The Strongest In The Marvel Universe?

[shapeshifter]

his was more of a question. he asked why I saw a connection. you came out and said that he was not. It seems like you just shut me down.

 

[JackRembrandt]

his was more of a question. he asked why I saw a connection. you came out and said that he was not. It seems like you just shut me down.

My apologies. I didn't (and still don't) see the connection between Wonder Man and Superman.

 

[Whirlysplat]

My apologies. I didn't (and still don't) see the connection between Wonder Man and Superman.

Well done Jack, now you're being polite to people. All the internet tough guy "buddy" stuff really goes nowhere.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

You're basing how difficult or not Strange is to write on how many cancelled titles he's had and how many bad stories he's had. Do you know how many cancelled titles Spider-Man has? Or how many bad stories he's had? LOTS. And he's easy to get right.

That's how your logic is flawed. I mean, seriously. Using sales as a basis for your argument? That's like saying that because The Loners aren't getting picked up for an ongoing, that must mean it's because they're hard to write.

I said he wouldn't have cancelled titles, meaning he has NO titles of his own, past little minis here and there, or minis he is part of.

Spider-Man has three titles all to himself, plus a slew of minis, and titles that were cancelled in favour of other titles of his own. That's not a comparison to make.

Unless you're just going by a technicality.

But you still put in a comparison value I didn't use (still), and said I used it.

The comparison value I used was the body of work they have. In comparison to Spider-Man (since you're bent on using him), Spider-Man has a SLEW of great stories (considered by many fans), well over the 50% threshhold, with hundreds more comics than Doctor Strange. So the failure rate is rather low for Spider-Man. Doctor Strange doesn't fare so well. With probably a few hundred titles to his name, his general stories have been horrible (or at least bad), with but a FEW stories of his own to call good (I'll even say arcs), and the rest of the good "Doctor Strange" stories, have been, in fact, stories about general team ups that he is simply part of, and not even really all that focused on (Though he did get some focus in the last Defender's mini).

The comparison you gave for me, saying I used it, was a quantifiable one. That if they have more than apparently a dozen or so bad stories, they instantly become hard to write. Now, maybe I just wasn't clear (I didn't think it was that clear, I just sort of assumed you knew that when most people talk about this stuff, they mean bodies of work altogether), maybe I should have presented some sort of comparison value the first time.

Under any rate, I don't care IF you use a comparison rate to explain what I/you/anybody says, just don't use one that I didn't use, and then say that I used it when it was that ambiguous.

 

[shapeshifter]

My apologies. I didn't (and still don't) see the connection between Wonder Man and Superman.

its alright. I just thought that might be why he got on your case.
I just see the similarity mostly in his appearance. Dark Haired strongman. the red eyes kind of remind me of supes too.
I'm not the only one either check this link out.
http://www.fortunecity.com/athena/power/955/

 

[yahman]

s.
Wait till more individual stories are written. It may be the MAX route is the only way to go for him. With a Miracleman type approach.

Id love to see Warren Ellis write something on those lines. His Superman depiction in JLA classified makes me wish he'd write big blue. A max serries would be Amazing !

 

[Whirlysplat]

Id love to see Warren Ellis write something on those lines. His Superman depiction in JLA classified makes me wish he'd write big blue. A max serries would be Amazing !

Both ideas sound perfect to me Yahs.

 

[Phenomenal]

I read WWH #5 and I must say that fight was kind of weak. Sentry and hulk slugging it out and making the city blocks quake was kind of cool but it wasn't all that. Yet all and all The Satelite takes the Hulk out in the end.

So, Tony's Tech > Sentry, Hulk, X-men, Strange/Zom, Black Bolt, etc etc.

 

[JackRembrandt]

I said he wouldn't have cancelled titles, meaning he has NO titles of his own, past little minis here and there, or minis he is part of.

Does that mean that Nick Fury is hard to write? He doesn't have any books all to himself either. It's a weak argument, and you know it.

Spider-Man has three titles all to himself, plus a slew of minis, and titles that were cancelled in favour of other titles of his own. That's not a comparison to make.

Unless you're just going by a technicality.

Sure, it is. Of any Marvel hero, Pete's probably got the most amount of cancelled books to his name.

But you still put in a comparison value I didn't use (still), and said I used it.

The comparison value I used was the body of work they have. In comparison to Spider-Man (since you're bent on using him), Spider-Man has a SLEW of great stories (considered by many fans), well over the 50% threshhold, with hundreds more comics than Doctor Strange. So the failure rate is rather low for Spider-Man. Doctor Strange doesn't fare so well. With probably a few hundred titles to his name, his general stories have been horrible (or at least bad), with but a FEW stories of his own to call good (I'll even say arcs), and the rest of the good "Doctor Strange" stories, have been, in fact, stories about general team ups that he is simply part of, and not even really all that focused on (Though he did get some focus in the last Defender's mini).

Even now, you're comparing the amount of stories each character has had rather then explaining why it is that you think Dr. Strange is a tough nut to crack.

