Do you like the Abominations new look?

[thegameq]

Well no offense to the old greats, but have you ever gone back to read a Stan Lee comic?

Admittedly, I didn't grow up on him. But the guy can't write for beans.

The characters a brilliant, but the writing was always uninspired.

Obviously you don't know what it's like to write a story. You can ALWAYS find something to improve on.

Rather than Marvel telling these writers to start from scratch and erase everything 616 has established (as you imply.)

They simply said "Oh? You want to take your own spin on it... fine, here's an alternate reality, take your own test drive with these characters. Just leave 616 alone."

Marvel did comic fans a favor by creating the Ultimates so that we could get a fresh take WITHOUT erasing the past as well as keep the established story lines we've had for 40+ years.

And even the amazing comic book films out there took liberties, and I think they ALWAYS should. If I want the old stories, I'll read them. I have them. I want new and fresh while staying RESPECTFUL to the source material. By that I don't mean changing a look here or there, I mean changing themes.

Like in Ang's Hulk when Banner's character was loving the "release" of the Hulk, eck. Totally goes against the theme of the struggle.

Or like Ultimate Hulk, they kept the struggle, but screwed with the character far more than TIH is doing to Abomination. Making him a sex crazed maniac cannibal... THAT is when I hate the Ultimates... not when Peter Parker is battling a Hulk like Green Goblin with fire powers.

Though I'm not to fond of the Ultimate line of books, in some cases, the liberties they've taken aren't to far off from the characters 616 center. Then you have extreme cases such as the Hulk. Frankly, I think Marvel is running out of ideas for the Hulk.

 

[wobbly]

Told you to not think that he was going to be any different from the figure.

And out of all things to complain about.... the nakedness is not one I'd focus on. Abomination was our old scaled faced friend in "Ultimate Destruction" but was naked, and not once did I really stop look at the screen and go "OMG, HE'S NAKED!!! UGH, Ruined."

In any case, that mega block is the most hilarious piece of plastic I've ever seen.

Bit of a difference between a video game and movie....

Thing is, the movie will be showing Bonsky's change from man to monster, so in showing him naked as the monster (why?) they will bizarrely be castrating him too. It might not ruin anything, but I'm telling you now that will not go un-noticed.

 

[Nathan]

Heh, I can already hear the people in the theater thinking, "Ok, where did his balls go?"

 

[wobbly]

Heh, I can already hear the people in the theater thinking, "Ok, where did his balls go?"

This is the reason why the comics generally avoid showing transformed Characters naked (even the Silver Surfer originally wore shorts): it's better to have the odd person wonder what happened downstairs (like with the Hulk or the Thing) than to actually go and bloody well show them.

 

[FrostBite]

Bit of a difference between a video game and movie....

Thing is, the movie will be showing Bonsky's change from man to monster, so in showing him naked as the monster (why?) they will bizarrely be castrating him too. It might not ruin anything, but I'm telling you now that will not go un-noticed.

As my interest is slowly dwindling in my favorite past time (games) because of the fact they are becoming more and more movie like and less and less like games... I couldn't disagree more. His nakedness is not going to be a problem for anyone. (Besides maybe you and some others.)

Now as for him being brown, and skeletal? You got yourself a legitimate complaint there coming from a fan stand point.

And I am telling you it WILL go unnoticed (nakedness I mean.) If his toes can fuse together, his genitalia can mysteriously disappear. I don't know why you think a general public whose going to see a man who transformers into a green monstrous alter-ego after being exposed to gamma is going to care about a naked monster.

Your logic there is making about as much sense as "Fish Look won't work" or "Hulk shouldn't talk because it's cheesy." This is a movie, based after a comic... two mediums that never need to make sense. EVER. Real world doesn't apply here, and there for, Abomination doesn't need to pee.

Heck how do we know, theres not some unexplained way that his now transformed body recycles it's food never needing to excrete waste? There you go, I just made an explanation, just as it would have been easy to explain Reptile Abomination.

 

[FrostBite]

This is the reason why the comics generally avoid showing transformed Characters naked (even the Silver Surfer originally wore shorts): it's better to have the odd person wonder what happened downstairs (like with the Hulk or the Thing) than to actually go and bloody well show them.

And yet not one person in the general audience character about his nakedness in the theater... who would have thought!? (They did care it was a crappy movie though.)

 

[wobbly]

And I am telling you it WILL go unnoticed (nakedness I mean.) If his toes can fuse together, his genitalia can mysteriously disappear. I don't know why you think a general public whose going to see a man who transformers into a green monstrous alter-ego after being exposed to gamma is going to care about a naked monster.

