normal, unassuming self afterwards, though. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something since I haven't been reading FF lately, but the fact that Reed not only participated, but in fact came up with the idea to send the Hulk into space, seemed like a departure from his usual characterization. I guess he might've been cowed into submission by the other Illuminati members' agreement, though.

i see the light bulb going off

[wobbly]

I think Namor's reaction was fine. He has fought both against and alongside the Hulk and isn't the type to take what he would see as a dishonorable route out of the perceived problem.
Tony I could see suggesting the idea, he would see it as a practical solution, but Reed? No way. I mean this is the guy who saved Galactus' life, was put on trial for it after the big G ate the Skrull homeworld, and now he is advocating setting loose another potential mass killer amongst the stars?

And the exile in space is another thing that bothers me: When Dr. Strange sent the mindless Hulk to the crossroads he made it all part of the spell that he could never enter a world where he could cause harm (so in a few of the worlds he visited he got his @ss handed to him big time) and should he ever feel discontented enough in any of those worlds he would be returned to the crossroads until he found one where he could find some kind of contentment. Now the only reason the Hulk returned from the crossroads wasn't so much because "it didnt work out" as Bendis has Strange describe it, but because he was brought back to Earth by an unwitting Alpha Flight (with an assist by the Beyonder).

But this exile is space in just inflicting the Hulk on someone else isnt it? Surely they would have to assume he could find an inhabited world at some point and with no safeguard in place by Strange what they fear he could do on Earth he could do elsewhere.
And they wonder why alien races in the MU generally don't like us very much...

[ShadowBoxing]

I think Namor's reaction was fine. He has fought both against and alongside the Hulk and isn't the type to take what he would see as a dishonorable route out of the perceived problem.
Tony I could see suggesting the idea, he would see it as a practical solution, but Reed? No way. I mean this is the guy who saved Galactus' life, was put on trial for it after the big G ate the Skrull homeworld, and now he is advocating setting loose another potential mass killer amongst the stars?

And the exile in space is another thing that bothers me: When Dr. Strange sent the mindless Hulk to the crossroads he made it all part of the spell that he could never enter a world where he could cause harm (so in a few of the worlds he visited he got his @ss handed to him big time) and should he ever feel discontented enough in any of those worlds he would be returned to the crossroads until he found one where he could find some kind of contentment. Now the only reason the Hulk returned from the crossroads wasn't so much because "it didnt work out" as Bendis has Strange describe it, but because he was brought back to Earth by an unwitting Alpha Flight (with an assist by the Beyonder).

But this exile is space in just inflicting the Hulk on someone else isnt it? Surely they would have to assume he could find an inhabited world at some point and with no safeguard in place by Strange what they fear he could do on Earth he could do elsewhere.
And they wonder why alien races in the MU generally don't like us very much...Yeah that remark really pissed me off.

[Mr. Green]

But this exile is space in just inflicting the Hulk on someone else isnt it? Surely they would have to assume he could find an inhabited world at some point and with no safeguard in place by Strange what they fear he could do on Earth he could do elsewhere.
And they wonder why alien races in the MU generally don't like us very much...
Well, in Planet Hulk Reed tells Hulk that he is being sent to a world with nobody to harm him or hunt him down. It is supposed to be a "favor" to the Hulk. But Hulk gets SO pissed when he hears that he just saved earth to be screwed over, that he starts tearing the space ship apart. Then he and the space ship are pulled into some kind of worm hole and sent to another planet. One Reed didn't intend him to be sent to. And these aliens are actually a THREAT to Hulk, plus he is weaker because the worm hole has a weakening effect on people. In fact, Hulk is apparantly the first one to have been able to even stand up after being sent through the worm hole.

Planet Hulk is awesome read! :) :up:

As far as Namor goes, Hulk and Namor have fought alongside agains the avengers, and also with the Defenders. They are more team mates than not, and Namor has a sense of honor when it comes to people that he has fought beside. He wouldn't betray someone that has helped him (and the entire MU) achieve countless victories in the past.

[DBM]

Maybe this has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up on this thread or any other Hulk ones.