The comparison you gave for me, saying I used it, was a quantifiable one. That if they have more than apparently a dozen or so bad stories, they instantly become hard to write. Now, maybe I just wasn't clear (I didn't think it was that clear, I just sort of assumed you knew that when most people talk about this stuff, they mean bodies of work altogether), maybe I should have presented some sort of comparison value the first time.

Under any rate, I don't care IF you use a comparison rate to explain what I/you/anybody says, just don't use one that I didn't use, and then say that I used it when it was that ambiguous.

What you're doing, an old rhetoric professor of mine would call "flapping". That is, you're not really addressing what I said, instead going for how I said it.

The bottom line is that Strange is no more hard to write then any other Marvel character. His stories (on the whole), like Spider-Man's past couple of years, have been less then stellar. You're trying to say that somehow, the quality of the story and the difficulties of writing said story are somehow related. That's where you lose me. I see it as just another bad story.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Does that mean that Nick Fury is hard to write? He doesn't have any books all to himself either. It's a weak argument, and you know it.

Yes, actually. How many awesome super great stories do you know of Fury? It's a perfectly fine argument.

Sure, it is. Of any Marvel hero, Pete's probably got the most amount of cancelled books to his name.

And, like I said, also has three solo titles, all of which, had cancelled books leading to said titles. Details.

Even now, you're comparing the amount of stories each character has had rather then explaining why it is that you think Dr. Strange is a tough nut to crack.

And? That would be a good explanation about how difficult it is to write Strange. I don't know if you want some particle theory level answer for it.

What you're doing, an old rhetoric professor of mine would call "flapping". That is, you're not really addressing what I said, instead going for how I said it.

The bottom line is that Strange is no more hard to write then any other Marvel character. His stories (on the whole), like Spider-Man's past couple of years, have been less then stellar. You're trying to say that somehow, the quality of the story and the difficulties of writing said story are somehow related. That's where you lose me. I see it as just another bad story.

You're actually not getting it. I did address what you SAID about me. I didn't address your point, as there is no real point to do it. You'll continue to think, no matter what, what you want, without change. That is fine with me. All you did was sort of alter what I said, and adapted it for your argument, which is fine on a technicality standpoint.

His stories have, for the VAST majority, been subpar to junk, where Spider-Man has had several good stories, except for recently.

Because, in all truth, if you have a good story, you have good writing. They're mutually exclusive. You can't have bad writing, and it somehow be a good story. And likewise, you can't have a good story, and have it somehow come from bad writing.

If a story is difficult to write, and the writer isn't up to the task, it's most likely going to be bad. Good example: Civil War. The classic tale of a story that could. Outsold like crazy, because, in all truth, it was considered to be a good story, if it had bad characterization. But it was a mishandled story, as many have agreed there was WAY better to be done with it. The writing was off, but not bad.

Infinite Crisis would be another.


Plus, if anybody was going for how someone said something, over what someone said, I just somehow doubt I'm the guilty party.

Let's put it in baseline. As discussed with others, it is a point of view question. You believe Strange isn't hard to write. Many others will just flat out disagree, as many complain about the inconsistency of Strange himself from book to book, even within his own comics. The -reason- this turned into what it was, was because I gave a comparison value that apparently didn't get across, you altered it to one that worked for your argument, and I corrected it, and now you're just kind of going with the argument you altered, rather than the one I tried putting back on course (aka, the rebuttle I presented).


And in all truth, I freaking promised Twy I wouldn't argue when I got back to America, and here I am. Arguing. x.x

Bleh, think what you want. If you believe you "won", go for it. Your opinions are your own, and I really don't aim to change them. If you think that any character is simply a pallett swap of another, giving them the same level of difficulty to write, then, by all means, go for it.

As for me, I think I'm going to actually try to sustain my promise.

 

[JackRembrandt]

Yes, actually. How many awesome super great stories do you know of Fury? It's a perfectly fine argument.

Um...TONS. Basically any story with Fury in it is a great one.

And, like I said, also has three solo titles, all of which, had cancelled books leading to said titles. Details.

The details would be that two of those three solo titles are being cancelled, leading to...one book. Granted, it's going to ship 3 times a month, but it is at the end of the day one book, with one purpose and one overall storyarc.

And? That would be a good explanation about how difficult it is to write Strange. I don't know if you want some particle theory level answer for it.

So, that's it, huh? You're whole opinion on why you think Strange is tough to write is based on the number of books he's had. WOW.

You're actually not getting it. I did address what you SAID about me. I didn't address your point, as there is no real point to do it. You'll continue to think, no matter what, what you want, without change. That is fine with me. His stories have, for the VAST majority, been subpar to junk, where Spider-Man has had several good stories, except for recently.

Have you ever read a Dr. Strange story? He's had loads of good ones. That's what makes him a good comparison to Spider-Man. Per capita, their awesome-to-crap ratio is pretty even. Go read the Ditko stories in Strange Tales or the Thomas stories in his solo book. Englehart's stories (Death of the Ancient One being the standout) were fantastic, too. Taken as a whole, the VAST majority of Strange stories have been excellent. Sounds like you're just familiar with the bad stuff.