I didn't say they'd care (as in object or applaud one way or another), but they bloody well will notice. Your kidding yourself if you think the audience will simply not notice the obvious absence of any genitalia in a naked male character.

As regards castrating/emasculating Blonsky making sense or not... I didnt cite that as a complaint so I'm not going to argue for something I never mentioned in the first place.

 

[wobbly]

And yet not one person in the general audience character about his nakedness in the theater... who would have thought!? (They did care it was a crappy movie though.)

Actually, I did get asked by a couple of non comic fans I know what his deal was...

I told them what I'll tell you now: Silver Surfer is an alien to begin with. His dick could be in his fingers for all we know.

 

[FrostBite]

I didn't say they'd care (as in object or applaud one way or another), but they bloody well will notice. Your kidding yourself if you think the audience will simply not notice the obvious absence of any genitalia in a naked male character.

As regards castrating/emasculating Blonsky making sense or not... I didnt cite that as a complaint so I'm not going to argue for something I never mentioned in the first place.

Well I apologize for assuming it was a complaint, it came off that way in my reading, but I just misunderstood. Sorry about that.

I don't know, maybe some people will. But never in my life have I heard someone notice that about one of these films. When I went with a group of people to Silver Surfer none where going "Man... you know what I just noticed?.... Where the heck is his ****?" Even though none of the people I went with were comic fans who were used to his nakedness.

Even though we all admittedly chuckled at "Rockslide."

Edit: I LOL'd hard at the "dick in fingers."

 

[thegameq]

Though I'll agree with you on the realism aspect, (hence my disdain for the Nolan-verse of Batman) and the fact he shouldn't have been changed... I am quite enjoying the first draft of the script far more than Ang's film. I wouldn't say theres a lack of creativity in it.

Though, truly there are many references to Bruce Jones' run. (Being on the run, meditation.)

So once again I'll ask since I have not read past "Return of the Monster" (which I enjoyed.) Yet no body ever seems to want to answer me... What do fans hate about Bruce Jones, so that I don't waste my money on the other volumes?

I wasn't speaking in direct relation to the TIH FB, as I have refrained from reading the script. Moreso in general when it comes to these films and the people in charge if making them.

There just seems to be something very lacking with these films in general and it's rare when they actually get it right. Though Raimi made a few changes here and there it was undeniably Spider-man. It felt like Spider-man. I really believe it's absolutely crucial that the director doing these films must understand and know the material almost as well as we do or it will show in the end product, and it usually does. When that happens the overall product just seems....off.

My greatest fear for TIH is that it will have that "off" feeling. Like something just doesn't feel right or off kilter.

It's like Nolan's version of Batman. Despite the few nods towards the comics and fans, the overall product is far to conservative. It just doesn't feel like Batman.

 

[FrostBite]

I wasn't speaking in direct relation to the TIH FB, as I have refrained from reading the script. Moreso in general when it comes to these films and the people in charge if making them.

There just seems to be something very lacking with these films in general and it's rare when they actually get it right. Though Raimi made a few changes here and there it was undeniably Spider-man. It felt like Spider-man. I really believe it's absolutely crucial that the director doing these films must understand and know the material almost as well as we do or it will show in the end product, and it usually does. When that happens the overall product just seems....off.

My greatest fear for TIH is that it will have that "off" feeling. Like something just doesn't feel right or off kilter.

It's like Nolan's version of Batman. Despite the few nods towards the comics and fans, the overall product is far to conservative. It just doesn't feel like Batman.

Weird thing is to me... it didn't... and did. Without Parker's quick wit and humor the protagonist just felt like a depressed teenage nerd for 3 straight movies. (I thought it would change by the second.)

But Raimi despite all of those changes as you said, some how made it FEEL like Spider-man, it FELT like a comic book at times.

I understand that "off kilter-conservative" feeling you have. Most wouldn't understand our cries of not "feeling" like batman though as it was truly a fantastic film.

Form what I have read so far (only to page 30, as I don't want to know the ENTIRE film.) I like what I am seeing, and in no way does it seem to conservative. In fact it's much more upbeat and faster paced than the previous.

 

[thegameq]

Weird thing is to me... it didn't... and did. Without Parker's quick wit and humor the protagonist just felt like a depressed teenage nerd for 3 straight movies. (I thought it would change by the second.)

But Raimi despite all of those changes as you said, some how made it FEEL like Spider-man, it FELT like a comic book at times.

I understand that "off kilter-conservative" feeling you have. Most wouldn't understand our cries of not "feeling" like batman though as it was truly a fantastic film.

Form what I have read so far (only to page 30, as I don't want to know the ENTIRE film.) I like what I am seeing, and in no way does it seem to conservative. In fact it's much more upbeat and faster paced than the previous.

