i don't actually read comics that much, most of my ideas of characterisation come from the cartoons.
cartoon writers are awesome
my ideas of the hulk come from the 90s tas show, the first series was amazing
my views of spiderman come from tas too. BUT it was Abbadon on this site who opened up my eyes to the flaws of it. I too loved the first film until abaddon made me realise parker is actually an arrogant dude who didn't have an outing for it until the bite, then he ****s up. not the announcer annoying him, there is NO incentive for parker to not take that robber down and he didn't fight for money, he did it for fame. Whether lee wrote it intentionally like that or not, it develops a far more complex character. It's a shame when its not followed up. You get him making all these cool inventions as well, inventions that can make him billions but he is humbled by his first lust of fame and doesn't go back.
as for the hulk, he was always portrayed as somewhat neutral in the cartoon i mentioned, bruce also kept a dictaphone so we could get inside his head. he always looked run down and guilty and you could see the conflict he had with the beast. you could see the strain it was taking on his sanity. You could see and hear the fear the man is strapped to an atomic bomb and no matter how many people the hulk 'doesn't kill' he can't live with it. On the flipside, you also see how the hulk feels about banner, about his surroundings, about hte people hunting him, he's forever antagonised. The hulk represents us, an ability to have and take what you want but when you have ultimate power, you normally find you wish for ultimate peace. he wants the same thing we want at the end of the day after he's dealt with the violence. he ultimately wants the same thing as banner. It's actually so beautiful for two characters to want the same thing but haye one another. Also seeing betty's relationship with both of them as she has feelings for the hulk and for bruce in a strange way.
the great thing about some of these shows was that it was all behind the lines, they are as shallow or as deep as you want them to be. The films don't have that depth because the writers don't UNDERSTAND how these characters interact. The funniest thing is that they interact no differently as any of us, we all have banner/parker/thor/stark/cap traits in us.
We all have a sense of duality and wish to lash out
We all feel guilty and the responsibility of not acting
We are all have this overbearing of destiny and reaching potential and having walk through fire
We all like to have a public mask of dealing with things while everything falls to bits underneath, we also use substances as a crutch
We all wish we could stand up and do the right thing all the time and be a symbol of hope
these characters are just hyperboles of these emotions while having others as well.When you start writing them as foreign entities rather than a part of yourself, you are destined to get them wrong. Anything these heroes do should do or the choices they make should be what we are capable of on our VERY BEST Days, and that's what makes it relatable because they capture a part of ourselves and should help us become better people.
that's why characters like captain america or superman's best powers aren't their weapons or their alien abilities, it's the fact that they are HUMAN and just like us, they have their trials and tribulations and just like idolised versions of us, they can still persevere
instead of accepting our destiny and the wrongs with the world, they lead us to a stature of self-empowerment to all make the small differences that eventually will add up.
or something like that for me anywho.
t:
