• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Bought and Though: Roughneck Edition (aka May 24th)

Darthphere said:
I didnt get it but let me get this straight. In FF Death in the Family
Someone dies, but is resurrected in the same issue?


Not quite
in marvel going back in time to alter stuff creates and alternate time line, ie your time line won't be affected by whatever you change but you will create a NEW time line which will play out whatever changes you made. This theory of time was created in future imperfect i think. Its been shown before pretty recently as well in league of losers in mtu where they league beat the bad guys and created a time line where all the heroes didn't die but their own time line still happened. So sue is still dead in her timeline but it's just not the timeline that 616 will follow (the pathos being that johnny knew this when he went back).

Can't say I agree with nextwave being criticised as 'empty', it's a joyous explosion of superhero noise, it rekindles the absurdities of past comic ages and reminds us of the inherent joy in the sillyness of comics. If we can't mock the conventions of comics ourselves then we're doomed to being thought of as comic book guy from the simpsons.
 
gildea said:
Not quite
in marvel going back in time to alter stuff creates and alternate time line, ie your time line won't be affected by whatever you change but you will create a NEW time line which will play out whatever changes you made. This theory of time was created in future imperfect i think.
FYI: That concept was introduced in a FF annual by Lee/Kirby, in one of their infamous torturing of Ben as he tries to cure himself of being the Thing.

Originally Posted by THANOSRULES
She Hulk Number 8- First off I Hated this book. I am not regular reader and picked it up only for civil war and new Warriors crossovers. Lets eliminate the fact that the book played out like a bad TV legal thriller, and let me see how much i see marvel characters behaving utterly out of character. Jen disses captain america.Iron man disses a former teammate when he says Jen helped Starfox "get away" with sexual asssault (actually dissing 2 ex-teamates). This just isnt comics to me. If some of you like it and praise it as genius , fine so be it. As for me i'd rather tune into old matlock episodes.
1. Iron Man has been written as an utter ass since around Avengers: Disassembled
2. You didn't read the last 2 issues which were the Starfox arc. He broke out of jail and got teleported back home by his father, Mentor. The trial never finished, and Jen realized that Starfox used his power on her once to get her into bed. She proceeded to beat the crap out of him before he got teleported out. Again, Iron Man was just being an ass instead of asking Jen what happened, she was his defense attorney, not believing that an Avenger would sexually assault anyone. Of course, Iron Man has wiped out the world's knowledge of his secret ID, assaulted Avengers and Guardsmen during the Armor Wars to destroy tech based on his designs, and hired the Titanium Man to attack Congress as part of his agenda in a recent Amazing Spider-man story, so there's precedent for Avengers deliberately doing criminal activities.
3. Jen didn't slam Cap. She was pointing out that Cap was currently the most wanted man in America, thanks to SHIELD, and that reminding people of the Vance and Elgin's connection to Cap wouldn't help matters any, given how they were literally being burned in effigy after the Stamford thing.
4. She-Hulk's a legal book. A lot of the cases deal with really neat, wierd cases you get in the Marvel universe - Ghosts testifying at their own murder trial, Spider-Man suing Jameson for libel, Dr. Strange involved in a case to arrest someone for stealing the Wand of Wotomb, etc. The book's not necessarily for everyone, but I don't think you're giving it a fair shot based on a Civil War tie-in.
 
nextwavekoala.jpg
 
Shadowknight said:
FYI: That concept was introduced in a FF annual by Lee/Kirby, in one of their infamous torturing of Ben as he tries to cure himself of being the Thing.

ahhh that explains why in future imperfect its referenced as "a paper by reed richards says"

brilliant, cheers :)
 
supposedly, I think, but it's 110% skippable. And was not very good. and was overpriced.
 
I just flipped through it, but I thought it was being promoted as being part of the lead up to it
 
i dont understand why it got so much promotion. it was a simple throw away issue with no ramifications.
 
deemar325 said:
Darth that is spot on!

Dan Slott knows these characters, make no mistake about that. These newcomers who read these books only because they've seen the movie or cartoon are clueless.

Well I agree Darth has a good point. Notice I didnt say anything in my review about Slott's abilitys persay. For what it was, the writing was pretty good, but let's eliminate the legal aspect althogether and see this is yet again a "talking heads" kind of issue , of which IMO marvel is far too over run with.

And I do like these kinds of books..when used in moderation, but In so far as Marvel they are increasingly the norm.

And i hope you dont mean me when you reference people who've seen the movies and hop on. I am all comics man. Cut my arm and back issues of Avengers will ooze out.

I hated what was done to Starfox. A mirthful and enjoyable character , albeit cheesy, attacked by the new "grimm and gritty" mature hocus pocus of marvel plots. At some point the rapes, murders, and CSI type jargon gets cliche, I think that point is well past at marvel.

Then I see what DC is doing , and I shudder about marvel's future.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"