BOUGHT/THOUGHT 6/28 Spoilers To Come!

roach said:
Tony Stark has become evil to me and this is just the start


Yeah, we have JMS to thank for that, hes making him look like a big ******* in in ASM, with his manipulation. Tony seems a lot more likebale in the actual mini considering that he not even sure if hes doing the right thing.
 
I feel like the drunk Prodigy did well enough to make the Anti-Regs seem like social deviants anyway.
 
WOLVERINE25TH said:
Well, I was answerin' yer post but Darth interrupted the flow. Take from it what ya will.


The question I asked was would the US allow a foreign power to enforce it's own laws
 
roach said:
The question I asked was would the US allow a foreign power to enforce it's own laws


No, but you see SHIELD is pretty much an American agency now, since everyone except for Brubaker forgot that its an International Spy agency.
 
roach said:
And really I am expected to believe that the US would let the UN (Shield) go after criminals on US soil????

I think that Miller, and many other writers, have confused the 616 SHIELD with Ultimate SHIELD.
 
hippie_hunter said:
I think that Miller, and many other writers, have confused the 616 SHIELD with Ultimate SHIELD.


Pretty much, only Brubaker in Captain America presents SHIELD the way its suppsoed to be and to a lesser extent Joss Whedon.
 
Darthphere said:
No, but you see SHIELD is pretty much an American agency now, since everyone except for Brubaker forgot that its an International Spy agency.

yes an International Spy agency that reports to the UN
 
The whole thing suffers from what Marvel's biggest problem is these days IMO, and that is:

Dropping entire storylines in our laps and making us accept them as fact with no build up to explain them. Most of the time, the build up is told in fabricated flashbacks that are shoehorned into continuity.

Everytime it happens (The Other, Sins Past, The Illuminati, Civil War), I just shrug my shoulders and wonder a) where the hell it came from and b) why I should give a crap.
 
the whole marketing behind the story is who's side will you be on. So far I have seen very little to make me as a reader pick the Pro-registration side. Everyone on the Pro side is presented as a major scumbag or stupid.
 
roach said:
the whole marketing behind the story is who's side will you be on. So far I have seen very little to make me as a reader pick the Pro-registration side. Everyone on the Pro side is presented as a major scumbag or stupid.
Its not as extremist as ULTIMATES 2 has been, but yes, nearly everything that is written for CW seems to point the reader clearly in support of the anti-SHRA camp, which is the obvious Liberal point. But is this a surprise? Marvel is obviously Liberal, as are DC and most comics/movies/tv shows in general, and I doubt they try to hide this. If the SHRA remains indefinately, it changes Marvel's Universe in such a way that even the worst editorial department possible wouldn't fathom making it permanent. And to be fair, JMS is a little less one-sided in his stories than even a "withstrained" Mark Millar and Paul Jenkins have been with CIVIL WAR and FRONLINE, respectively.

Perhaps the problem is that Marvel billed early solicts as "not clearly taking one side" when they very clearly are, and that was a mistake on their part. Its also not their first miscommunication hassle they've had and it usually frustrates me when they don't learn from their own mistakes, and they're being paid to. If you advertise something as one thing, and you get another, the audience feels "cheated" and that is not a good feeling to evoke (the FANTASTIC FOUR: DEATH IN THE FAMILY special illustrates this). On the other hand, one could argue DC comics lately haven't been nearly as deceptive, and they're seeing increased success. Frankly, if Marvel's ediorial staff were more honest about some things, despite how "black and white" that may make things seem, they'd be viewed better. As it is, "mistrust" in what Marvel says led to an "underpreforming" DEADLY GENESIS, but Marvel missed the point of why their solicts were underestimated or disbelieved, and instead felt it was because they lacked spoilers. Its not that. Its simply a "cry wolf" phenomina. They claimed a dozen times in the past that pointless X-Men mini's were "big", and retailers overordered them. So when one comes across that actually IS big, well, the retailers had learned not to bite as deeply, and Marvel noticed, but for the wrong reason.
 
Darthphere said:
Ironic, since the SHRA is a liberal act.
Actually, yes, since it is an act that seeks to add to the government payroll and in effect "expand" gov't into another area, which is usually depicted as a Liberal philosophy.

But the issue isn't that. CW is a "security vs. personal freedom" parable, which ignores the fact that yes, allowing unregistered vigilantes to roam about makes no sense in the real world, but is fundamental to the genre of comic book superheroes.
 
roach said:
the whole marketing behind the story is who's side will you be on. So far I have seen very little to make me as a reader pick the Pro-registration side. Everyone on the Pro side is presented as a major scumbag or stupid.


Harsh on spidey.
 
WOLVERINE25TH said:
Right, which means we need Cap ***** slapping pro-registration bums.

He's already started in New Avengers # 21. He ***** slapped Pym with his shield.
 
SpideyInATree said:
He's already started in New Avengers # 21. He ***** slapped Pym with his shield.

Most people dont need a SHRA to justify hitting Pym.
 
I guess he'll need a really big bag of ice.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"