deemar325 said:
Heres the thing, why burden the reader with more mini's when they can just carry on the story within the ongoing books it affects? Yeah 'Son of M' was a welcome suprise, but that to me was a fluke. Just like Marvel Zombies was a fluke, all the mini's do is eat a hole in our pockets more.
What happen in Son of M could have been done in Uncanny or adjectiveless X-men or better yet a book that's really suffering like Thing,Runaways,or MTU.
Luke would know how to get the common man (whose not a hick from Kentucky) to back him up, but I still see Luke as the likely betrayer to Cap. I see it coming for some reason maybe his new wife and child?
I hope to god, someone like RedSkull or Hell maybe Hate-Monger is behind this. I needs my villians.
Me too. Thankfully, Millar seems to be heeding the call as CIVIL WAR #5 seems "set to explore what the villians do", according to both new cover art released and some words Millar said in WIZARD 2 months ago. Apparently, Spider-Man's decision to reveal his identity publically, indeed, makes his enemies' jobs easier. He may end up being the "cationary tale" behind the anti-SHRA movement. I'd worry about MJ biting the bullet, as Joe Q seems to hate any superhero who is married (people are fearing Reed & Sue may be due for a divorce; Namor has his fingers crossed), but considering that SPIDER-MAN 3 is less than a year away, I know Marvel's too much of a ****e for their own movies to risk knocking her off at this point, despite Millar's perchant for shock value (at times).
But, as I said before, Cap's squad doing some "pre-emptive captures" of supervillians (Vulture, Grim Reaper, Trapster, and some 13 more that Hill acknowleged) may help stem the tide for a short while. Although what's interesting is that before CW, if Vulture whined about the government "is supposed to do something about these vigilantes", people'd just laughed; after CW, Vulture could have a good shot at suing the U.S. if he wanted, or "cutting a deal" with the feds to hunt down some superhero tail. Considering that the government in Marvel has been all but willing to throw "pardons" or "agent badges" at any ol' supervillian who agrees to play puppet, from the Thunderbolts to Mystique to Venom to even Sabretooth, I'd be disappointed if we didn't see some villians profitting from this shift in priorities for Marvel's gov't.
CaptainStacy said:
I could see Panther not choosing sides publicly, but secretly supporting one side on the sly. most likely Captain America's. as Panther and Iron Man have been at odds several times in the past.
And especially since Black Panther was apalled at Iron Man's "Illuminti" grouping and refused to be a member or allow them to gather in Wakanda. Surprise surprise, two members of that group (Stark and Reed) are leading the pro-SHRA movement.
On the other hand, in recent years, Black Panther has been made into more of a spy and "someone with an alterior motive for his own mission", not unlike Batman, than he was before (when he'd join the Avengers simply because of something "childish" like being impressed with Capt. America's honor or something). And he's and Marvel are also busy with Storm's wedding and convincing us that it "makes sense" by embellishing and retconning in elements to a MTU #100 backstory.
But as you say, it may be likely that Black Panther will side with Cap rather than Iron Man. As
deemar325 noted, many of Marvel's black heroes have already affiliated themselves with Cap's rebellion already. A shame that NEXTWAVE is making characters like Photon and Machine Man look like nothing but laughing stocks, because I'd be interested on some of their takes on SHRA.
roach said:
which is a major issue for me is why wasnt Captain America called to speak infront of the Senate???? How long did the Steroids in baseball hearings go for and they pretty much called everyone????? The US government is gonna outlaw superheroes and they dont call in their greatest hero. It's like if DC did the same and the only hero they called to testify was the Question.
The thing is, as
BrianWilly and I have noted a few times, the fundamental difference between DC and Marvel at this point is how superheroes are seen by the government and the public eye. In DC, longtime sun-drenched heroes are respected and honored; the gov't even taken some expenses to help RECOVER some in the wake of IC. Marvel, in contrast, tends to have a world that is suspicious and distrustful of superheroes; even the bright "sun-drenched" faces like the Avengers can be turned into outright criminals by even the smallest of circumstances (a factiod I am surprised that evil shapeshifters or disguise artists don't exploit more often; in this day and age, Chameloan could impersonate Cap and ruin his good name for YEARS). In DC, superheroes are celebrities in some fashion, which in some ways one could argue takes them out of the "average joe" arena. Marvel wants to keep their heroes, by and large, more "down to earth" and hence why they aren't afforded as much celebrity status or respect. Granted, considering anyone named Kennedy could get away with anything in America, the notion that someone who's been a longtime hero since WW2, captured countless villians and saved thousands of lives wouldn't be afforded at least SOME degree of respect politically is also a bit of a fantasy. But the medium requires some suspension of disbelief.
Marvel's also been committed to doing their universe different than DC does, for better or worse. That doesn't mean both can't shamelessly rip off the other to sell books, though.