Doesn't the Hulk have some kind of "sixth sense" or something that allows him to always find his way back to the place the accident originally occured at that gave him his powers? And if he does, don't Reed/Tony/Everyone know about this? And if they know about this, don't they know he always finds his way back? And if so, why did they bother with this?

[gildea]

And if he does, don't Reed/Tony/Everyone know about this? And if they know about this, don't they know he always finds his way back? And if so, why did they bother with this?


It's comics everything almost always resets!! Why bother with any of it??

;)

[TheCorpulent1]

Maybe this has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up on this thread or any other Hulk ones.

Doesn't the Hulk have some kind of "sixth sense" or something that allows him to always find his way back to the place the accident originally occured at that gave him his powers? And if he does, don't Reed/Tony/Everyone know about this? And if they know about this, don't they know he always finds his way back? And if so, why did they bother with this?
Maybe they figured the Hulk wouldn't be able to figure out a way off the planet. Although that's a stupid assumption for anyone to make, especially people as smart as Reed, Strange, Tony, et al. I'm sure Bruce Banner could build a spaceworthy vessel out of materials the Hulk could procure from any inhabitable planet.

When you get right down to it, if they were going to do an exile on the Hulk right, the plan would've started and ended with Dr. Strange and his catalogue of uninhabited dimensions he could magically transport the Hulk to with ease. Unless the Hulk starts drifting back into his retarded habit of developing nonsensical powers like punching through time, he'd have literally no way of making it across a dimensional gap, whereas any spatial gap is pretty easy for someone as smart as Banner and as powerful as the Hulk to overcome.

[The Question]

Maybe they just don't know about his sixth sense. Also, remember, the sixth sense came from the fact that Maestro's spirit was haunting the sight. Since Maestro reformed himself, it's quite possible that that sense is no longer a factor.

[TheCorpulent1]

I still don't see how Banner, who's among the smartest people in the world, couldn't find his way back to Earth from pretty much anywhere. A normal genius might have some trouble, but we're talking about comic book standards and a guy who's a colleague and consultant to Reed Richards.

[The Question]

Very true. I'm sure he'd be able to do it eventually, since he's on an inhabited planet. The main problem, however, would be finding Earth. And I don't know how adept at electronics and computer porgraming Bruce is, seeing as how both would be necesairy to locate Earth.

[TheCorpulent1]

Comic book geniuses are adept at everything. It doesn't matter what their field of specialization is. :p

[The Question]

Are you sure? I mean, Stark only ever shows in depth knowlege of engineering and some biology. I've never seen Bruce being that knowlegable with electronics or computers. The only Marvel genius who seems to be smart in multiple feilds is Reed (who's so damn smart he's probably a mutant in that regard, or his streatchyness increased his inteligence as explained in Marvel Mangaverse and Ultimate FF), but even then he mostly sticks to physics and engineering. His knowlege of biology, while impressive, seems to be a bit more lacking that his other feilds. He;s yet to come even close to curing Ben.

[TheCorpulent1]

It's not as prominent anymore, but a while ago it seemed like every scientist type could build pretty much anything for any purpose. Beast was a top-notch geneticist, for example, but he seemed to build lots of random junk just as well as an engineer. Anyway, I was just joking. The scientist types have become more specialized lately. One of the few things I liked in "The Other" was the fact that Tony and Hank wanted to consult Bruce Banner on Peter's radiation disease, since no one was better versed in all things nuclear and radioactive than Bruce (except Dr. Doom and Reed).

[gildea]

i think we're examining it a little too closely they wanted a catalyst for planet hulk its that simple and it's a reasonably sound idea.

Heck anything in comics falls down if you apply TOO much analysis over it.

Besides there could NEVER be a full proof method as hulk needs to get back SOMEHOW!