Because, in all truth, if you have a good story, you have good writing. They're mutually exclusive. You can't have bad writing, and it somehow be a good story. And likewise, you can't have a good story, and have it somehow come from bad writing.

Uh....okay. No disagreement there.

If a story is difficult to write, and the writer isn't up to the task, it's most likely going to be bad. Good example: Civil War. The classic tale of a story that could. Outsold like crazy, because, in all truth, it was considered to be a good story, if it had bad characterization. But it was a mishandled story, as many have agreed there was WAY better to be done with it. The writing was off, but not bad.

Infinite Crisis would be another.

That doesn't mean it was a tough story to write. That just means Millar sucks.

Plus, if anybody was going for how I said something, over what I said, I just somehow doubt I'm the guilty party.

Well, surprise, surprise. It happened.

 

[DACMAN]

See there you go again! What will you do when Secert Invasion proves that all those people Banner beat where NOT who he thought they where?

Skrulls have the same memories and powers as their counter parts. Until they are activated they don't even know they're Skrulls. So it doesn't matter.

 

[DACMAN]

Indeed. Though, Hulk's powers all around was weakened -- Sufer's main power was blocked, leaving him with his physical capabilities.



Rachel Summers probably holds that title, with the Phoenix Fragment and that bit she absorbed from that Phoenix Sword.



Indeed.



I disagree, considering the reality warpers.



I suppose it depends on how you post.

I can agree with most of what you say.

 

[DACMAN]

You mean the King Thor who existed as part of current continuity for a year?

That's the same as an alternate version of the Hulk's animated adaptation?

Man, you should be ashamed of yourself

He didn't fight the real HULK.

But then I can use the Heroes Reborn HULK...


http://images.google.com/imgres?img...es+reborn+HULK+thor+&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&sa=N


And as I posted already. The HULK has more wins against Thor.

 

[DACMAN]

So are you guys finally ready to give the HULK his due?

 

[VICTORVONDOOMX]

What? That he's physically STRONGER than most folks, outside of Thanos and Mangog, but far less POWERFUL than a Thor or Silver Surfer or Black Bolt? Sure.

 

[DACMAN]

He's physically stronger than everyone. He beat the piss out of Black Bolt. He's beaten Thor many times. And always held his own against the Silver Surfer.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Black Bolt was a skrull.

 

[VICTORVONDOOMX]

He's physically stronger than everyone..

No, he isn't. I mentioned two individuals that he is not physically stronger than.

He beat the piss out of Black Bolt.

That has NEVER happened. Each of the 3 fights with Black Bolt has been a clear victory for Black Bolt. He DID just beat a Skrull disguised as Black Bolt... which is exactly the type of detail overlooked by FANBOYS.

 

[Zenien]

And if the real Blackbolt really cut lose against the Hulk, the Inhuman city would have probably shattered, Going on prior history.

 

[Fading]

I read WWH #5 and I must say that fight was kind of weak. Sentry and hulk slugging it out and making the city blocks quake was kind of cool but it wasn't all that. Yet all and all The Satelite takes the Hulk out in the end.

So, Tony's Tech > Sentry, Hulk, X-men, Strange/Zom, Black Bolt, etc etc.

I agree. My train of thought is that Pak was afraid to give Hulk a loss, and Marvel management in general was afraid to give Sentry a loss so they ended it in a draw inbetween them in their super powered forms to make neither look weak.

However two big problems with this. 1. They spent the entire core series building the Sentry vs. Hulk fight, and then instead of giving a clear resolution, the fight ended in a draw more or less and something else finished the fight. 2. If Stark had this power all along, why didn't he depower Hulk at the very beginning of the fight? That would have been boring for the book of course, but made the most sense as the beam could have depowered the Hulk off the bat and no casualties have happened.

 

[Fading]

I thought the Marvel equivalent of Superman was Gladiator

It's like others have said, he is. Marvel I think wants it's own Superman, but either doesn't get the formula right, or the character doesn't take off in main stream popularity. I think Gladiator had the right tools and almost the right look (costumes cool, but I think the mohawk conflicts with Superman's straight edge style). Hyperion was close too, but just never took off in popularity, I'd gamble most comic fans don't know the first think about Hyperion let alone non comic fans. Sentry seems to be another try, and IMO their best attempt yet as they started him out in the series that replaced X-Men books as the new hot book at Marvel.

As for Thor, I think he was Marvel's answer to Superman, but he isn't a Superman type. Thor's an entirely different deal, while he has the strength and flight, pretty much everything else is different including personalities.

 

[JackRembrandt]

And if the real Blackbolt really cut lose against the Hulk, the Inhuman city would have probably shattered, Going on prior history.

Black Bolt could've shattered the moon if he really cut loose.

 

[CBG]

If Stark had this power all along, why didn't he depower Hulk at the very beginning of the fight? That would have been boring for the book of course, but made the most sense as the beam could have depowered the Hulk off the bat and no casualties have happened.

The stone ship prevented Tony from using said satellites.

Then the Sentry flew through it.

 

[VICTORVONDOOMX]

Yes, reading is much more helpful in grasping plot points than just looking at the pictures.