Personally, for me, I think it's the tv/comicbook aspect that seems off kilter, as I am trying to come to grips with how they will blend the two worlds: 50/50, 75/25, etc.

I just want it to "feel" like the Hulk from the comics. Abomination, though a huge disappointment, I feel myself already begining to write him off as a loss.

 

[sean61675]

Though I'm not to fond of the Ultimate line of books, in some cases, the liberties they've taken aren't to far off from the characters 616 center. Then you have extreme cases such as the Hulk. Frankly, I think Marvel is running out of ideas for the Hulk.

The ultimate Hulk is a what & does what?? WTH?!?! Please explain. I haven't read much of the Ultimates at all.

 

[FrostBite]

The ultimate Hulk is a what & does what?? WTH?!?! Please explain. I haven't read much of the Ultimates at all.

Think you meant to quote me .

Ultimate Hulk was a retelling in the worst way. I love many retellings, but this one... not so much.

As Hulk is not just angry... but completely and utterly testosterone driven in the Ultimate books. Such as rampaging through town wanting to RAPE Betty, and KILL Freddy Prinze Jr. (Must admit I chuckled at that.)

Even biting an alien-nazi-leader in half. Go figure!

 

[Bubonic]

Christ..they aint seriously making him naked are they?

I guess radiation could make your balls and wang fall off...

Told you to not think that he was going to be any different from the figure.

And out of all things to complain about.... the nakedness is not one I'd focus on. Abomination was our old scaled faced friend in "Ultimate Destruction" but was naked, and not once did I really stop look at the screen and go "OMG, HE'S NAKED!!! UGH, Ruined."

In any case, that mega block is the most hilarious piece of plastic I've ever seen.

I just rather him have pants, I think it's stupid to have his parts dematerialize in order to accommodates people's sensibilities.
I suppose they'll be an explanation, his ribs are exposed, he does seem zombyish, he has no ears... So I guess his extremities are rotted off.

Got to agree on how hilarious that lego looks.

Bit of a difference between a video game and movie....

Thing is, the movie will be showing Bonsky's change from man to monster, so in showing him naked as the monster (why?) they will bizarrely be castrating him too. It might not ruin anything, but I'm telling you now that will not go un-noticed.

That's the thing, during transformations I can understand people getting extra features, but for vital parts to just dissapear is a bit weird.

 

[FrostBite]

I guess radiation could make your balls and wang fall off...



I just rather him have pants, I think it's stupid to have his parts dematerialize in order to accommodates people's sensibilities.
I suppose they'll be an explanation, his ribs are exposed, he does seem zombyish, he has no ears... So I guess his extremities are rotted off.

Got to agree on how hilarious that lego looks.

Chances are I doubt it'll be explained. It'll probably just be -Morph- -rampage-.

I also doubt the lack of pants thing has anything to do with peoples sensibilities, probably just didn't want short shorts on that design.

I have a feeling that he is not as "clean" looking and more rotted than the Hulk... is...

Spoiler

I believe he keeps pumping himself with a new super soldier type thing, and doesn't transform until Banners blood is in his body. I have a feeling it's a messy concoction is that body of Blonsky's.

Instead of Banner's serum + gamma = Hulk, he gets New Serum + Gamma infected blood (no direct exposure) = Abomination

Just a thought though, who knows.

 

[Kirmit]

I never really noticed the lack of genitalia on the figure and I doubt I'll be looking in the movie, I'll be far more engrossed in the action between abomb and hulk t: .

 

[Bubonic]

Well, it might make it seem like I'm overly concerned with monster junks, really it's just a matter of me being upset by silly things like that.
But if abom is all nasty, drippy, and rotting looking maybe it'll conceal that.

 

[Cracker Jack]

The abomination invades local pool

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I saw this pic and thought i'd post it. It's a megablok of Abomination...and he looks far darker and greenish than the original figure we saw from the other figure.

Think of it what you will.

Thats even worse than the toy pic, this is diabolical!

 

[Nathan]

Yeah, would it have been really so hard to at least give us something like Hulk Ultimate Destruction? He doesn't look 100% like comic Abomination either. But at least he doesn't look like ass.

 

[Kirmit]

I agree, that looks terrible, straight from a zombie movie, hopefully he'll look great onscreen .

 

[Cracker Jack]

Here's a clearer look at the toy

 

[Kirmit]

I don't see any ears on that thing......mind you I don't see any eyes either lol.

 

[Cracker Jack]

But that look is sooooooooooooooooo much better than the comic version

Look down, in the bowl, it's a log, it's a floater, no it's

TURD MAN