[KAD]

Are you sure? I mean, Stark only ever shows in depth knowlege of engineering and some biology. I've never seen Bruce being that knowlegable with electronics or computers. The only Marvel genius who seems to be smart in multiple feilds is Reed (who's so damn smart he's probably a mutant in that regard, or his streatchyness increased his inteligence as explained in Marvel Mangaverse and Ultimate FF), but even then he mostly sticks to physics and engineering. His knowlege of biology, while impressive, seems to be a bit more lacking that his other feilds. He;s yet to come even close to curing Ben.


I agree about Reed but Banner has always been a master of many fields.

Throughout his career he has built numerous Gamma devices and improved on others tech.

[gildea]

yeah heck he built the gamma bomb!!

[The Question]

I agree about Reed but Banner has always been a master of many fields.

Throughout his career he has built numerous Gamma devices and improved on others tech.


Doesn't mean he's a master of engineering. Just that he's familiar with devices used in nuclear physics and knows how to build them. I doubt he could design a working jet fighter.

[wobbly]

His knowlege of biology, while impressive, seems to be a bit more lacking that his other feilds. He;s yet to come even close to curing Ben.

Not entirely true. He has come up with a working cure a couple of times: The first I can recall would work but only on Ben's earlier lumpy form (so Ben went back in time and forced it on his younger self) and the second would have worked but for a powerful psychological block Ben had (so powerful even Franklin with his full powers couldn't get past it) but yes, when it comes to certain fields Reed himself admits there are specialists in them who are better (like when he called on Doc Ock for help when Sue was being blasted by radiation from their unborn child. Somewhat Ironically, for that he had also called on Banner's aid too).

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, Reed's had issues that he couldn't overcome on his own. I think Dr. Doom's pretty much the only scientist left who can do literally everything as well as or better than every other top-notch scientist.

[The Question]

I'm fairly certain that I'd count Doom as a mutant. He's so ****ing smart, he's probably got a super brain.

[TheCorpulent1]

He's probably smarter than the Leader, who does, in fact, have a super brain. :D

[rodhulk]

I wonder what Hulk will do when he returns from Planet Hulk... tie Mister Fantastic into a knot, perhaps?He already did once.

[rodhulk]

Maybe this has already been discussed, but I haven't been keeping up on this thread or any other Hulk ones.

Doesn't the Hulk have some kind of "sixth sense" or something that allows him to always find his way back to the place the accident originally occured at that gave him his powers? And if he does, don't Reed/Tony/Everyone know about this? And if they know about this, don't they know he always finds his way back? And if so, why did they bother with this?Hulk has that ability on earth. But I'm not sure if it remains when he's on another planet.

[rodhulk]

Give me an example FROM THE COMICS where Hulk topples a building that would be full of people and nobody got hurt. Wait... YOU CAN'T. YOU WON'T.

Everyone keeps mentioning him knocking over buildings full of people when it's never happened.

Bruce has mpd and Hulk is one of those personalities. (I know some of you know this) So without Banner there is no Hulk. Therefore it was just the Hulk's body. That's an important point because it shows this: Using the mindless Hulk as an example of how Savage Hulk is an uncontrolable killer is a fallacy. It DOESN'T prove your point. Quit using it to do so.The comics have 'never' shown Hulk killing people when buildings get destroyed by him. Sure we can assume it's possible, but it cannot be stated as a fact.

[TheCorpulent1]

I have a question about Planet Hulk. I was flipping through an issue earlier this week and I noticed some alien stone guy kicking the Hulk's ass, then befriending him. Was that guy a Kronan (or as they were originally known, the Stone Men from Saturn)?

[Mr. Green]

I have a question about Planet Hulk. I was flipping through an issue earlier this week and I noticed some alien stone guy kicking the Hulk's ass, then befriending him. Was that guy a Kronan (or as they were originally known, the Stone Men from Saturn)?
It doesn't say, but I think you may be right. I didn't notice the remarkable similarity. Good work!

Seriously, I haven't heard of a single person who HASN'T loved Planet Hulk so far. Every aspect of it is pretty much great. Check out the first two issues at least. It's worth it! :) :up:

[TheCorpulent1]

No, thanks. I'm not interested in the Hulk at all, really. Plus I'm already buying the Annihilation event in full, and that pretty much covers my quota for Marvel events.