Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Comic Characters who HAVE shown up in Agents of SHIELD

[cph9fa]

I just went back and relistened to that part of the episode. It's funny... I could've sworn they said something about possession when I listened to it the first time, but you're right: they don't. Here's the exact dialog (between Fitz, Simmons, and Mack):

S: They call it "La Garita del Diablo" -- the Devil's Sentry.
F: Delightful.
S: Yeah. The fort was built in the 18th century and helped repel some of our British ancestors when they tried to invade the island. But this particular guard tower was built in 1634, and is well-known as being haunted.

(The covering to the pit collapses.)

M: Now that's a deep hole.
F: And haunted, apparently. Not scared of ghosts, though, are you Mac?
M: Me? Of course not. But, uh... what was that story?
S: The story is several of the guards went missing in the middle of the night from this tower, never to be seen again. They simply vanished. It's all preposterous, really.
M: Yeah. About as preposterous as an alien city.

So now I'm less certain that Mack is indeed meant to be a real Kree Sentry. I'll add a "maybe" to my list. I still think its a good possibility, given that's his possession was caused by Kree technology to guard their outpost, but its not as clear a case as I thought. (At any rate, I think there's a better case to be made for this than for "Scorch")

 

[Mike Murdock]

I wasn't intending to reignite that debate. The soldiers disappearing is almost certainly connected to Mac's situation. The legend was the Devil's Sentry. Given that, it's at least an homage to the Kree Sentry. Whether an homage is the same as including it, though, is a different question.

 

[Pokkle]

Simmons, Fitz and May must be on the list now.

 

[Uskok]

Simmons, Fitz and May must be on the list now.

Coulson, Simmons, Fitz and May first appeared in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not in the comics. Therefore, they should be on the list of AoS characters who have shown up in the comics, not the other way around.

 

[SirStrangefolk]

Coulson, Simmons, Fitz and May first appeared in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not in the comics. Therefore, they should be on the list of AoS characters who have shown up in the comics, not the other way around.

So they should be on the list as Canon Immigrant. How will this be done if the blind guy turns out to be Reader, though? While he appeared in the comics first, there is so little time between his introduction in both mediums, he could've been created for either, or might even always have been intended to be a character both on TV and in the comics from creation. Will he still count as original to the comics just because that was released earlier?

 

[Pokkle]

It is like Harley Quinn, she first appeared in the Batman animated series but now she is a famous comic character.

 

[Mike Murdock]

So they should be on the list as Canon Immigrant. How will this be done if the blind guy turns out to be Reader, though? While he appeared in the comics first, there is so little time between his introduction in both mediums, he could've been created for either, or might even always have been intended to be a character both on TV and in the comics from creation. Will he still count as original to the comics just because that was released earlier?

Keep in simple. Where they appeared first is what counts. Reader appeared in the comics first so he is credited that way. Leo Fitz appeared on the show first (and frankly clearly was created for the show) so he gets credited that way.

 

[Mr. Immortal]

I'm still really disappointed with how they handled Absorbing Man. One of the greatest villains in Marvel who's great in stories for both street levelers and bricks and they really jobbed him.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I don't agree. I thought he came off as awesome. They used his powers creatively, he was intimidating, and they even incorporated his flail into it. I thought he was the first successful individual comic villain incorporated into the show.

 

[Mr. Immortal]

I don't agree. I thought he came off as awesome. They used his powers creatively, he was intimidating, and they even incorporated his flail into it. I thought he was the first successful individual comic villain incorporated into the show.

He was defeated in a really lame way, wasn't really necessary at all, and then completely disappeared. He really could have been a Dragon in one of the movies but instead he just some exposition mook in a tv show. Good for you if you liked his appearance but I can't imagine a bigger waste of such an awesome character.

 

[Mike Murdock]

He wasn't going to appear in a movie, though, because the odds of a Hulk movie are slim and he's not going to be threat to all the Avengers combined.

He was the main threat for two episodes, killed two agents, set up the obelisk as a danger while still being a danger to himself. So I disagree about not being necessary unless you think no character is necessary because something else could theoretically have replaced them.

I agree about the defeat. Hopefully he'll come back. But of course he completely disappeared after. He was the main antagonist for two episodes, not the entire season.

 

[metaphysician]

He was defeated in a really lame way, wasn't really necessary at all, and then completely disappeared. He really could have been a Dragon in one of the movies but instead he just some exposition mook in a tv show. Good for you if you liked his appearance but I can't imagine a bigger waste of such an awesome character.

And, we see the core of the objection. TV being an intrinsically inferior medium, and all.

Creel was fine. He kicked their asses pretty badly, was actually smart, and got defeated in a way that he could come back at any time. Seems like a good villain usage to me.

 

[OB12]

I agree that Creel was portrayed well. He was intimidating and he caused some damage. To me, he would be a character that could have some crossover appeal in the Netflix series of shows, maybe as henchman for the Kingpin or something.

 

[Mr. Immortal]

I don't think TV is inferior, I think it's actually superior in pretty much every way except the lack of budget. The longer run times allow for more storytelling and deeper character arcs.

I think what it boils down to is I just like the character more than you guys it seems. He deserved better than being relegated to monster-of-the-week status.

 

[Mike Murdock]

He got a two-parter which was a first on the show. To me, that helped set him up as something more.

 

[seahammer]

I would love it if we could get an appearance from the Warriors Three when Sif showed up, like Dugan and Morita showed up with Peggy Carter in the season opener.

 

[Jedi Arrow]

I would love it if we could get an appearance from the Warriors Three when Sif showed up, like Dugan and Morita showed up with Peggy Carter in the season opener.

Would Zachary Levi or Josh Dallas play Fandrall? Surely as an ABC show, they could get Dallas over from the set of OUAT to do one episode of AOS.

Seriously, though, recasting Fandrall in Thor 2 always bugged me a bit; I loved Dallas in the role. No offense to Levi, of course, and I understand why they did it (Dallas being busy with OUAT and all), but Dallas had the part first and I think he fit the look better.

 

[Mike Murdock]

The only reason Dallas had the part in the first place was because Levi had a scheduling issue. Thor 2 got the guy they originally wanted.