Rocket Raccoon just fared better against Gladiator than the combined Shi'ar and Kree armies in a "serious" comic, so I'm not sure what your point was there. How is the image of a talking raccoon holding Gladiator off with a mop any better than Lockjaw using the Infinity Gems to beat Thanos? Is anyone going to have a problem taking Gladiator seriously again? No because it's one isolated instance that actually does make sense given his powers and limitations, just like this instance in Pet Avengers with Thanos.
There's one flaw in this argument. Gladiator didn't lose. He figured out he was being tricked, and smacked Rocket and Rach down rather easily and quickly. That was why the scene worked, while still being funny, why it was accurate, and why it didn't lesson Kallark's "nasty" meter.
TheCorpulent1 said:
Speaking of Tippy Toe, Squirrel Girl beat Thanos as well, yet people still managed to take Thanos seriously for years afterward.
I don't think everyone took that scene seriously, since this was back when Dan Slott was still in his niche as "funny guy" before his run on AVENGERS: THE INITIATIVE.
TheCorpulent1 said:
The Infinity Gems were somehow scattered again. Reed actually goes to Black Bolt because he thought he'd found one in Attilan (the Mind Gem, which Lockjaw swallows, thus beginning the whole Pet Avengers adventure). A small retcon, I suppose, but it's 1) not the first time the Infinity Gems were scattered after appearing to be in good hands, and 2) certainly no worse than the Illuminati themselves suddenly possessing them when they were supposedly either scattered about the cosmos or inert or in the Ultraverse (I don't even remember which one anymore, they go missing so often).
The Illuminati, or at least Reed, also apparently took the Soul Gem from Adam Warlock, which drove him a bit batty for a while in ANNIHILATION CONQUEST.
Still, the idea of a bunch of animals getting their hands on the Infinity Gems which can only destroy the entire universe is a bit much. Granted, so was giving one to Pip the Troll. Way to go, Adam.
TheCorpulent1 said:
Your argument still basically boils down to "the Pet Avengers are stupid so anything that happens in their comic shouldn't be taken seriously and if Thanos appeared, he was played as a stupid version of himself." Which just isn't true, since everything in the comic, while certainly played for laughs, makes sense with continuity, maybe requiring a couple of minor retcons at most--no worse than iHerc, which is also played for laughs a lot.
Incredible Hercules isn't a straight comedy book, though. It has elements of drama and emotion to it as well. It also to the best of my memory hasn't had a villain job to so completely arbitrary a force than a bunch of pets stumbling onto the strongest weapons in creation. No, I admit I don't read the book. It just sounded so bizarre from your review I couldn't help but have an opinion on it. Losing to Hercules or Cho isn't a bad defeat for anyone. Losing to, say, MJ's Aunt Anna who happened to have her frying pan charged with cosmic energy? That would be a ridiculous defeat for someone, and it's ability to work would depend on who.
Thanos shouldn't lose to animals. The idea that anyone can beat anyone with such arbitrary means takes some of the drama out of comics. "Oh, well, Forbush Man could beat the Stranger if he happened to stumble upon the Cosmic Cube". When I read solicits I was quite concerned about the idea of a big league villain losing to what is basically a comedy force. I don't think it's the right approach.
For the life of me I can't think of one villain who is a serious, A-List occasional line wide threat who ever recovered rep from losing to a comedy team like a bunch of animals or pets or something. It's like Sabretooth losing to Heathcliff (who also was part of STAR Comics; I had a subscription in the 80's when I was a wee lad), regardless of how or why, and I actually have fondness for Heathcliff. Would I or anyone else take Creed seriously again? No. Or at least it would be very difficult. You'll notice it has been quite a few years since anyone mentioned that Dr. Doom supposedly
really lost to Squirrel Girl.
Thanos is now the guy who lost to pets to me. Which will make for a chuckle worthy statement to some of my friends when we hang out, but it won't do any future stories with him any favors. PET AVENGERS probably should have stuck to a villain more deserving of such a defeat, to lose to animals. And there are plenty. But maybe next time, since there will be a sequel. I'd actually buy it if they promised Throg would lead the team against Black Talon, a summoned mystical Chicken-Cow from the 'Ringo run of ASM and a revived Gamecock forming the "dreaded" Tri-Foul of Terror. Or something. But Thanos? Eh, not as good a play.
